About the Author
Lamar Waldron's historical research and notification books have won praise from Publishers Weekly, Vanity Fair, the Boston Globe and the San Francisco-Chronicle. Called "the ultimate JFK historian" by Variety his groundbreaking work has been the subject of two primetime specials. He has been show more featured on CNN, MSNBC, the History Channel, and Fox News. show less
Image credit: via Counterpoint Press
Works by Lamar Waldron
Ultimate Sacrifice: John and Robert Kennedy, the Plan for a Coup in Cuba, and the Murder of JFK (2005) 159 copies, 1 review
Speed Racer (1988) Vol. 1 #9 1 copy
Associated Works
Choices: A Pro-Choice Benefit Comic Anthology for the National Organization for Women (1990) — Contributor — 20 copies
Gauntlet: Exploring the Limits of Free Expression, No. 3 - Politically [In]Correct Issue (1992) — Contributor — 16 copies
Tagged
Common Knowledge
- Gender
- male
Members
Reviews
Though I am impressed at the sheer amount of work and information that Lamar Waldron provides in The Hidden History of the JFK Assassination, and while he has pretty clearly lain out the most compelling and likely networks of both cause and activity related to JFK's murder, I found his writing and presentation styles in this book to be opaque and somewhat pedestrian. As a result, I felt that much of this read was a slog, and it was only sheer tenacity that got me through to the end, rather show more than the enjoyment of the contents.
Not only is the subject matter plausible, most of it is gallingly obvious once it is all spread out like a detective's white board, and for that Waldron's work should be lauded – especially when held against other specious tell-alls within the massive stable of literature on the JFK assassination. I regret, though, that a white board was not actually included with the text, as it would have made the dense, meandering connections and poor organization which mar the book far more intelligible to the reader. Perhaps that is one of the effects of paring down the author's previous, more extensive works into this one, and removing all footnotes in the name of accessibility. More likely it is an issue of Waldron being a fine investigative researcher but a limited writer. Between his choice of retaining contractions, amateurish sentence construction, constant repetition of information, and pervasive use of "however," Hidden History loses much of the punch that it promises over and over again within the text itself.
I was annoyed by the repeated sales pitches for Waldron's other works throughout the book, which crop up in introduction, body, and conclusion (complete with references to the trade paperbacks being stocked with information the older editions lack), as well as frequent first-person references to his own interviews, discoveries, and triumphs in the archives. Leaving these out would not only provide more room for relevant information, but also would preserve the continuity of the narrative without breaking the spell of the story that he is attempting to tell. What is left, though, is a frantic explosion of sometimes staccato information, with chapters feeling like they were originally written to be self-contained website essays. Data and thesis are often reiterated between chapters, with space dedicated to explaining people and operations which have already been explained. It would have been far more effective to have a simple list of dramatis personae and key for acronyms to help readers gain familiarity with the most important players in the study.
Even with these issues, the premise of Waldron's book is sound and intriguing – so much so that it has certainly shaped my understanding of the most likely "truths" behind what really happened in November 1963. In other words: I believe him, at least until better or more compelling information becomes available. Yet there are still some pockets of ambiguity that could use some ironing out. For instance, Waldron's assessment of Oswald is all over the place, and he never really commits to explaining the would-be assassin's actual place in the scheme. Perhaps this is simply because the most obvious patsy in this crime was manipulated so well by multiple parties that his position cannot actually be verified. Other characters are left floating in similar positions, including Guy Banister, Clay Shaw, and David Ferrie.
Likewise, I found it difficult to parse one of the author's key explanations for the governmental cover-up of JFK's murder. Waldron stresses the absolute necessity for US officials to prevent conflict with the USSR as the main reason why Mafia, CIA, and Cuban ties were not divulged after the assassination. Any retaliation for aggression by Castro or other US military action against Cuba, the Soviet proxy in the Western Hemisphere, Waldron leans on, would be met with the possibility of nuclear war. Yet JFK and RFK were secretly plotting a coup attempt near the time of the President's death, which he explains would have been seen as somehow more "acceptable" by Soviet authorities, as long as US intervention was requested by internal Cuban dissidents. In charge of these plots in Cuba was Juan Almeida, conspiratorial attache to the Kennedy administration, whom all agencies of the US government bent over backward to protect through the entire assassination fiasco and even into the late aughts. Yet both the CIA and FBI are eviscerated by Waldron, who asserts they did everything in their power to cover up facts and withhold evidence about Kennedy's death, including eliminating key witnesses and falsifying information. Was Almeida's safety really that important to numerous government agencies? Were they actually protecting Almeida or the US connection to him – or was it the CIA and Mafia's ties to murder of Kennedy that was actually being preserved by not divulging Almeida's identity? Who was in who's pocket? Who had dirt on whom? I have no idea, because Waldron is not particularly clear on any of it. He probably knows, but he just can't write it out concisely. Alternatively, maybe I'm just not getting it.
Considering that this nearly 500-page beast of an investigative monograph is Waldron's truncated, "more accessible" version of 2008's Legacy of Secrecy, one can only imagine what was left out here, other than detailed footnotes and a full bibliography. I am just not willing to find out by subjecting myself to his more expansive works, mostly because I don't think I could take it. Your mileage, of course, may vary. show less
Not only is the subject matter plausible, most of it is gallingly obvious once it is all spread out like a detective's white board, and for that Waldron's work should be lauded – especially when held against other specious tell-alls within the massive stable of literature on the JFK assassination. I regret, though, that a white board was not actually included with the text, as it would have made the dense, meandering connections and poor organization which mar the book far more intelligible to the reader. Perhaps that is one of the effects of paring down the author's previous, more extensive works into this one, and removing all footnotes in the name of accessibility. More likely it is an issue of Waldron being a fine investigative researcher but a limited writer. Between his choice of retaining contractions, amateurish sentence construction, constant repetition of information, and pervasive use of "however," Hidden History loses much of the punch that it promises over and over again within the text itself.
I was annoyed by the repeated sales pitches for Waldron's other works throughout the book, which crop up in introduction, body, and conclusion (complete with references to the trade paperbacks being stocked with information the older editions lack), as well as frequent first-person references to his own interviews, discoveries, and triumphs in the archives. Leaving these out would not only provide more room for relevant information, but also would preserve the continuity of the narrative without breaking the spell of the story that he is attempting to tell. What is left, though, is a frantic explosion of sometimes staccato information, with chapters feeling like they were originally written to be self-contained website essays. Data and thesis are often reiterated between chapters, with space dedicated to explaining people and operations which have already been explained. It would have been far more effective to have a simple list of dramatis personae and key for acronyms to help readers gain familiarity with the most important players in the study.
Even with these issues, the premise of Waldron's book is sound and intriguing – so much so that it has certainly shaped my understanding of the most likely "truths" behind what really happened in November 1963. In other words: I believe him, at least until better or more compelling information becomes available. Yet there are still some pockets of ambiguity that could use some ironing out. For instance, Waldron's assessment of Oswald is all over the place, and he never really commits to explaining the would-be assassin's actual place in the scheme. Perhaps this is simply because the most obvious patsy in this crime was manipulated so well by multiple parties that his position cannot actually be verified. Other characters are left floating in similar positions, including Guy Banister, Clay Shaw, and David Ferrie.
Likewise, I found it difficult to parse one of the author's key explanations for the governmental cover-up of JFK's murder. Waldron stresses the absolute necessity for US officials to prevent conflict with the USSR as the main reason why Mafia, CIA, and Cuban ties were not divulged after the assassination. Any retaliation for aggression by Castro or other US military action against Cuba, the Soviet proxy in the Western Hemisphere, Waldron leans on, would be met with the possibility of nuclear war. Yet JFK and RFK were secretly plotting a coup attempt near the time of the President's death, which he explains would have been seen as somehow more "acceptable" by Soviet authorities, as long as US intervention was requested by internal Cuban dissidents. In charge of these plots in Cuba was Juan Almeida, conspiratorial attache to the Kennedy administration, whom all agencies of the US government bent over backward to protect through the entire assassination fiasco and even into the late aughts. Yet both the CIA and FBI are eviscerated by Waldron, who asserts they did everything in their power to cover up facts and withhold evidence about Kennedy's death, including eliminating key witnesses and falsifying information. Was Almeida's safety really that important to numerous government agencies? Were they actually protecting Almeida or the US connection to him – or was it the CIA and Mafia's ties to murder of Kennedy that was actually being preserved by not divulging Almeida's identity? Who was in who's pocket? Who had dirt on whom? I have no idea, because Waldron is not particularly clear on any of it. He probably knows, but he just can't write it out concisely. Alternatively, maybe I'm just not getting it.
Considering that this nearly 500-page beast of an investigative monograph is Waldron's truncated, "more accessible" version of 2008's Legacy of Secrecy, one can only imagine what was left out here, other than detailed footnotes and a full bibliography. I am just not willing to find out by subjecting myself to his more expansive works, mostly because I don't think I could take it. Your mileage, of course, may vary. show less
The Hidden History of the JFK Assassination: The Definitive Account of the Most Controversial Crime of the Twentieth Century by Lamar Waldron
Powerful, wealthy crime lord Carlos Marcello planned to kill JKF to get back at him and (mostly) RFK for their persecution of Marcello, particularly the kidnapping-like deportation to Central America. This was done with cooperation of CIA associates, who had already collaborated with the mob on assassination plots.
That is the convincing conclusion arrived at here from some of the millions of pages so far released by the government as well as the author's own investigations and other show more published works.
Identified as red herring are any clues that the "patsy" Oswald was a leftist/Marxist, etc.
Fall guy Oswald was framed as both a Marxist and a pawn in the JFK plot to overthrown Castro with the help of highly placed Almeida. In the telling here, this goes as far as the Hoffa disappearance. That is linked by Hoffa being the liaison between the Mafia and the CIA for Castro assassination plots, etc. That whole sphere of cooperation gave the Marcello organization a blueprint and resources to try and take out JFK from an upper story sniper with a scoped rifle, earlier in Chicago and Tampa.
Marcello's confession on all this was obtained as part of a previously-unknown FBI sting operation targeting Marcello, code-named CAMTEX and I take it this scholarship and interpretation will be the basis of David Mamet's upcoming JFK Film Assassination.
There is the feeling I get here is that we supposed to believe at least some of the CIA itself was taken in, thinking the Mafia wouldn't misbehave to this level. Indeed, that explains how David Atlee Phillips would allow himself to be seen with Oswald in public in Dallas not longer before the assassination. He didn't know enough to know that Oswald would later be framed for the assassination. So, maybe not even aware it was about to go down.
- "The man who wanted JFK killed", from Trained to Kill: The Inside Story of CIA Plots against Castro, Kennedy, and Che by Antonio Veciana
Apparently he and maybe other CIA were in Dallas that fateful day, though. Apparently also there were no Secret Service agents in the city not on the motorcade when the shooting occurred, But, multiple witnesses met people around the grassy knoll etc. identifying them as such including with identification able to convince police. Well, that implies conspiracy. In that conspiracy, who actually fired the effectual shows. Here the finger is pointed at Bernard Barker as one of the shooters.
- Spartacus Educational
Regardless, I don't think any of this means there was not accidental shooting by the SS themselves. See JFK: The Smoking Gun. show less
That is the convincing conclusion arrived at here from some of the millions of pages so far released by the government as well as the author's own investigations and other show more published works.
Identified as red herring are any clues that the "patsy" Oswald was a leftist/Marxist, etc.
As for the shooting at General Walker’s home, Banister belonged to the same white supremacist circles as General Walker, and associates of the two had been at a white supremacist conference in New Orleans just four days before someone shot into Walker’s home. Any role Oswald had in that incident was probably at Banister’s behest, an effort to plant evidence that would make Oswald look murderously violent after he was arrested for JFK’s assassination.
...historians and researchers have shown that all the “Castro killed JFK” CIA reports were either debunked and/or can be traced back to the mob bosses and their CIA associates who later confessed their roles in JFK’s murder
Fall guy Oswald was framed as both a Marxist and a pawn in the JFK plot to overthrown Castro with the help of highly placed Almeida. In the telling here, this goes as far as the Hoffa disappearance. That is linked by Hoffa being the liaison between the Mafia and the CIA for Castro assassination plots, etc. That whole sphere of cooperation gave the Marcello organization a blueprint and resources to try and take out JFK from an upper story sniper with a scoped rifle, earlier in Chicago and Tampa.
Marcello's confession on all this was obtained as part of a previously-unknown FBI sting operation targeting Marcello, code-named CAMTEX and I take it this scholarship and interpretation will be the basis of David Mamet's upcoming JFK Film Assassination.
There is the feeling I get here is that we supposed to believe at least some of the CIA itself was taken in, thinking the Mafia wouldn't misbehave to this level. Indeed, that explains how David Atlee Phillips would allow himself to be seen with Oswald in public in Dallas not longer before the assassination. He didn't know enough to know that Oswald would later be framed for the assassination. So, maybe not even aware it was about to go down.
I have been written about. I have been questioned. My book, "Trained to Kill," is the first time I tell the story for myself. The whole story.
Why now? In the past, I knew that Castro, and others, wouldn’t hesitate to do away with their enemies by putting a bomb under their car. I was well aware of what could happen as I traveled with my wife and children. Now I’m old. My wife is gone. My children are grown. I have survived cancer and a heart attack. Now I can reveal the truth about my double life.
My name is Antonio Veciana. I am an accountant by training, a banker and a businessman by trade. Some call me a patriot. Some call me a terrorist. Only one knew I was a spy, with a single mission—destroy Castro. My CIA handler, the man I knew as Maurice Bishop. The man whom congressional investigators later identified as master spy David Atlee Phillips. The man whom I saw meeting with Lee Harvey Oswald in Dallas.
- "The man who wanted JFK killed", from Trained to Kill: The Inside Story of CIA Plots against Castro, Kennedy, and Che by Antonio Veciana
Apparently he and maybe other CIA were in Dallas that fateful day, though. Apparently also there were no Secret Service agents in the city not on the motorcade when the shooting occurred, But, multiple witnesses met people around the grassy knoll etc. identifying them as such including with identification able to convince police. Well, that implies conspiracy. In that conspiracy, who actually fired the effectual shows. Here the finger is pointed at Bernard Barker as one of the shooters.
Conspiracy theorists have long implicated Barker in the assassination of President John F. Kennedy... his name was often discussed by American conspiracy theorists as having played a role in the assassination of John F Kennedy, allegedly in revenge for his failure fully to support the Bay of Pigs invasion.
- Spartacus Educational
Regardless, I don't think any of this means there was not accidental shooting by the SS themselves. See JFK: The Smoking Gun. show less
Ultimate Sacrifice: John and Robert Kennedy, the Plan for a Coup in Cuba, and the Murder of JFK by Lamar Waldron
A long, fascinating but badly written book, to the extent that I was constantly on the point of abandoning it, but was always drawn back in by the story that is played out oh so laboriously but ultimately convincingly. JFK was killed not by Oswald but by the Mafia's gunmen, argues Waldron, because Bobby was out to destroy them, and if they had just killed Bobby then JFK would have appointed someone to carry on his work.
Endless conspiracy connections to pursue here. Primarily centered on the involvement of mafia figures. Also a tie in to Cuban activity and personnel. Take your pick will keep you speculating and postualating for hours on end.
You May Also Like
Associated Authors
Statistics
- Works
- 12
- Also by
- 2
- Members
- 449
- Popularity
- #54,621
- Rating
- 3.6
- Reviews
- 4
- ISBNs
- 40
- Languages
- 1