Customer Reviews

The Dark Side of Camelot

5 star:		(50)
4 star:		(31)
3 star:		(13)
2 star:		(5)
1 star:		(22)

 

 

First, the disclaimer: although I am a conservative, I like and admire much of what JFK did as president, and I admire the man. Few readers will begin reading this book without a pre-existing opinion of Kennedy. That is/was mine.

Hersh does a workmanlike job illustrating the apparently undeniable fact that Kennedy had medical problems, integrity issues, and personal problems that the country would probably not tolerate in a president today. This book appears to be well-researched and well-documented. It does not present a flattering portrayal of Kennedy and it does not intend to.

First, the infidelity. Hersh goes into depressing detail as to his theme that JFK's marriage was a sham. According to Hersh, JFK never missed an opportunity to philander whenever Jackie Kennedy was away, and sometimes when she wasn't away. Much of JFK's inner circle conspired with him in this regards (according to Hersh) to a degree that is hard to imagine. Hersh speculates that part of Kennedy's abnormal libedo was induced by various drugs he took for his Addison's condition. Hersh develops this theme further in his discussion of the Cuban Missile Crisis and speculates that the cocktail of steroids and other drugs that Kennedy evidently needed to get through the day affected his judgment and his willingness to take risks. This in turn may have caused him to be more prone to the kind of brinksmanship that Hersh claims characterized Kennedy's handling of the Missile Crisis.

Personally I'm not so sure. Despite the fact that the US had an overwhelming nuclear and overall military superiority over Soviets in 1962, Kennedy did not bomb the missiles out but instead negotiated. Here I felt Hersh was unfair to Kennedy.

On the other hand, it seems clear that Kennedy's marriage was a sham and his image of youthful vigor was even more of a sham. Hersh is convincing that Kennedy could not get through the day without a battery of probably illegal drugs. Kennedy was suffering from Addison's disease, which is a very serious condition, and had many other health issues, including the famous back problem, which put him in constant pain.

Personally I found this book convincing as regards the infidelity, drug, and health claims that it made about Kennedy. Hersh is on thinner ice when he theorizes that these issues caused Kennedy to endanger the country. While this book or one like it is probably needed to balance the fluff pieces about Kennedy (and all the Kennedys) that abound, it is not itself a balanced analysis of JFK. To its credit, the book more or less admits this, in its title if nowhere else.

"This warts-and-more-warts bio is so determined to kill off the Kennedy mystique it should be subtitled The Second JFK Assassination.... Hersh packs so much sleaze and scandal between the covers, he makes Kitty Kelley look like a pussycat." (Editorial Review from Entertainment Weekly, a respected journal of political & historical analysis.)

The Kennedys were entertainment, daily, for a nation becoming addicted to the drug of television. Jack, Jackie, Bobby, Teddy, and even strange Robert McNamara were stars, mainlining glitz to the masses in a perpetual party where the best & brightest women, wearing Casini gowns, pushed each other into Georgetown swimming pools and where their men fiddled with Faddle in John Kennedy's hide-away pool at the White House.

Seymour Hersh, respected and sometimes venerated for his expose' journalism about My Lai, Cointelpro, and Abu Ghraib, was reviled by the eastern liberal priesthood for exposing in this book a naked liberal icon. Spit and vituperation flew about Hersh's sloppiness, his near miss in almost going to print with some bad intel about Marilyn Monroe. That single slip-up became the firestorm focus of a mainstream media seduced by John Kennedy in 1960 and 1961 (JFK said in January '61 that it was our "moment of maximum danger" ... and indeed it was; we had entrusted the free world to an amphetamine kid and to the kid's kid brother) and that's seduced by him now.

Historian Michael Beschloss said that while the public is still enamored of the Kennedy phantom, most historians now know better. But historical honesty and accuracy are hampered by the priesthood I mentioned. 42 years after Dallas, the Kennedys and their protectors -- who bought absolution for Teddy at Chappaquiddick -- are still buying cover for the darkest corners of Camelot. There's a priesthood or palace guard blocking access to information, and it's reminiscent of Florence Harding, widow of another randy president, burning his papers before historians could see them.

(Anyone disputing my assertion about media seduction should review the media's failure to question or challenge Kennedy's failure at the Bay of Pigs in 1961. For a fumigation of smelly liberal pieties about the Missile Crisis of 1962, read liberal Eric Alterman's excellent discussion in When Presidents Lie. For perceptive analyses of assassination plots against Castro, go to Gus Russo and Ronald Steele. I'm astonished, though, that even now there is more concern about inept attempts to kill a tyrant than about the assassination in 1962 of America's ally Ngo Dinh Diem. That assassination, which locked us into a decade of no-win war, must have been approved by Kennedy or by someone close to him.)

. . . I felt just plain dirty.

The title gives you an obvious clue that this isn't going to be your average work about Kennedy. And, it's not. If you're looking for a book that portrays Kennedy and his supporting cast in the worst possible light in every case, then I can wholeheartedly recommend this book to you. If you "never liked the Kennedys" and believe "they always got away with everything," then, again, this is the book for you.

Mr. Hersh has run into problems in the past with people questioning his sources and "facts." It seems that his sourcing is good here (and, in fact, this book is even cited in Robert Dallek's JFK work, "An Unfinished Life.")

My problem with the book was more one of perspective. Every story, every anecdote, every whispered secret is clearly told to impart the most sinister and devious motives to Kennedy and his clan. Where there are conceivably other interpretations (even when they are well-known), they are not mentioned.

The bottom-line is that this book is a hatchet job. I don't know whether most of it is true or not. My guess is that much of it is. I know that I couldn't put the book down once I started it - though not from a sense of satisfaction in what I was reading, but more because, as I turned each page, there was a sense of wonderment as to how the next page could be more outrageous than the one I just read.

If you're a Kennedy basher, you'll love it. If you're a Kennedy can do no wrong type, you'll hate it. If you're like me, and somewhere in the middle, you'll learn a few things you probably didn't know before, but you'll find the experience a lot like taking castor oil.

Basically, how you rate "The Dark Side of Camelot" all comes down to how you feel about the Kennedys, as the previous reviews on this book have clearly demonstrated. If you admire the Kennedys, then this book is "trash" and Hersh's claims about John F. Kennedy's Presidency are "wildly exaggerated" or "just not true". But if you don't like the Kennedys, then Hersh's claims are "without doubt" and "undeniably the truth". Books about John F. Kennedy usually fall into one of these two groups - the scholarly, mostly admiring "serious" books which concentrate on the issues Kennedy dealt with as President and look only briefly at his many personal flaws; and the so-called "sensational" books which focus primarily on JFK's wild private life and only briefly examine the major historical events of his term of office (the Bay of Pigs, Cuban Missile Crisis, etc.). I tend to look at Hersh's book somewhat differently - I think that many of Hersh's allegations are indeed true, and there's little doubt (as many other books and sources have confirmed Hersh's allegations), that JFK was anything but a saint in his private life. However, I'm still not convinced that his private behavior had much effect on his judgments and decisions in the great historical moments of his Presidency. For example, does anyone (except his strongest critics) believe that Kennedy consulted Marilyn Monroe (or one of his other mistresses) before giving the order to allow Cuban exiles to invade Cuba at the Bay of Pigs to overthrow Fidel Castro (would Monroe even know where Cuba was)? Most of Hersh's claims have been made elsewhere, although he does come up with new testimony from ex-Secret Service agents, aides, and others to buttress his arguments. Specifically, the major charges are: 1) That Kennedy, with the help of his sinister, enormously wealthy father, "bought" the 1960 presidential election by stealing enough votes to defeat JFK's great rival, Richard Nixon. There was some evidence of major vote-stealing in Illinois (Nixon carried 92 of 101 counties in Illinois but still lost the state by only 9,000 votes, mostly because of a huge Kennedy vote in Chicago). President Eisenhower encouraged Nixon to contest the results there, but Nixon, in a graceful move, refused to. Hersh implies that the mafia in Chicago, specifically mob boss Sam Giancana, stole the votes necessary for JFK to win in Chicago, and that Kennedy and Giancana privately communicated through a woman they shared sexually, Judith Campbell-Exner. Exner's story has been repeated in other books, and there is little doubt that she and Kennedy had a relationship. However, Illinois alone wouldn't have changed the outcome of the election, and Nixon would still have needed to win another big state to change the result. His best bet may have been in Texas, another state that JFK won by a close margin and where there were also claims of vote fraud (courtesy of Lyndon Johnson, JFK's running mate). However, the Texas angle has never been investigated as thoroughly as the Illinois vote, and we may never truly know who should have won the 1960 presidential election - we can only speculate. 2)Hersh provides plenty of eyewitness testimony that President Kennedy had literally dozens of mistresses, extramarital affairs, and one-night stands, thus leaving himself open to blackmail from foreign governments or hostile internal forces (such as the mafia). Again, there's considerable evidence from other books that Kennedy did fool around - two of his secretaries were nicknamed "Fiddle" and "Faddle" and often took nude swims with him in the White House pool. Again, the real charge is whether or not these women compromised JFK's ability to do his job, and that's harder to prove. That Kennedy treated most of these women like live sex toys is undeniable - he didn't seem to take most of them seriously (nor, according to author Gore Vidal, a relative of Jackie Kennedy, did his wife. According to Vidal, Jacqueline Kennedy often used the word "it" , not "she" or "her", when referring to her husband's many mistresses). Kennedy also supposedly had a fling with a woman who was later suspected of being a spy for the Communist East German government, and who was quickly deported when Bobby Kennedy learned of the suspicions about her. These are serious charges, and Kennedy does seem to have been guilty of, at least, extremely poor judgment. 3)And, finally, Hersh charges that Kennedy systematically used the power of the Presidency to cover up his shenanigans, thus breaking the law repeatedly and committing criminal acts. If true, this would place Kennedy in the Nixon range of Watergate-type scandals, which means that he should have been impeached. Again, there is little doubt that Kennedy used the Secret Service and other federal agencies to hide his behavior from outsiders, and his brother did use his power as Attorney General to silence embarrassing stories and try to dig up dirt on potential enemies (such as Nixon, the Kennedys had the IRS audit his taxes several times from 1961-1963, with no result). Of course, MANY politicians have done the same, and while it may not be morally right, the Kennedys were neither the first nor the last politicians to do so. Whether this makes them especially evil or sinister is dubious. In short, it is my belief that Hersh's claims, although largely true, still don't provide a clear link between JFK's private life and his public (political) life. Was Kennedy a terrible person? Hersh makes a strong case that the private Kennedy was often a sexually deviant, amoral man. But as for Kennedy the President (and they are different things), I don't believe he was a great President, but he also wasn't the awful leader that Hersh and some others make him out to be. Today many historians rate JFK as about average - in the middle of the pack. And that's about where I would place him, too. And that's also why I'm giving "The Dark Side of Camelot" three stars - Hersh's research and allegations are worth reading, but whether there's a link between what Hersh describes and Kennedy's political behavior and decision-making remains to be seen.

This book is based largely on recently released documents, accessed via the Freedom of Information Act, and on the recollections of many of those who heretofore helped safeguard the myth of "Camelot." To say that it tells an interesting story would be a monumental understatement, for the book tells a long suppressed story of corruption, arrogance, abuse of power, and immorality at the highest levels of government. And it is so well researched and so meticulously and methodically documented that there can be little doubt that this is, in fact, the nearest we will ever come to the true tale of Camelot.

In his day, John F. Kennedy was seen by many as a prince charming who lived with his beautiful loving wife and children in a idyllic sort of "Camelot;" a man who could and would do no wrong. But nothing could be farther from the truth. As the reader will discover, Camelot was built on mountain money, false publicity, lies, corruption, and deceit and was maintained by secrecy and an all pervasive silence which persisted in various degrees for almost forty years.

Without reciting the entire book, here are a few of the many revelations brought forth in these pages: John F. Kennedy suffered from venereal disease (non-gonorrheal urethritis) for most of his adult life and could never be cured because of his incessant sexual excesses. There is strong evidence that Kennedy was married in 1947 to a socialite in Palm Beach and that there was no subsequent divorce, casting doubt on the legitimacy of his later marriage to Jacqueline Bouvier. Jacqueline Kennedy was presumably paid by JFK's father to stand by him if he was elected president, but she planned to divorce him if he lost the 1960 election. Kennedy's father, Joseph P. Kennedy, spent millions of dollars in publicity over a period of years to promote his son's political career, and later spent even more in bribes in Illinois, West Virginia, and other states, mostly through his criminal contacts, in order to ensure his son's election to the presidency. Following JFK's election, his father insisted that he appoint his brother, Robert, Attorney General ostensibly to stymie any possible investigation of the stolen election. While in office, JFK continued his sexual excesses with loose women, including high-priced prostitutes. Kennedy personally cancelled the second bombing mission during the "Bay of Pigs," resulting in the failure of the invasion. JFK carried on an illicit affair with a woman named Judith Campbell and used her to funnel money and messages to crime boss Sam Giancana in an effort to arrange the assassination of Fidel Castro. There is some indication that JFK may have been blackmailed while he was in the White House so as to influence the awarding of some government contracts. Kennedy didn't force Nikita Khrushchev to back down in the Cuban Missile Crisis as Americans were led to believe. Instead, he secretly agreed never to invade Cuba and to remove NATO's Jupiter missiles from Turkey if the Soviet missiles would be removed from Cuba. Eventually Kennedy got Judith Campbell pregnant, whereupon he suggested that perhaps Sam Giancana could help her get an abortion. And, shortly before his assassination, Kennedy had an affair with a woman named Ellen Rometsch who was thought, by the FBI, to be a possible East German spy. Rometsch was abruptly deported back to Germany, where she was paid handsomely by the Kennedys to keep quiet. She was never granted another visa to return to the United States, where she might be called to testify.

After reading this book, one will likely conclude that JFK wasn't a master statesman or one of America's great presidents, but that he may very well have been its worst. Nevertheless, if Judith Campbell was correct in her observation that it is often impossible to tell the good men from the bad and that some [men] are deadly serious about the games they play, then the Kennedy brothers and their father must certainly be considered masters of the political game. This is a great read - go for it.

First, I'd like to stress that this book, just like its title indicates, is not supposed to appeal to the nostalgia-ridden fans and conspiracy theorists that once found common ground on movies like 'JFK.' Seymour Hersh's 'Dark side of Camelot' is indicting as it is jaw-dropping.
In one of the more revealing accounts, Hersh takes on the task of dispelling the peace-loving, freedom-advocate myth surrounding the J.F. Kennedy cult by confirming a long-held, yet underrated perpective that historical events such as the Cuban Missile crisis were in great part exacerbated by the late president and his brother Robert's domestic political ambitions, even when doing so required using the mafia as a reliable ally for the defense of the 'free world' as depicted by the Kennedys. It was the Kennedys' obsesion to bring Castro down and the urge to appear 'strong of communism' that brought the world to the brink of nuclear war with the prospect of a catastrophic invasion that was planned after the Bay of Pigs fiasco. Hersh accounts of US and Soviet generals, CIA officers, and other sources of authority complement this view with chilling details.

The Vietnam war also had Kennedy's fingerprints all over it, according to Hersh's findings. Kennedy's was as eager as Richard Nixon to continue running the war at the expense of hundreds of thousands of lives when the former approved of Vietnamese strongman Diem's murder, although Kennedy was well aware that Diem and his brother had started backchannel negotiations with the communist and buddhist opposition in South Vietnam to find a peaceful resolution to the conflict. At the end, Diem's pro-US rivals in the military took over and resumed the reign of terror and reppression that had been encouraged by Kennedy's most hawkish advisers in the Pentagon.

The 'Dark side of Camelot' is not only a political indictment of John F. Kennedy, but also an impeachment on utter immorality by a U.S. head of state. In one of at least four main accounts from ex-Secret Service officers, president Kennedy was courted by members of his cabinet with young club girls who were often threatened with lock-ups in asylums if they dared to speak about their sexual anecdotes with president Kennedy and his entourage. Kennedy's promiscuous behavior opened the door for venereal diseases, such as Chlamydia, to haunt him until the day of his death, according to medical records cited by Hersh.
For revelations like these ones, it is likely that the 'Dark Side of Camelot' be dismissed as a gossip-teller on the sexual life of John F. Kennedy, however, it will prove immensely valuable for those who wish to pursue the trail of elussive puzzle parts that shaped U.S. government policy during some of the most impacting world events of the 20th century

You won't get the whole "Camelot" picture with this book but you may not get the whole "Camelot" picture without it.

Hersch does a good job of incorporating most of his sources in the text so readers can judge their credibility as they read along--and as they see fit. The bibliography is also written in an easily decipherable way. It's a testament to the strength of an open society that can allow a reporter such as Hersch to spend 5 years probing through such highly sensitive sources of information as the CIA, FBI, Secret Service, organized crime and private bedrooms and will allow it citizens to learn from it.

As for believability, what is more gullible, believing the hidden dark side that Hersch paints in this book or the star-struck "Camelot" image? The truth obviously has elements of both and this book simply helps balance the scale. It is assumed that the reader is already familiar with the generally accepted charismatic image of JFK.

The value of this book is in understanding the potential disparity that can exist between image and reality for our public figures. But, believe it or not, you can also gain a deeper and more critical appreciation of JFK here by looking beyond the highly choreographed PR image to understand the total human being.

I don't recommend this as an "introduction" if you don't either remember or know the basics about this subject. But if you do, even if you think you've heard it all, this book will keep you on the edge of your seat and your eyeballs on the edge of their sockets-a fascinating, informative read.

I recommend this book primaraly for the comments of former Secret Service agents Larry Newman, Tony Sherman, Tim McIntyre, and Joe Paolella, all of whom I also spoke to and/ or corresponded with. Like what they say or not, it is also supported by what other have said, including the comments to myself from former SAIC of PRS Robert I. bouck on 9/27/92, among others.
Vince Palamara-JFK/ Secret Service expert (History Channel, author of two books, in over 30 other author's books, etc.)
Pittsburgh, PA

BEST JFK ASSASSINATION BOOK: ULTIMATE SACRIFICE
BEST JFK SECRET SERVICE BOOK: SURVIVOR'S GUILT BY YOURS TRULY :)

Were you alive in 1962? If you were be very greatful that you are alive now. John F. Kennedy was incredibly ill-suited to take over the Presidency when he did. He was terribly ill physically. He was a compulsive adulterer who could barely devote the time needed for his job. He was thoroughly ruthless, dishonest, vengeful and self-centered. And above all he was reckless. He thrived on personal and political recklessness. In 1962 I was a child. Whenvever I feel badly, I think of how easily it could all have have ended in October 1962 during the Cuban missile crisis. Count your blessings folks.

This book is well worth reading. I have never been a Kennedy-hater, nor an apologist, but think that this book is important and accurate in dispelling the annoying Camelot myth. Americans should be offended, not just morally, but because JFK compromised American security unhesitatingly.

I strongly disagree with repeating sentiments in previous reviews. This is not just a rehash; there is much new supporting evidence, and added material. Also, this is not based on "rumors." Hersh is explanatory about sources to the point that it impedes the narrative -- but is important to his credibility.

I give the book four stars because the style leaves a little to be desired, but is still quite agreeable. The content is above reproach. A generation of people who did not live through the assassination do not buy into the concept of "American royalty" -- bought, not earned -- and do not hold a man of youth, beauty and intelligence above the basic standards of decency and statesmanship.