Ultimate Sacrifice by Thom Hartmann & Lamar Waldron

[William Kelly]

"If" JFK had agreed to the overthrow of Castro, then the only reason that a representative of the U.S.was in Havana, meeting with the Cuban president on 11-22-63, was to give the impression that all was well. I do not accept this. I do not believe that JFK knew anything about such plans. He said he would not attack Cuba, and he did not make such a statement just to appease the Russians. He meant it ! He was moving toward normalization of relations with Castro's government.

I agree. The CIA no doubt was still conspiring to overthrow Castro. Arthur Schlesinger was interviewed by Anthony Summers in 1978 for his book Conspiracy: Who Killed President Kennedy (1980):

“The CIA was reviving the assassination plots at the very time President Kennedy was considering the possibility of normalization of relations with Cuba - an extraordinary action. If it was not total incompetence - which in the case of the CIA cannot be excluded - it was a studied attempt to subvert national policy.... I think the CIA must have known about this initiative. They must certainly have realized that Bill Attwood and the Cuban representative to the U.N. were doing more than exchanging daiquiri recipes…They had all the wires tapped at the Cuban delegation to the United Nations….Undoubtedly if word leaked of President Kennedy’s efforts, that might have been exactly the kind of thing to trigger some explosion of fanatical violence. It seems to me a possibility not to be excluded.”

It is inconceivable that JFK would have carried out secret negotiations with Castro while secretly plotting to overthrow him. That makes no sense at all.

Of course, beyond the coincidence with Johnson I mentioned , there is also the coincidence with E. Howard Hunt. In November 1963, E. Howard Hunt was, by his own admission, the chief of covert activity for the Domestic Operations Division. He tries to pass that off as being a book-reader and story writer. After poring through numerous articles and books on the CIA, I came across a rather startling revelation--which will, I believe, be included in Larry Hancock's updated Someone Would Have Talked. The Domestic Operations Division was, as near as I could gather, charged with trying to coerce and turn foreign nationals living on U.S. soil into U.S. assets. This means embassies...ambassadors...Carlos Lechuga at the U.N.. It was therefore Howard Hunt's JOB to spy on Lechuga and see if there was anything that could be used to blackmail him into becoming a CIA asset. Well, Lechuga had a mistress in Mexico City. By an amazing coincidence, Lee Harvey Oswald just so happened to visit this woman. There is even word he had an affair with her, or, at the least, spent some of his unaccounted-for time with her.

There is also the strange coincidence that the leader preparing to invade Cuba, and the man most hung out to dry should the Lechuga-Attwood talks prove successful, just so happened to be a close personal friend of Mr. Hunt's named Manuel Artime.

IF Hunt, with his pals Phillips and Angleton, had been using Oswald in some sort of operation against Duran and Lechuga, and proved himself expendable, AND Hunt then found out that JFK was back-dooring Artime, what we have said, what would he have done? We KNOW he was willing to kill Americans on American soil to further CIA interests--he and Liddy were planning to kill Jack Anderson. Liddy, by his own words, was worried Hunt would try and have him taken out in prison. Was it a coincidence that much of the info that Oswald was working for Castro came courtesy Nicaraguan intelligence, with ties to Hunt's buddy, Artime? Was it a coincidence that when Rolando Cubela wanted a sniper rifle with silencer, the CIA set him up with Hunt's buddy, Artime?

If Bush is gonna torture anyone, I know who I would nominate.

"... Well, Lechuga had a mistress in Mexico City. By an amazing coincidence, Lee Harvey Oswald just so happened to visit this woman. There is even word he had an affair with her, or, at the least, spent some of his unaccounted-for time with her. ...".

"There is even word" ...The woman in question? "..., it was said.., by CIA case office, Jerry Hunt, that this Mexico lady's real name was, "Christina Benavides". "it was also said", that this J Hunt of the CIA was "James Auther Paisley", who was killed in a boating accident on Chesspeak Bay some years ago. However, I am under the impression, and believe, that none of this can be documented today, and I fear it is planted information by the FBI and the CIA to throw the investigation off tract. It would be nice if we had this womans operative name and could cross check her background and determind if she was really a CIA operative in Mexico.

(Above Referenced conversation recorded with FBI XXXXX field office dated April 10, 1976; 62-2116-xx (9 pages of the 129 pages remain classified. 120 pages declassified and released FOIA) Also, this information can be found referenced as Phoenix 302 of 1963, classification "destroyed".., and 72-73 PHX field office reports of 1978. Declassified and released FOIA#xxxxx in reference to released 120 pages of which 17 pages withheld as 67-c and K-1 release date of 1997)

Any valid documentation as to this Mexico woman's real ID would be appriciated.

CIA documents indicate that Lechuga had an affair with Sylvia Duran in Mexico City. When Lechuga met with COPA/Resarchers in Bahamas/Rio (they met twice, and I don't know which meeting), Tony Summers asked him about it and he denied having an affair with Duran.

[

See: Cuban Archives transcript of meeting.

BK

[William Plumlee]

deleted

Edited November 3, 2006 by William Plumlee

[Dawn Meredith]

I wish this CIA-disinformation that Kennedy was trying to kill Castro would just cease!

Ultimate Sacrifice gets it wrong, Joan Mellen gets it wrong. On and on and on.

President Kennedy was opposed to killing leaders. I suspect in particular leaders with whom he was attempting peaceful co-existence.

It makes NO sense at all. This is just age- old CIA smear tactics.

Dawn

[Myra Bronstein]

I wish this CIA-disinformation that Kennedy was trying to kill Castro would just cease!

Ultimate Sacrifice gets it wrong, Joan Mellen gets it wrong....

Dawn

Would you mind elaborating Dawn? How did Joan Mellen get it wrong?

I read Garrison's book but I just started Mellen's, so I don't have an opinion of it yet.

Do you think Garrison got it right?

I consider him to be totally credible and trustworthy but I'm a fairly new researcher.

Thank you.

Myra

[William Plumlee]

deleted

Edited November 3, 2006 by William Plumlee

[William Plumlee]

deleted

Edited November 3, 2006 by William Plumlee

[William Plumlee]

deleted

Edited November 3, 2006 by William Plumlee

[Myra Bronstein]

I guess Mr. Waldron is no longer active in this forum? (Or traveling?)

"I just read "Ultimate Sacrifice" and have a question for Mr. Waldron.

If the Kennedys were close to overthrowing Castro, why wouldn't the mafia wait until Castro was out of power to kill JFK? Wouldn't they want to get their casinos and property back after capitalism is, presumably, restored -- *before* assassinating their enemy?"

But it appears Dawn is. Dawn, I'm curious--

-How did Joan Mellen get it wrong (as you said) in "Farewell to Justice"?

-Do you think Jim Garrison got it right in "On the Trail of the Assassins"?

Thank you.

Myra

[Pat Speer]

A new breed of young researchers come on the scean and they are directed by the experts to these books which are said to tell them of the real facts of the JFK and they start the chain all over again. The longer this is allowed the further we drift from the real facts behind JFK and other events of American History. That is why I say the real truth behind the JFK assassination will never be known. Because these so call experts will never modifie or rewrite what they have written in the past. Their egos will never allow this, nor will their pocketbooks.

Unfortunately, I understand where this is comng from... Some months ago, I sent an email to an historian letting him know of my recent research into the medical evidence. He sent me an email congratulating me on my outstanding work, etc, but when his book came out he repeated the same old crap, much of it debunked in the same work he'd just called "simply outstanding."

It seems that there is a limit as to how many times the media will allow themselves to change their minds. For some it was "Oswald acted alone, wait Garrison said it was the CIA, wait there's nothing to Garrison's charges, wait the HSCA said it was a probable conspiracy, wait the Justice Department says there's nothing to it...that's it, then...Shut up Ollie Stone...Thank You, Gerald Posner!!! Now we can go to our graves feeling we did all we could to uncover the truth of the biggest stories of our lifetimes...but wait, you have evidence that proves that Posner is full of it....I DON'T WANT TO HEAR ABOUT IT. GO AWAY!"

Edited October 23, 2006 by Pat Speer

[Michael Hogan]

I just read "Ultimate Sacrifice" and have a question for Mr. Waldron.

If the Kennedys were close to overthrowing Castro, why wouldn't the mafia wait until Castro was out of power to kill JFK? Wouldn't they want to get their casinos and property back after capitalism is, presumably, restored -- *before* assassinating their enemy?"

That's a good question, Myra.

On page 776, Waldron and Hartmann write:

Some accounts say that LBJ shut down all anti-Castro operations when he took over, but the record shows that substantial US support for some -- like Artime--continued. According to Castro, assassination attempts against him actually increased under LBJ. But now things were controlled completely by the CIA, with Bobby (Kennedy) and Harry (Williams) having no role. So, the CIA combined parts of C-Day/AMWORLD--Artime, Menoyo, and Ray--with what was left of AMTRUNK and eventually, Rolando Cubela (AMLASH).

According to the authors, even after his brother's murder, Robert Kennedy persisted in his efforts to topple Castro via C-Day, until he had a meeting with LBJ in January, 1964 and the President told him the C-Day plan was finished.

[William Kelly]

I just read "Ultimate Sacrifice" and have a question for Mr. Waldron.

If the Kennedys were close to overthrowing Castro, why wouldn't the mafia wait until Castro was out of power to kill JFK? Wouldn't they want to get their casinos and property back after capitalism is, presumably, restored -- *before* assassinating their enemy?"

That's a good question, Myra.

On page 776, Waldron and Hartmann write:

Some accounts say that LBJ shut down all anti-Castro operations when he took over, but the record shows that substantial US support for some -- like Artime--continued. According to Castro, assassination attempts against him actually increased under LBJ. But now things were controlled completely by the CIA, with Bobby (Kennedy) and Harry (Williams) having no role. So, the CIA combined parts of C-Day/AMWORLD--Artime, Menoyo, and Ray--with what was left of AMTRUNK and eventually, Rolando Cubela (AMLASH).

According to the authors, even after his brother's murder, Robert Kennedy persisted in his efforts to topple Castro via C-Day, until he had a meeting with LBJ in January, 1964 and the President told him the C-Day plan was finished.

But this doesn't answer Myra's question: Why would the mafia kill JFK when he was weeks away from a coup in Cuba that would return the casinos to the mob?

Another question on the table, yet unanswered, is why JFK would negotiate with Castro via UN connection while attempting to kill him in a coup?

Nor do I believe RFK "persisted in his efforts to topple Castro via C-Day," after JFK was killed because they never gave the go to kill Castro or take him out in a Coup, only explored those altertnatives as a matter of strategic policy.

Remember the real question is who killed JFK and took over the US government, not whether if JFK/RFK tried to take over Cuba and ordered the CIA to kill Castro.

And nor do I think any historian, journalist, scholar or student should even accept the idea of C-Day, an event that didn't happen, a name that only exists in the minds of Waldron and Hartman, and a "theory" dependent on unnamed sources, still secret documents and untennable assumptions of the basic evilness of the Kennedy. Their book Ultimate Sack should be relegated to the same sack as Eddowes, Blakey, Russo, and all the others who propose a theoritical solution to the crime.

And LBJ told RFK he was finished on 11/22/63.

BK

[Michael Hogan]

Bill,

Essentially, I agree with the points you made. I didn't mean for my post to imply I subscribed to Waldron and Hartman's thesis.

By the way, how is Evica's book A Certain Arrogance?

Mike Hogan

[William Kelly]

Bill,

Essentially, I agree with the points you made. I didn't mean for my post to imply I subscribed to Waldron and Hartman's thesis.

By the way, how is Evica's book A Certain Arrogance?

Mike Hogan

Hi Mike,

It's okay, people can subscribe to the W&H thesis and still be my friend.

GME's book "A Certain Arrogance - U.S. Intelligence's Manipulation of Religious Groups and Individuals in Two World Wars and the Cold War, and the Sacrificing of Lee Harvey Oswald" (Xlibris, 2006) is better than "Ultimate Sack" but I think both were prematurely published, as important info and evidence is still coming out in both areas of interest.

I started out writing a review of Mallon's book and USack like Morley did, but decided they both deserve being addresed separately, and will try to do so more thoroughly when I get the time.

GME's "We Are All Mortal" is one of the best third round books that didn't get the attention it should.

"ACA" is an anthology of a series of lectures/papers GME has given, though updated, and his reports on the Albert Schweitzer College connection, C.D. Jackson, Ruth Paine & the Quakers and Allen Dulles are all well developed and some new pieces to the puzzle, but he doesn't take it to the extent of the present research.

At least Evica's work is quoteable and sourced correctly, Ultimate Sack is so rife with hypothetical speculation, imaginary scenarios and unnamed sources that its a diversion from reality if you pay any attention to it.

The only sure thing that I agree with them on is that there's still important documents and other records that are being withheld for National Security reasons - and should be released.

There you go Mike, aren't you glad you asked?

BK

[John Simkin]

Lamar Waldron has suggested members read the new introduction to Ultimate Sacrifice:

http://www.ultimatesacrificethebook.com/

He will then start answering our questions.

[Wayne Smith]

5. In a recently published book, Ultimate Sacrifice, the authors argue that in 1963 JFK and the CIA were working with Juan Almeida Bosque and Che Guevara in a plot to overthrow Fidel Castro. Do you think this is possible? If so, why has Castro allowed Almeida to remain in office (according to the authors, Castro has known about the plot since the early 1990s)?

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKalmeida.htm

No, I do not think it is possible that JFK and the CIA were working with Che and Juan Almeida against Castro. The authors must have been smoking something!