JFK Assassination Course (University of Alabama)

[David Beito]

Some great suggestions here.  Other than selections from the Warren Report, (which I will do) what are some good (short) readings on the anti-conspiracy perspective?   Has anyone taught a course like this before?

 

[James DiEugenio]

Both the late Jim Marrs and John McAdams did.

As far as pro WC stuff, the WC guy who did the most writing on that was David Belin who did two books on the subject.

As far as others, there are people like Jim Moore, Posner and Bugliosi.

 

Edited February 22, 2019 by James DiEugenio

[Ron Bulman]

I think I've read Mr. Marrs taught the course at the University of Texas at Arlington for 30 years.  Spartacus says he started teaching it in 1976.

https://spartacus-educational.com/JFKmarrsJ.htm

I don't know where one might find an old syllabus.

[James DiEugenio]

David:

PM me and I will give you my landline and you can put me on speaker phone.  Or Skype me in.

Edited February 23, 2019 by James DiEugenio

[Gene Kelly]

David

There is a previous December 2015 thread started by Don Jeffries about teaching a course on the JFK assassination, with some good ideas.  I am an adjunct at a local university, and have thought about how I would structure a one-semester overview course.  There have also been separate EF threads that address the question "what is the one single compelling fact of this case that sticks out and convinces you of conspiracy?" That answer (or list) is different for many readers, but there are a finite number of things that certainly stick out.  In developing a syllabus and course outline, you only have so many weeks and lectures. And JFK is a topic that can go in many directions, with a variety of interesting subplots (including disinformation). Given that you are preparing for a semester and 15-20 classes (if you teach once or twice per week), I would structure the lectures on each of those subtopics. Doing each subtopic justice in just one lecture would of curse be a challenge ... the best you can do is to whet the students' appetites and stimulate their imagination. The course objective would be an overview - introducing each topic and letting the students do further research (i.e. teach a man to fish ....) - by providing good references for each topic.  Here are some suggested subtopics:

1. Subverted and failed investigations (WC, Garrison, HSCA, AARB) - work of James DiEugenio (e.g. Destiny Betrayed)
2. Crime scene evidence pattern and control (TSBD, 10th & Patton, Paine garage) - many authors 
3. The Plaza kill zone (the case for triangulated ambush) - work of Craig Roberts and Orchard 
4. The mysterious Umbrella Man - work of Robert Cutler, Ron Ecker
5. The implausible Manlicher Carcano and CE 399 - the work of David Joseph and others
6. Provenance of the Zapruder film (kept from public by C. D Jackson) - work of Douglas Horne
7. Obfuscation of key testimony (e.g. Carolyn Arnold, Victoria Adams, Julia Mercer, Richard Carr, Richard Nagell) - work of Mark Lane, Dick Russell and Larry Hancock
8. Who was Jack Ruby - work of Joan Mellen and others 
9. Oswald impersonators, doubles (Lee and Harvey) - work of John Armstrong
10. Mexico City - the work of Bill Simpich
11. Infiltration and collusion of Dallas Police Department (Hill, Westbrook, Sawyer, Baker, et al.) - work of Joseph McBride
12. Secret Service protection breakdown - work of Vincent Palamara
13. Officer Tippet's murder - work of Joseph McBride
14. Other proposed plots (i.e. Chicago/Thomas Valee, Miami, Houston) - article in Kennedy's and King 
15. Parkland physician intimidation - work of Millicent Cranor, Pat Speer and others
16. Allen Dulles, James Angleton and CIA manipulations - work of David Talbot and Jeff Morley
17. Wounds, jacket hole, autopsy photographic record - work of Millicent Cranor, David Mantik, David Lifton 
18. Michael and Ruth Paine - various threads in Education Forum; work of Salandria, Simpich, Carol Hewett and Steve Jones 
19. Backyard photograph authenticity - work of Richard Gilbride
20. Composition, conduct and "packaging"of Warren Commission - work of Gerald McKnight, Sylvia Meagher
21. The Big Picture (i.e. why?): historical backdrops (Bay of Pigs, Cold War, Vietnam) - work of James DiEugenio, James Douglas, Donald Gibson, Peter Dale Scott

Here is a short list - certainly not a complete listing - of some excellent books (and some of the best authors) to reference for further study:

• Harvey & Lee: How the CIA Framed Oswald. John Armstrong (2003)
• JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters James Douglass  (2008)
• Oswald and the CIA. John Newman (1995)
• The Last Investigation. Gaeton Fonzi 1993
• The Devil’s Chessboard, David Talbot 2015.
• Someone Would Have Talked Larry Hancock 2006
• William Davy. Let Justice be Done (1999)
• Battling Wall Street: The Kennedy Presidency. Donald Gibson 1994
• Peter Dale Scott. Deep Politics and the Death of JFK (1996)
• Into the Nightmare: My Search for the Killers of Officer Tippit.  Joseph McBride (2013)
• The Man Who Knew Too Much. Dick Russell (1992)
• The Yankee and Cowboy War: From Dallas to Watergate Carl Oglesby (1976)
• Inside the Assassination Records Review Board. Douglas Horne (2009)
• Accessories After the Fact. Sylvia Meagher (1967)
• Destiny Betrayed: J.F.K., Cuba, and the Garrison Case. James DiEugenio 1992
• Spy Saga: Lee Harvey Oswald and U.S. Intelligence. Philip H. Melanson 1990
• Best Evidence; Disguise and Deception in the Assassination David Lifton (1992)
• Breach of Trust: How the Warren Commission Failed the Nation" Gerald McKnight (2005)
• The Ghost: Secret Life of CIA Spymaster James Angleton" Jeff Morley (2017) 

Gene Kelly

 

[W. Tracy Parnell]

21 hours ago, David Beito said:

Some great suggestions here.  Other than selections from the Warren Report, (which I will do) what are some good (short) readings on the anti-conspiracy perspective?   Has anyone taught a course like this before?

 

I would recommend Case Closed for a short course such as this. Bugliosi's book is more complete but too long and complex for these purposes. You also might want to check out McAdams' book called Assassination Logic. I believe he might have used this in his course work. David Von Pein's website (and McAdams') is a great resource as well.

[James DiEugenio]

1 hour ago, Rich Pope said:

David,

James is an invaluable resource.  If you could somehow have him tied into your class to help field questions or to provide expert insights, I would take it in a heartbeat.

I was just kidding Rich.

[John Kozlowski]

3 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

I was just kidding Rich.

Lol they'd prob learn more from you than anyone though.

[Ron Bulman]

I'm not a Professor, Instructor or Teacher.  Or Researcher.  Two and a half weeks, twelve classes, is not a lot to examine a crime discussed in depth for over half a century.  If given such a rare opportunity to encourage young people to find Truth in History I think I'd stick to 5 or 6 key points.  Presentation, discussion one day. Overnight analysis of reading(s), further discussion of subject the next day and presentation of the next topic.

I'd start with the HSCA.  Why did Americans feel the need to reexamine the Warren Commission findings, enough to convince the House of Representatives to do so, less than 15 years after the Assassination?  Why did they, the second but Last Investigation by Our Government, Yours and Mine, conclude there were at least four shots. Thus a conspiracy.

The Magic bullet, Specter, ZigZag, seven wounds, found on A gurney.  Show them Dale Meyer's justification.  Let them decide for themselves.

Zapruder time.  Back and to the left.

If not a lone nut Communist then who, Castro, Mafia, CIA.  Who?

Why?  

The last Friday I'd ask for a 3-5 page paper summarizing their thoughts due on the last day of class.

I'd be interested in their responses for a modern perspective.  If they agree, and the administrators here agree it would be nice to see them posted here.

[Ron Bulman]

13 minutes ago, Ron Bulman said:

I'm not a Professor, Instructor or Teacher.  Or Researcher.  Two and a half weeks, twelve classes, is not a lot to examine a crime discussed in depth for over half a century.  If given such a rare opportunity to encourage young people to find Truth in History I think I'd stick to 5 or 6 key points.  Presentation, discussion one day. Overnight analysis of reading(s), further discussion of subject the next day and presentation of the next topic.

I'd start with the HSCA.  Why did Americans feel the need to reexamine the Warren Commission findings, enough to convince the House of Representatives to do so, less than 15 years after the Assassination?  Why did they, the second but Last Investigation by Our Government, Yours and Mine, conclude there were at least four shots. Thus a conspiracy.

The Magic bullet, Specter, ZigZag, seven wounds, found on A gurney.  Show them Dale Meyer's justification.  Let them decide for themselves.

Zapruder time.  Back and to the left.

If not a lone nut Communist then who, Castro, Mafia, CIA.  Who?

Why?  

The last Friday I'd ask for a 3-5 page paper summarizing their thoughts due on the last day of class.

I'd be interested in their responses for a modern perspective.  If they agree, and the administrators here agree it would be nice to see them posted here.

Then you have to fit in time for Tippit, which Oswald didn't have time for, and to get to the Texas Theater.

[Denny Zartman]

Good luck, David. I don't know how anyone could teach a short course on this subject, especially using short texts and no full JFK books. I hope you'll keep us updated on how it goes. I'd be very curious as to the questions your students come up with after their first exposure to the subject.

Mark Lane's "A Lawyer's Brief" is quite outdated but still worth reading. Fidel Castro's two speeches also bring up some good points worth consideration.

For the anti-conspiracy side, I don't think you can do much better than the WC report and "Case Closed". "Reclaiming History" would be good for you to have on hand as a reference work when you want to use the index and know the LN side of any argument, but no one other than a dedicated researcher is ever going to read "Reclaiming History" book straight through.

It seems that you're not looking for books to use in the course, but maybe at the end you could provide a list of further reading for students who might have their interest sparked. Here would be a few of my suggestions to add.

"The JFK Assassination Evidence Handbook" by Mike Davis. Maybe the best current comprehensive JFK conspiracy book that's under 200 pages.

The first edition of "Crossfire" by Jim Marrs. Outdated, but IMHO for beginners a slightly more accessible book than most, including Marrs's own later edition.

"Accessories After The Fact" Sylvia Meagher. Also outdated but excellently organized and still quite useful, especially when examining the internal contradictions of the Warren Report.

"Head Shot" by G. Paul Chambers. Gives a decent overview of a few assorted aspects of the assassination from the perspective of a physicist, which makes it a bit different from many other JFK assassination books. And it's shorter than most, as well. (I think this is an important book that often gets overlooked.)

"Best Evidence" by David Lifton. It's long and much more focused on the medical evidence than giving an overview of the entire assassination. The personal narrative makes it compelling reading, it's educational when it comes to understanding the medical evidence, and of course the theory Lifton proposes makes it a landmark work whether or not you agree with his conclusion.

Edited February 24, 2019 by Denny Zartman

[James DiEugenio]

Denny:

I am not so sure about calling those texts like Crossfire and AAF outdated.

IMO, a lot of the most recent stuff on the JFK case is pretty crappy.  I am actually thinking of writing an essay on that specific topic since I think its really debilitating to the case.

But one definition of the term classic, is that the work has stood the test of time.  In my view, the Meagher book is a classic.  And it would be made to order for this audience.  I still use Meagher in my current critiques.  One reason I think  her book has stood up is this: she really did read the entire 26 volumes.  A lot of people say they did, but she really did.

Crossfire, the first edition-- as I said a long time ago--is a really nice desk compendium which covers almost all aspects of the case. You could print out a few pages on each topic to kick start a discussion.

 

[Michaleen Kilroy]

If you're looking for good, brief sources for your students to understand the CIA's plain treachery in the case, I'd check out these:

• https://www.amazon.com/CIA-JFK-Secret-Assassination-Files-ebook/dp/B01FIGY89Y
• https://aarclibrary.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Doc.-156-1.-Dan-L.-Hardway-Declaration.pdf
• https://aarclibrary.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/robert_blakey_aarc_9_26_letter.pdf

[Ron Bulman]

21 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:

Then you have to fit in time for Tippit, which Oswald didn't have time for, and to get to the Texas Theater.

And of course that former Chicago waste handlers union mobster, runner of numbers for Al Capone as a pre/young teen, Jacob Rubenstien.

[Derek Thibeault]

22 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

Denny:

I am not so sure about calling those texts like Crossfire and AAF outdated.

IMO, a lot of the most recent stuff on the JFK case is pretty crappy.  I am actually thinking of writing an essay on that specific topic since I think its really debilitating to the case.

But one definition of the term classic, is that the work has stood the test of time.  In my view, the Meagher book is a classic.  And it would be made to order for this audience.  I still use Meagher in my current critiques.  One reason I think  her book has stood up is this: she really did read the entire 26 volumes.  A lot of people say they did, but she really did.

Crossfire, the first edition-- as I said a long time ago--is a really nice desk compendium which covers almost all aspects of the case. You could print out a few pages on each topic to kick start a discussion.

 

An essay on that would be helpful. I love Crossfire but I assume recent finds may have made a thing here or there inaccurate. Prayer Man for example.