Question:

To demonstrate one’s ability to analyse truth claims, to present and compare ideas in a debate format, to communicate one’s ideas clearly in written form, and to use critical thinking skills.

PROCEDURE

1. Now that you have formulated a clear debate question and found two pertinent and authoritative debaters, you must conduct enough research so that you understand the general position of each debater and, to a sufficient extent, the specific details of each argument. Having done that, try to summarize each of their positions in standard form.  Identify their thesis, major premises (two or three), and some of the assumptions or beliefs they have which might have influenced their judgment.

2. Then, identify the strengths and weaknesses of each argument. Do either of these positions contain bad logic, incorrect facts, vague language, or other problems that undermine their credibility?  Do they make unsupported assumptions or claims?  One of these two arguments probably seems less strong than the other (or they could both be weak).  Which one, if any, do you find more credible?  (Be careful not to assume that your own beliefs are necessarily correct.  Stick to the facts and the logic.  Be objective.).

3. Now Formulate a thesis statement that you think best describes your own position vis-à-vis your two debaters. It is important for you to consider multiple points of view (e.g.: believers, sceptics, and neutral “epistemic authorities”) before formulating your own argument, so make yourself a list of the available evidence and counter-evidence before choosing a side.  Here are some examples of appropriate thesis statements:

Example 1: “While Gus Russo’s argument is plausible—that is, it is possible that Lee Oswald was

        encouraged by the Cuban government to kill Kennedy—it is not very convincing given the

        lack of clear evidence to support it.  Therefore, it is more likely that Gerald Posner was

       correct and that Lee Oswald acted alone.”

Example 2:  “Since Professor Sabato’s investigation of the Dallas Police dictabelt is better supported by

        known facts than the theory proposed by the HSCA, we must conclude that the

       dictabelt offers no clear proof that there was a second shooter in Dallas.”

4. Organise the debate into three body paragraphs or sections:

(1) Summarize the argument of the “believer”. List and explain at least two of his/her strongest premises.

(Be sure to identify his/her name, credentials, thesis, premises, and assumptions).

(2) Summarize the argument of the “sceptic”.  List and explain at least two of his/her strongest premises.

(Be sure to identify his/her name, credentials, thesis, premises, and assumptions.)

(3) Summarize your own position regarding the truth, reliability, or authority of these two positions .  It

should take the form of an argument and contain at least two premises that offer empirical evidence

(a posteriori), rational evidence (a priori), or appeals to respected authority figures.  Highlight any

fallacious logic, false claims, hidden assumptions, or ambiguous language used by your debaters that

influenced your judgment.  (Stay on topic.  Do not ignore the debaters to present your own unrelated

argument; your job is to determine which of the two debaters is more credible).

5. Write a general outline of your essay as an argument in standard form. Here is an example:

e.g.:  Issue:            Did Oswald receive secret orders from Fidel Castro while in Mexico City?

          Premise 1:  According to investigative reporter Gus Russo, Lee Harvey Oswald met with

  members of Castro’s secret police while in Mexico City, eight weeks before the

   assassination.

                          Premise 2:  According to lawyer Gerald Posner, No evidence has surfaced that Oswald received

    any help from Cuba either before, during or after the assassination.   

                          Premise 3:  (a) Russo’s theory is historically plausible, but lacks evidence to make it probable.

    (b) Posner has also discovered no evidence of direct Cuban assistance.  However,

   Posner does not consider that Oswald could have received some vague

   conditional promise by Cuba, which may have pushed him to think

    he would be offered a visa to immigrate there if he murdered the President.      

Thesis:    While Gus Russo’s argument that Lee Oswald was hired by the Cubans is plausible,

   it is not very strong given the lack of clear evidence to support it.   Therefore, it is

   unlikely that Fidel Castro ordered the assassination.

6. Complete the Essay Outline Grid (see p.3-5 below) and submit it to the teacher on the due date. Be precise.  Use appropriate language and terminology.  Clearly list the sources you plan to cite to support your statements (identify the author’s name, the title of the source, the date of publication and, if available, the page numbers).  Formulate appropriate opening and closing statements.  A good way to open your essay is with a definition of the contested term or concept, a quote, or the description of a relevant historical event.  In the final draft, your thesis statement and a list of your premises should be stated at the end of the introduction.

IMPORTANT:  Your final essay will have to include an updated bibliography and a stapled copy of

           the graded outline.  

7. On the assigned date, submit your work in the form of an 800-1000 word ESSAY. Use clear and precise language.  Structure your essay appropriately^[1].  Include the following elements:

1. A cover page with your name, title, course title, course number and section, teacher’s name, the date, and a

word count (do not include the cover page and bibliography in your word count).

1. An introduction (presenting the topic, your thesis and premises.)
2. A new body paragraph for each new idea (minimum three). Always indent the first line.
3. A conclusion (including your thesis, premises, and an appropriate closing statement.)
4. A bibliography (Works Cited list) in MLA format.  Minimum five sources (preferably published or academic).
5. In-text citations each time you borrow someone else’s words or ideas. Cite each source at least once.
6. Page numbers.
7. Your essay must be double-spaced and typed at a 12 point font.
8. Submit an electronic copy to turnitin.com before midnight on the due date. Your essay will not be graded if it is not submitted to Turnitin.   Late submissions will be penalised at -10% per day.

[1] Consult your Champlain College Writer’s Toolkit and any academic version of the MLA Style Guide.

Answer:

Introduction

According to Brown (n.d), previous empirical studies in 2013 revealed that more than 60% of the Americans consider Kennedys’ assassination involved a group of conspirators to execute the killing. Contemporary, until today 2017, Kennedy remains the most recent president to die while in office, where the rationality of many organizations’ and security intelligence investigations findings posits that criminal conspiracy and parties were greatly involved in the assassination. According to Lifton, the Warren report asserts that Kennedy was shot from behind, while the autopsy report indicates that he was shot from rear; which stirs his zeal for the conspiracy report (Salisbury 45). Lifton adamantly states that Kennedys’ body was tempered with to hide the shooters as well as alter the evidence to arrest the assassinators. Theoretically, this paper will debate on was JFK’s dead body secretly manipulated to alter his wounds?

.According to David Lifton, just after the assassination, unknown conspirators of the Air Force One, transferred Kennedys’ body from the initial bronze-made casket into a shipping casket; on air, while on the route to from Dallas to Washington. Moreover, Lifton asserts that, on arrival at the Andrews’ Air force Base, Kennedys’ body was out of the media in the shipping casket, which was secretly taken by helicopter to unknown place believed to be the WALTER Reed Armey Medical Centre (Salisbury 34). Confidently, Lifton believes that Kennedys’ body was altered at Walter Reed Medical Centre to certify the Secret Service agents’ reports that Kennedy body was hot from rear. According to Ambrose (67), Liftons’ research coincides with the Church Committee that the Dallas police, the Commission, and the CIA collaborated to hide the films, videos, and photos taken by Zapruder to compromise the evidence of multiple killer’s involvement. In addition, the David Lifton argued that the reports presented by FBI and CIA were very malicious, deficient and heavily altered (Swanson n.d). Conclusively, Lifton asserts that FBI worked under pressure, influence, and on directory authority from unknown and unnamed higher governmental officials, the likes of Director Hoover.; to lie to the public that the body had on one bullet wound on his head; shot from rear.

On the contrary, David Lifton, wrote that the assassination was executed by mobsters, who shot differently at Kennedys’ car from behind (Green 45). According to Liftons’ report, killing of Oswald marred the conspiracy rationale, which seemed a plot to mar the questioning of the main suspect. Significantly, according to Brown (n.d), Lifton believes that Kennedys’ body was stolen and mutilated in the morgue, which on November 22, 1963, saw the Dallas Police paraffin and scientific tests of the main suspect, Oswald, depicted that only the hands wound on Kennedys’ body was from his weapon, on a rear shot, while the cheek bullet wound was from the unknown. According to Lifton, the Dallas Police did not present the accurate results of the tests, which saw Kennedys’ body tempered during the Dallas to Washington Air force transfer.

Ultimately, on the contrary, Warren Commission argued that Kennedys’ body revealed that only one man, Oswald was involved in the assassination, and the body was taken for an autopsy for further analysis. Due to the interruptions from the FBI and CIA, the Warren Commission found it had to reach Oswald, whom shot by Jack Ruby; the death appeared as a big blow to hide the core reason of the killing motive (Swanson n.d). According to Warren Commission, the bullet wounds on Kennedys’ head, and that on the leg were from same bullet cartridges of the rear shots, which led to the controversy in the reports of the autopsy and that of Dallas medical staff. The Warren report denied the Dallas medical staff claimed that the head bulled came from behind and passed through the 2 in-. by 2-I n; on the contrary, Lifton depicts that the autopsy report argued that the wound culminated from a rear shot; all which contradict the whole conspiracy theory in the assassination.

Response

Personally, there seems clear evidence that Kennedys’ body was altered by a group of people; which the government tried to hide through the Dallas/Bethesda medical forgery report. (Welsh 88). Evidently, the Air force that flew Kennedys’ body, operated the body, by claiming the behind wound culminated form the head surgery by the autopsy experts; which  intentionally aimed to mar assassinator’s’ evidence. The contradictory report of FBI and the Dallas police further proves that the investigations by Lifton are true; that revolved around malicious interests, and motives of the higher government official like Hoover (Swanson n. d). Logically, Jack Ruby seemed to have been contracted to execute the killing of Oswald, who would maybe reveal the whole assassination plot if he had not been killed (Salisbury 56). In fact, according to the CIA, the Dallas Police, FBI and the HSCA reports, there is a concurrence of information that there was evidence distortion; through the medical forgery of the head surgery, all which coincidentally try to shield the witnesses from conveying the actual occurrence and motive of the assassination (Brown n.d)..

According to Lifton, medical forgery, information distortion, and Oswald’s’ death by Ruby were part of conspiracy. Apparently, it appears as a clear plan to kill Oswald; because no one has the guts to shoot and kill publicly. Funny enough, the different versions of Dallas and the autopsy reports puts it clear that there were confusions to mar Kennedys ‘body wounds reports. Ruby was never questioned by the Police or the government intelligence agencies about his motives (Brown n. d). Evidently, the whole assassination plan looks like a state affair, a political and power battle to eliminate Kennedy. Conclusively, Kennedy was assassinated through conspiracy crime group, mandated and instructed by higher government officials; and who had to alter the body-wounds’ evidences to hide the real suspects.

Works Cited

Ambrose, Stephen E. “Writers on the Grassy Knoll: A Reader’s Guide”. New York: New York Times, 2012. Print

Brown, Walter. Reverberations from JFK assassination still felt today. Retrieved From http://themobmuseum.org/blog/reverberations-from-jfk-assassination-still-felt-today/, 2014. Web

Green, Lee, “His J.F.K. Obsession: For David Lifton, the Assassination Is a Labyrinth without End”. London: Los Angeles. Print

Salisbury, Harrison E.  “JFK AND FURTHER SINISTER FORCES”. New York, New York Times, 1981. Print.

Swanson, James. Three surprising details from the JFK assassination – and why they matter. Retrieved From http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/jfk-assassination-three-hours-that-changed-the-world/article15558304/?page=all, 2013. Web

Welsh, David; Lifton, David, “The Case For Three Assassin, vol. 5, no. 7, pp. 77-100, 2012. Web