TEACHING with DOCUMENTS the Twentieth Century: 1946-2001 TEACHING with DOCUMENTS the Twentieth Century: 1946-2001

TEACHING WITH DOCUMENTS The Twentieth Century: 1946-2001 TEACHING WITH DOCUMENTS The Twentieth Century: 1946-2001

A Selection of Units for Middle School and High School

Made possible through a grant from the William E. Simon Foundation

New York • 2018 Timeline Illustration Credits:

Top row, left to right: Berlin Airlift airplane being loaded with supplies, August 18, 1948 (Harry S. Truman Library and Museum); Greyhound bus carrying Freedom Riders attacked by a white mob outside Anniston, Alabama, May 14, 1961 (Birmingham Civil Rights Institute); Lyndon B. Johnson taking the oath of office on Air Force One, photograph by Cecil W. Stoughton, November 22, 1963 (Lyndon B. Johnson Presidential Library); Near Woodstock, photograph by Ric Manning, August 18, 1969 (Creative Commons BY 3.0); Sandra Day O’Connor, painting by Jean Marcellino, 2006 (National Portrait Gallery, Smithsonian Institution, gift of Jean Marcellino); Cleanup after the Exxon Valdez oil spill, Prince William Sound, Alaska, May 11, 1989 (National Archives and Records Administration); Remains of the World Trade Center in New York City, photograph by Paul Morse, September 14, 2001 (George W. Bush Presidential Library and Museum).

Bottom row, left to right: Nurse with patient in J. H. Emerson iron lung, ca. 1950 (National Museum of Health and Medicine); Hawaii Statehood air mail stamp, 1959 (National Postal Museum, Smithsonian Institution); President Lyndon B. Johnson signing the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Lyndon B. Johnson Presidential Library); Chairman Mao and President Nixon in China, February 29, 1972 (Richard Nixon Library and Museum); “Home is where you dig” [sign over the fighting bunker of Private First Class Edward, Private First Class Falls, and Private First Class Morgan of the 1st Battalion, 7th Regiment, during Operation Worth, Vietnam], 1968 (National Archives and Records Administration); Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev in Washington, DC, December 8, 1987 (Ronald Reagan Presidential Library and Museum); President George H. W. Bush in Saudi Arabia, November 22, 1990 (George Bush Presidential Library and Museum).

To learn more, visit gilderlehrman.org.

ISBN 978-1-932821-95-6

Cover Image: Buzz Aldrin on the moon, July 20, 1969 (NASA) Contents

Preface ______5

A Historical Introduction to the Twentieth Century: 1946–2001 ____ 6

The Origins of the Cold War______9

America’s First Ladies on Twentieth-Century Social Issues______25

Martin Luther King Jr.’s “I Have a Dream” Speech______41

Going to the Moon: Science Fiction v. Science History______57

The Lessons and Legacy of the Vietnam War______75

The Fall of the Berlin War______91

Osama Bin Laden’s Declaration of Jihad against Americans______107

Timeline: The Twentieth Century: 1946–2001______Pocket

TEACHING WITH DOCUMENTS The Twentieth Century: 1946-2001 5

Preface

This book, Teaching with Documents: The Twentieth The Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History was Century: 1946–2001, covers seven important themes in the founded in 1994 by philanthropists Richard Gilder and Lewis second half of the twentieth century, from the foundations of Lehrman to improve history education in K–12 schools and the Cold War at the end of World War II and the civil rights to make history accessible to every student. Our programs and women’s rights movements through the Vietnam War center on the belief that knowledge and understanding and the 9/11 attacks in 2001. Documents and graphic and of American history set students on a course of ongoing multimedia materials include speeches, letters, articles, intellectual inquiry, engaged citizenship, and achievement. photographs, cartoons, paintings, and video clips. To that end, we develop resources for teachers as well as students, among them the TLTH programs, teacher Over the past twenty years, the Gilder Lehrman Institute seminars, online courses, an online master’s degree program of American History has worked with history, social in American History and an AP US History Study Guide. Our studies, and English language arts teachers at every level website provides American history content, including essays to introduce primary sources in classrooms across the and videos by leading scholars, primary source documents country. Close reading of such texts not only builds content for all eras in American history, teaching resources, and knowledge but also supports a variety of pedagogical classroom materials. strategies. The Gilder Lehrman Institute’s Teaching with Documents series is designed to help educators use Teaching with Documents is the newest addition to our compelling primary source documents to build integrated classroom-ready materials. The Gilder Lehrman Institute literacy skills that will directly impact student understanding continually strives to enrich its offerings for teachers. Visit and performance. Those skills include our website, gilderlehrman.org, to learn more about our programs and resources—and sign up to get updates! • Writing based on textual evidence • Developing vocabulary Tim Bailey, Director of Education The Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History • Analyzing documents and graphic materials • Unlocking primary source documents through Acknowledgments: scaffolded shared-reading strategies The publication of this book, Teaching with Documents: The • Attaining a better understanding of complex Twentieth Century: 1946–2001, has been made possible by a primary sources through text-based questioning grant from the William E. Simon Foundation. • Interacting in a dynamic classroom environment • Studying literature and multimedia elements Contributors to the volume include Tim Bailey, Director integrated into social studies content of Education, Gilder Lehrman Institute; Ron Nash, Senior Education Fellow, Gilder Lehrman Institute; and Toby Developing such teaching units is one part of Teaching Smith, Master Teacher, Gilder Lehrman Institute. Together, Literacy through History™ (TLTH), the Gilder Lehrman they have more than 70 years of experience teaching Institute’s comprehensive professional development program American history to middle and high school students and for educators. The program takes an interdisciplinary they are leaders in developing innovative ways to integrate approach to classroom instruction. The Institute conducts primary sources in the classroom. TLTH programming in school districts across the United States, offering workshops with master teachers, seminars As always, we thank Richard Gilder and Lewis Lehrman, with eminent historians, and classroom-ready curriculum whose generosity and vision make possible all programs at materials. the Gilder Lehrman Institute.

The second half of the twentieth century was a time of Russia’s approval—invaded South Korea, precipitating an amazing achievements as well as bitter conflicts; as man first immediate American response. The Korean War was the first set foot on the moon, war raged in Vietnam. This period in open military conflagration of the Cold War. And in 1955, history also saw a new world order evolve into the Cold War. when NATO accepted the Federal Republic of Germany as a These monumental shifts began with World War II. The war member, Russia formed the Warsaw Pact to prevent future cast America onto the world stage as a mighty economic invasions of Soviet territory and tighten control over Eastern and military giant. It rescued the country from the Great Europe. Depression, created full employment, and for the first time Cold War anticommunism was not limited to foreign in a generation increased real income for American workers. policy. From the hearings of the House Unamerican Moreover, the poorest 40 percent of the population saw its Activities Committee (HUAC) in the immediate postwar share of the national income grow, while the top 5 percent years to the launching of McCarthyism in 1950, fear of witnessed a decline. Technology boomed, and the computer domestic communism dominated political discourse in the age began. African Americans and women experienced more United States. Both Democrats and Republicans celebrated dramatic change than they had in decades. And the contours American democracy and capitalism; they agreed there were of postwar diplomacy took shape in response to issues no fundamental problems with American society, and that dividing the Western Allies from the Soviet Union. Although any problems that did exist could be solved by incremental the war lasted only four years for the United States, its reform. The anchor of this consensus was anticommunism, impact endured for generations. both as a foreign policy toward the Soviet Union and as a Domestically, the war triggered massive social changes. political stance rejecting left-of-center politics. More than 6.5 million women took jobs for the first time, In spite of this political consensus, the Civil Rights increasing the female labor force by 57 percent. African Movement surged forward in the postwar years, creating Americans joined the Armed Forces in record numbers, and the foundation for a decade of rapidly expanding protest. two million left the South for factory jobs in the North and When black veterans returned from World War II, they West. While facing ongoing discrimination, black Americans refused to accept second-class citizenship any longer. With pursued the “Double V” campaign—victory against racism at their uniforms still on, they went to register to vote. When home as well as victory against fascism abroad. Membership they were beaten—even murdered—for trying to exercise in the NAACP—the largest African American protest the franchise, they fought back. The war had kindled a new organization—skyrocketed from 50,000 to 500,000. activism and a new faith among African Americans. By the The war also set the stage for the dominant political 1960s, the Civil Rights Movement had become a page-one and diplomatic reality of the postwar years—the Cold War. story in every newspaper and had entered the political arena Tensions among the Allies had existed from the beginning of as a pivotal issue. World War II, and after the war profound conflicts continued By 1963, President John F. Kennedy could no longer to separate the superpowers. By 1947, polarization between ignore what was happening around the country and went the two superpowers had come to dominate all diplomatic on national television to declare that racial equality was relations. In the Truman Doctrine, the President portrayed a “moral issue” as old as the Scriptures and to propose America as being in a holy war with the Soviet Union. legislation that would end segregation in the work place Pursuing a policy of “containment,” the United States and in all public accommodations. Five months later on pledged to fight Communist incursions any place and any November 22, 1963, Kennedy was assassinated. He did not time they occurred. live to see his legislation pass, but his successor, Lyndon Tensions worsened through the 1940s and 1950s as B. Johnson, not only secured passage of the Civil Rights nations around the world aligned themselves on one side Act of 1964, but also signed the Voting Rights Act of 1965, or the other. The United States created the Marshall Plan prohibiting the states from denying African Americans their in 1948 to rebuild Europe and established NATO (the North right to vote in the South. Atlantic Treaty Organization) the same year. In 1949, the As in the abolition movement more than one hundred USSR tested its first atomic bomb, and Communist China years earlier, the battle over equal rights for African emerged, led by Mao Zedong. In 1950, North Korea—with Americans quickly led to a battle over equal rights for

This historical overview is based on the essay “1945 to the Present,” by William H. Chafe, History Now, The Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History, gilderlehrman.org/history-now.

women. The 1964 Civil Rights Act outlawed discrimination delivered. He cut taxes, created new jobs, increased the in the workplace against women as well as African military budget dramatically, called the Soviet Union an “evil Americans, and when there was little effort to enforce that empire,” and won back the confidence of the people. At his prohibition, a group of activists led by Betty Friedan created wife Nancy’s prompting, he entered into intense negotiations the National Organization for Women (NOW) in 1966. with Mikhail Gorbachev, the leader of the Soviet Union. Growing numbers of women sought independence, equal Unable to compete financially or militarily with Reagan’s relationships, and careers. arms buildup, Gorbachev was ready for peace. Protest movements in the 1960s culminated when To the astonishment of the world, the Berlin Wall came activists zeroed in on the Vietnam War as a primary example down in 1989 after twenty-eight years. Shortly thereafter, of what was wrong with American society. By July 1965 the Soviet Union itself fell apart, with its constituent parts Johnson had begun escalating American involvement in breaking away to form independent republics. In 1991, then Vietnam, and the number of troops soon reached 540,000. President George H. W. Bush put together a coalition of Initial protest against the war was moderate, but when sixty-five countries that removed invading Iraqi forces from intellectual argument changed nothing, student activists Kuwait in Operation Desert Storm. Despite Bush’s popularity quickly intensified their protests. Soon, antiwar protestors after the successful military campaign, the nation elected a started burning draft cards and calling the police who charismatic new president, William Jefferson Clinton. opposed them “capitalist pigs.” As the presidential election The hallmark of Bill Clinton’s presidency was the deficit- year of 1968 dawned, the nation was split apart more severely reduction package he passed in 1993. The plan produced than at any time since the Civil War. The presidential race a surplus and a projected elimination of the national debt, was dominated by a sense of domestic crisis. while creating an economic climate that added a precedent- The election of Richard Nixon inaugurated a new era shattering twenty-two million jobs. But Clinton could not of conservatism, based on rallying mainstream Americans avoid his personal demons. When he lied about an affair with against social experimentation and protest groups. Although a twenty-two-year-old White House intern, Clinton became Nixon finally ended the war in 1973 (on terms virtually the second president in history to be indicted by Congress identical to those he could have had in 1969), he did so by and brought to trial before the United States Senate. In the such excessive bombing of Hanoi that he seemed to be out to end, Clinton survived but largely undermined his second prove that he was the “mad man” that he wanted his enemies term in the White House. to think he was. In one of the most sensational and disputed elections Nixon’s greatest achievements were in the foreign policy in American history, George W. Bush was elected president realm, which he cared about more deeply than anything else. in 2000. The George W. Bush administration will be He went personally to China, met with Chinese Communist remembered forever because of the terrorist attacks by Party chairman Mao Zedong, and inaugurated diplomatic Osama bin Laden’s al-Qaeda on September 11, 2001. Al- relations with the People’s Republic of China. It was a master Qaeda conspirators hijacked four jumbo passenger jets. stroke. While Nixon could be a visionary on foreign policy, he Two were flown into the 110-story twin towers of the World also engaged in petty, self-destructive, and vindictive efforts Trade Center in New York City. The towers collapsed, killing to squash his political adversaries. Eventually, the discovery nearly 3,000 people. A third plane flew into the Pentagon. of his involvement in Watergate led Republicans and A fourth was headed for the White House when passengers Democrats alike to conclude that Nixon had to go, and in the and crew stormed the cockpit and forced the plane to crash summer of 1974 Richard Nixon, faced with impeachment, in the Pennsylvania countryside. It was a time of national resigned the office of the presidency. shock parallel to that which occurred after the attacks on Watergate inaugurated an era of malaise in America. Pearl Harbor in 1941. The devastation united Americans and When Americans were forced to flee Saigon in 1975, clinging international allies in the fight against terrorism and the to helicopters, it seemed a fitting symbol of the country’s effort to recover economically and emotionally. More than decline, economically, politically, militarily, and on issues a decade later, Americans continue to face challenges in an of basic social values. Ronald Reagan was the “cowboy” who unsettled world. came riding in from the West to rescue America’s sense of well-being and pride. To a remarkable degree, Reagan

Churchill, Truman, and Stalin at Potsdam, 1945 (The Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History)

The Origins of the Cold War

BY TIM BAILEY

UNIT OVERVIEW

In these lessons students will analyze two different sets of documents related to the beginning of the Cold War. In the first lesson the students will analyze the Truman Doctrine. In the second lesson the students will be asked to compare and contrast American and Soviet views of the Marshall Plan, the US plan for both rebuilding Europe and quelling a rising tide of postwar communism.

UNIT OBJECTIVES

Students will be able to

• Analyze primary source documents using close reading strategies

• Demonstrate understanding of complex text through critical thinking questions

• Demonstrate understanding of both literal and inferential aspects of text-based evidence

• Write a comparative or argumentative essay using text-based evidence

• Formulate questions, answers, and rebuttals for a debate based on evidence from texts

ESSENTIAL QUESTIONS

Lesson 1: Was the Truman Doctrine an appropriate foreign policy or was it inappropriate interference in the affairs of other countries?

Lesson 2: Was the Marshall Plan a purely humanitarian measure on the part of the United States?

NUMBER OF CLASS PERIODS: 2–3

GRADE LEVEL(S): 7–12

COMMON CORE STATE STANDARDS

CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.8.1: Engage effectively in a range of collaborative discussions (one-on-one, in groups, and teacher- led) with diverse partners on grade 8 topics, texts, and issues, building on others’ ideas and expressing their own clearly.

CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH.11-12.2: Determine the central ideas or information of a primary or secondary source; provide an accurate summary that makes clear the relationships among the key details and ideas.

CCSS.ELA-Literacy.SL.9-10.1.C: Propel conversations by posing and responding to questions that relate the current discussion to broader themes or larger ideas; actively incorporate others into the discussion; and clarify, verify, or challenge ideas and conclusions.

CCSS.ELA-Literacy.W.9-10.1: Write arguments to support claims in an analysis of substantive topics or texts, using valid reasoning and relevant and sufficient evidence.

LESSON 1

OBJECTIVES

Students will be able to

• Analyze a source document using close reading strategies

• Demonstrate understanding of both literal and inferential aspects of text-based evidence

• Write a comparative/argumentative essay using text-based evidence

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

The Truman Doctrine, 1947

The Truman Doctrine arose from a speech delivered by President Truman before a joint session of Congress on March 12, 1947. The immediate cause for the speech was a recent announcement by the British Government that, as of March 31, it would no longer provide military and economic assistance to the Greek Government in its civil war against the Greek Communist Party. Truman asked Congress to support the Greek Government against the Communists. He also asked Congress to provide assistance for Turkey, since that nation, too, had previously been dependent on British aid.

At the time, the US Government believed that the Soviet Union supported the Greek Communist war effort and worried that if the Communists prevailed in the Greek civil war, the Soviets would ultimately influence Greek policy. In fact, Soviet leader Joseph Stalin had deliberately refrained from providing any support to the Greek Communists and had forced Yugoslav prime minister Josip Tito to follow suit, much to the detriment of Soviet-Yugoslav relations. . . .

In light of the deteriorating relationship with the Soviet Union and the appearance of Soviet meddling in Greek and Turkish affairs, the withdrawal of British assistance to Greece provided the necessary catalyst for the Truman Administration to reorient American foreign policy. Accordingly, in his speech, President Truman requested that Congress provide $400,000,000 worth of aid to both the Greek and Turkish Governments and support the dispatch of American civilian and military personnel and equipment to the region.

Truman justified his request on two grounds. He argued that a Communist victory in the Greek civil war would endanger the political stability of Turkey, which would undermine the political stability of the Middle East. This could not be allowed in light of the region’s immense strategic importance to US national security. Truman also argued that the United States was compelled to assist “free peoples” in their struggles against “totalitarian regimes,” because the spread of authoritarianism would “undermine the foundations of international peace and hence the security of the United States.” In the words of the Truman Doctrine, it became “the policy of the United States to support free peoples who are resisting attempted subjugation by armed minorities or by outside pressures.”

Source: Milestones in the History of US Foreign Relations, Office of the Historian, Bureau of Public Affairs, US Department of State https://history.state.gov

MATERIALS

• Teacher Resource: The Truman Doctrine: President Harry S. Truman’s Address before a Joint Session of Congress, March 12, 1947,, 100 Milestone Documents, https://www.ourdocuments.gov

• Document Analysis: The Truman Doctrine (excerpts)

PROCEDURE

You may choose to have the students do the lesson individually, as partners, or in small groups of no more than three or four.

1. Discuss the information in the Historical Background. However, be careful not to reveal too much, because you want the students to gather information from their close reading of the document.

2. Hand out the Document Analysis worksheet, which contains excerpts from President Truman’s speech to Congress.

3. Depending on the reading level of the students, you can have them read the text in their groups or you can “share read” the text with them. This is done by having the students follow along silently while you begin to read aloud, modeling prosody, inflection, and punctuation. Then ask the class to join in with the reading while you continue to read aloud, still serving as the model for the class. This technique will support struggling readers as well as English language learners (ELL).

4. Students will use the Document Analysis worksheet to help them understand the speech. First, they will select the most important words or phrases in the text and copy those words into the column on the right. Second, they will summarize the text in their own words. Students can brainstorm as partners or in small groups but must complete their own Document Analysis worksheet. Emphasize that the students are to first select the author’s words to identify what is important in the text and then summarize what they understand the text to mean in their own words.

5. Initiate a class discussion with the question, “What is the central argument being made in Truman’s speech?” Have groups or individual students share their summaries and compare with other groups’ work.

6. Students will write a short essay that answers the essential question for this lesson: Was the Truman Doctrine an appropriate foreign policy or was it inappropriate interference in the affairs of other countries?

LESSON 2

OBJECTIVES

Students will be able to • Analyze primary and secondary source documents using close reading strategies • Demonstrate understanding of complex text through critical thinking questions • Demonstrate understanding of both literal and inferential aspects of text-based evidence • Write a comparative/argumentative essay using text-based evidence • Formulate questions, answers, and rebuttals for a debate based on evidence from texts

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND Marshall Plan, 1948 In the immediate post–World War II period, Europe remained ravaged by war and thus susceptible to exploitation by an internal and external Communist threat. In a June 5, 1947, speech to the graduating class at Harvard University, Secretary of State George C. Marshall issued a call for a comprehensive program to rebuild Europe. Fanned by the fear of Communist expansion and the rapid deterioration of European economies in the winter of 1946–1947, Congress passed the Economic Cooperation Act in March 1948 and approved funding that would eventually rise to over $12 billion for the rebuilding of Western Europe. The Marshall Plan generated a resurgence of European industrialization and brought extensive investment into the region. It was also a stimulant to the US economy by establishing markets for American goods. Although the participation of the Soviet Union and East European nations was an initial possibility, Soviet concern over potential US economic domination of its Eastern European satellites and Stalin’s unwillingness to open up his secret society to westerners doomed the idea. Furthermore, it is unlikely that the US Congress would have been willing to fund the plan as generously as it did if aid also went to Soviet Bloc Communist nations. Thus the Marshall Plan was applied solely to Western Europe, precluding any measure of Soviet Bloc cooperation. Increasingly, the economic revival of Western Europe, especially West Germany, was viewed suspiciously in Moscow. Economic historians have debated the precise impact of the Marshall Plan on Western Europe, but these differing opinions do not detract from the fact that the Marshall Plan has been recognized as a great humanitarian effort. Secretary of State Marshall became the only general ever to receive a Nobel Prize for peace. The Marshall Plan also institutionalized and legitimized the concept of US foreign aid programs, which have become an integral part of US foreign policy.

Source: Milestones in the History of US Foreign Relations, Office of the Historian, Bureau of Public Affairs, US Department of State, https://history.state.gov

MATERIALS • George C. Marshall (US Secretary of State), “European Initiative Essential to Economic Recovery [“Marshall Plan” Speech], Harvard University, June 5, 1947 (excerpts) Department of State Bulletin 16 (415): 1159–1160. Available online from the Harry S. Truman Library & Museum, www.trumanlibrary.org • Andrei Vyshinsky (Soviet Deputy Foreign Minister), Speech at the United Nations, September 18, 1947 (excerpts), Modern European History 1871–2000: A Documentary Reader, ed. David Welch (London: Routledge, 1999), 130. • Analyzing the Speech • Debate Organizer

PROCEDURE

1. For this lesson divide class into groups of three to five students.

2. Discuss the information in the Historical Background. However, be careful not to reveal too much, because you want the students to gather information from their close reading of the documents.

3. Pass out the Marshall Plan Speech.

4. Depending on the reading level of the students, you can have them read the document silently to themselves or you can share read it as described in Lesson 1.

5. Pass out Analyzing the Speech. Answer Critical Thinking Question #1 as a whole-group activity. Make sure that the students use and cite evidence from the text to answer the question.

6. Students will now answer the rest of the questions with their group.

7. Discuss different interpretations developed by the student groups.

8. Repeat the process with Andrei Vyshinsky’s speech at the United Nations, passing out the text of the speech and Analyzing the Speech worksheets.

9. Discuss different interpretations developed by the student groups.

10. The students will now create a “mock debate” to both reinforce their understanding of the issues surrounding the Marshall Plan and demonstrate their knowledge through an oral presentation. The students will write the script for a hypothetical debate based on the issues raised in the primary documents they have been studying. Within each group, the students will choose one person to be a debate moderator. The rest of the group is split between American and Soviet representatives. The students will write the script as a team effort and everyone in the group will have a copy of the final script. It is important that all the students work on their own questions and answers.

11. Pass out the Debate Organizer. Each student will need four copies.

12. You will provide three questions that all members (American and Soviet representatives) of all groups must address during their debate:

a) What is the best way to rebuild the European economy?

b) Was the Marshall Plan a purely humanitarian measure on the part of the United States? (This is the essential question for the lesson.)

c) What was the eventual outcome of the Marshall Plan?

13. The students should add another one or two questions with answers taken directly from the primary source material. Students can also write responses in the form of a rebuttal. It is important that all arguments are based on the actual text from the documents.

14. Have students rehearse their debate.

15. Depending on the time available and the number of groups presenting, you can hold the debate in this lesson or the following day.

16. Wrap up: Have students discuss the questions and answers posed by other groups and assess their use of evidence from the speeches.

TEACHER RESOURCE

The Truman Doctrine (excerpts)

President Harry S. Truman’s Address Before a Joint Session of Congress March 12, 1947

The gravity of the situation which confronts the world today necessitates my appearance before a joint session of the Congress.

The foreign policy and the national security of this country are involved.

One aspect of the present situation, which I wish to present to you at this time for your consideration and decision, concerns Greece and Turkey.

The United States has received from the Greek Government an urgent appeal for financial and economic assistance. Preliminary reports from the American Economic Mission now in Greece and reports from the American Ambassador in Greece corroborate the statement of the Greek Government that assistance is imperative if Greece is to survive as a free nation.

I do not believe that the American people and the Congress wish to turn a deaf ear to the appeal of the Greek Government.

Greece is not a rich country. Lack of sufficient natural resources has always forced the Greek people to work hard to make both ends meet. Since 1940, this industrious and peace-loving country has suffered invasion, four years of cruel enemy occupation, and bitter internal strife.

When forces of liberation entered Greece they found that the retreating Germans had destroyed virtually all the railways, roads, port facilities, communications, and merchant marine. More than a thousand villages had been burned. Eighty-five percent of the children were tubercular. Livestock, poultry, and draft animals had almost disappeared. Inflation had wiped out practically all savings.

As a result of these tragic conditions, a militant minority, exploiting human want and misery, was able to create political chaos which, until now, has made economic recovery impossible. . . .

The Greek Government has also asked for the assistance of experienced American administrators, economists, and technicians to insure that the financial and other aid given to Greece shall be used effectively in creating a stable and self- sustaining economy and in improving its public administration.

Meanwhile, the Greek Government is unable to cope with the situation. The Greek Army is small and poorly equipped. It needs supplies and equipment if it is to restore the authority of the Government throughout Greek territory.

Greece must have assistance if it is to become a self-supporting and self-respecting democracy.

The United States must supply that assistance. We have already extended to Greece certain types of relief and economic aid, but these are inadequate.

There is no other country to which democratic Greece can turn.

No other nation is willing and able to provide the necessary support for a democratic Greek Government. . . .

. . . It is of the utmost importance that we supervise the use of any funds made available to Greece, in such a manner that each dollar spent will count toward making Greece self-supporting, and will help to build an economy in which a healthy democracy can flourish. . . .

The Greek Government has been operating in an atmosphere of chaos and extremism. It has made mistakes. The extension of aid by this country does not mean that the United States condones everything that the Greek Government has done or will do. We have condemned in the past, and we condemn now, extremist measures of the right or the left. We have in the past advised tolerance, and we advise tolerance now.

Greece’s neighbor, Turkey, also deserves our attention.

The future of Turkey as an independent and economically sound state is clearly no less important to the freedom-loving peoples of the world than the future of Greece. The circumstances in which Turkey finds itself today are considerably different from those of Greece. Turkey has been spared the disasters that have beset Greece; and, during the war, the United States and Great Britain furnished Turkey with material aid. Nevertheless, Turkey now needs our support.

Since the war Turkey has sought financial assistance from Great Britain and the United States for the purpose of effecting that modernization necessary for the maintenance of its national integrity.

That integrity is essential to the preservation of order in the Middle East.

Source: Address of the President of the United States Delivered before a Joint Session of the Senate and the House of Representatives, Recommending Assistance to Greece and Turkey, March 12, 1947. https://www.trumanlibrary.org

DOCUMENT ANALYSIS NAME PERIOD DATE

The Truman Doctrine (excerpts)

The gravity of the situation which confronts the world Key Words or Phrases today necessitates my appearance before a joint session of the Congress.

The foreign policy and the national security of this country are involved.

One aspect of the present situation, which I wish to present to you at this time for your consideration and decision, concerns Greece and Turkey.

As a result of these tragic conditions, a militant Key Words or Phrases minority, exploiting human want and misery, was able to create political chaos which, until now, has made economic recovery impossible.

Greece must have help to import the goods necessary to restore internal order and security, so essential for economic and political recovery.

The Greek Government has also asked for the assistance of experienced American administrators, economists, and technicians to insure that the financial and other aid given to Greece shall be used effectively in creating a stable and self-sustaining economy and in improving its public administration.

The very existence of the Greek State is today threatened by the terrorist activities of several thousand armed men, led by Communists, who defy the Government’s authority at a number of points, particularly along the northern boundaries. . . . In Your Own Words Meanwhile, the Greek Government is unable to cope with the situation. The Greek Army is small and poorly equipped. It needs supplies and equipment if it is to restore the authority of the Government throughout Greek territory.

Greece must have assistance if it is to become a self- supporting and self-respecting democracy.

The United States must supply that assistance. We have already extended to Greece certain types of relief and economic aid, but these are inadequate.

There is no other country to which democratic Greece can turn.

No other nation is willing and able to provide the necessary support for a democratic Greek Government. . . .

. . . It is of the utmost importance that we supervise Key Words or Phrases the use of any funds made available to Greece, in such a manner that each dollar spent will count toward making Greece self-supporting, and will help to build an economy in which a healthy democracy can flourish. . . .

Greece’s neighbor, Turkey, also deserves our attention.

The future of Turkey as an independent and economically sound state is clearly no less important In Your Own Words to the freedom-loving peoples of the world than the future of Greece. The circumstances in which Turkey finds itself today are considerably different from those of Greece. Turkey has been spared the disasters that have beset Greece; and, during the war, the United States and Great Britain furnished Turkey with material aid. Nevertheless, Turkey now needs our support.

Since the war Turkey has sought financial assistance from Great Britain and the United States for the purpose of effecting that modernization necessary for the maintenance of its national integrity.

That integrity is essential to the preservation of order in the Middle East.

George C. Marshall, “Marshall Plan” Speech at Harvard University, June 5, 1947 (excerpts)

I need not tell you gentlemen that the world situation is very serious. That must be apparent to all intelligent people. I think one difficulty is that the problem is one of such enormous complexity that the very mass of facts presented to the public by press and radio make it exceedingly difficult for the man in the street to reach a clear appraisement of the situation. Furthermore, the people of this country are distant from the troubled areas of the earth and it is hard for them to comprehend the plight and consequent reactions of the long-suffering peoples, and the effect of those reactions on their governments in connection with our efforts to promote peace in the world.

In considering the requirements for the rehabilitation of Europe, the physical loss of life, the visible destruction of cities, factories, mines, and railroads was correctly estimated, but it has become obvious during recent months that this visible destruction was probably less serious than the dislocation of the entire fabric of European economy. . . . The rehabilitation of the economic structure of Europe quite evidently will require a much longer time and greater effort than had been foreseen. . . .

The truth of the matter is that Europe’s requirements for the next three or four years of foreign food and other essential products—principally from America—are so much greater than her present ability to pay that she must have substantial additional help or face economic, social, and political deterioration of a very grave character. . . .

Aside from the demoralizing effect on the world at large and the possibilities of disturbances arising as a result of the desperation of the people concerned, the consequences to the economy of the United States should be apparent to all. It is logical that the United States should do whatever it is able to do to assist in the return of normal economic health in the world, without which there can be no political stability and no assured peace. Our policy is directed not against any country or doctrine but against hunger, poverty, desperation, and chaos. Its purpose should be the revival of a working economy in the world so as to permit the emergence of political and social conditions in which free institutions can exist. Such assistance, I am convinced, must not be on a piecemeal basis as various crises develop. Any assistance that this Government may render in the future should provide a cure rather than a mere palliative. Any government that is willing to assist in the task of recovery will find full cooperation, I am sure, on the part of the United States Government. Any government which maneuvers to block the recovery of other countries cannot expect help from us. Furthermore, governments, political parties, or groups which seek to perpetuate human misery in order to profit therefrom politically or otherwise will encounter the opposition of the United States.

It is already evident that, before the United States Government can proceed much further in its efforts to alleviate the situation and help start the European world on its way to recovery, there must be some agreement among the countries of Europe as to the requirements of the situation and the part those countries themselves will take in order to give proper effect to whatever action might be undertaken by this Government. It would be neither fitting nor efficacious for this Government to undertake to draw up unilaterally a program designed to place Europe on its feet economically. This is the business of the Europeans. The initiative, I think, must come from Europe. The role of this country should consist of friendly aid in the drafting of a European program and of later support of such a program so far as it may be practical for us to do so.

Source: Speech by George C. Marshall, “European Initiative Essential to Economic Recovery,” June 5, 1947, Department of State Bulletin 16 (415): 1159–1160.

Andrei Vyshinsky, Speech at the United Nations, September 18, 1947 (excerpts)

The so-called Truman Doctrine and the Marshall Plan are particularly glaring examples of the manner in which the principles of the United Nations are violated, of the way in which the Organization is ignored.

. . . This is clearly proved by the measures taken by the United States Government with regard to Greece and Turkey which ignore and bypass the United Nations as well as by the measures proposed under the so-called Marshall Plan in Europe. This policy conflicts sharply with the principles expressed by the General Assembly in its resolution of 11 December 1946, which declares that relief supplies to other countries “should . . . at no time be used as a political weapon.”

As is now clear, the Marshall Plan constitutes in essence merely a variant of the Truman Doctrine adapted to the conditions of postwar Europe. In bringing forward this plan, the United States Government apparently counted on the cooperation of the Governments of the United Kingdom and France to confront the European countries in need of relief with the necessity of renouncing their inalienable right to dispose of their economic resources and to plan their national economy in their own way. The United States also counted on making all these countries directly dependent on the interests of American monopolies, which are striving to avert the approaching depression by an accelerated export of commodities and capital to Europe. . . .

It is becoming more and more evident to everyone that the implementation of the Marshall Plan will mean placing European countries under the economic and political control of the United States and direct interference by the latter in the internal affairs of those countries.

Moreover, this Plan is an attempt to split Europe into two camps and, with the help of the United Kingdom and France, to complete the formation of a bloc of several European countries hostile to the interests of the democratic countries of Eastern Europe and most particularly to the interests of the Soviet Union.

An important feature of this Plan is the attempt to confront the countries of Eastern Europe with a bloc of Western European States including Western Germany. The intention is to make use of Western Germany and German heavy industry (the Ruhr) as one of the most important economic bases for American expansion in Europe, in disregard of the national interests of the countries which suffered from German aggression.

Source: Andrei Vyshinsky, Speech at the United Nations, September 18, 1947, printed in Modern European History 1871–2000: A Documentary Reader, ed. David Welch (London: Routledge, 1999), 130.

CRITICAL THINKING NAME PERIOD DATE

ANALYZING THE SPEECH TITLE OF SPEECH

1 What is the major claim being made by the author of this speech?

What textual evidence supports the author’s claim? Does the claim that is being presented appear to be fact based or opinion based?

2 What is the “tone” or attitude of the speech? Give evidence of the “tone” or attitude in this speech: How does this affect the speech’s effectiveness?

3 What are the best (most convincing or most thought-provoking) parts of the speech?

Cite textual evidence to support your opinion.

NAME PERIOD DATE

DEBATE ORGANIZER Write moderator’s question here: Answer:

Evidence from Text:

Write moderator’s question here: Answer:

Evidence from Text:

Write moderator’s question here: Answer:

Evidence from Text:

Citizens of West Berlin stand on ladders to greet friends and loved ones on the eastern side of the Berlin Wall, September 16, 1961. (National Archives)

Eleanor Roosevelt, US delegate to the UN and chair of the Commission on Human Rights, holds up a copy of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1949. (United Nations Photo)

America’s First Ladies on Twentieth-Century Social Issues

BY TIM BAILEY

UNIT OVERVIEW

Over the course of the lessons in this unit, the students will examine, explain, and evaluate speeches by five twentieth- century First Ladies of the United States: Eleanor Roosevelt, Betty Ford, Nancy Reagan, Barbara Bush, and Hillary Clinton. The speeches address the subject of rights: women’s rights, human rights, or both. Students’ understanding will be assessed through the completion of worksheets and their participation in a dramatic culminating activity.

UNIT OBJECTIVES

Students will be able to

• Close read informational text for comprehension and critical analysis

• Identify, explain, and summarize the major issues, ideas, and messages, both literal and inferential, in the speeches

• Cite evidence from the text of the speeches to support responses to the critical thinking questions

• Compare and contrast the speeches and authors’ viewpoints regarding a common theme

• Collaborate effectively with classmates to compose and present questions and responses that reflect the issues, ideas, and viewpoints in the original documents

ESSENTIAL QUESTIONS

Middle School: To what extent can the ideas and words of First Ladies inspire us to improve our society?

High School: To what extent can the rhetoric of First Ladies be a catalyst for social change?

NUMBER OF CLASS PERIODS: 4–5

GRADE LEVELS: 7–12

COMMON CORE STATE STANDARDS

CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RI.9-10.1: Cite strong and thorough textual evidence to support analysis of what the text says explicitly as well as inferences drawn from the text.

CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RI.9-10.2: Determine a central idea of a text and analyze its development over the course of the text, including how it emerges and is shaped and refined by specific details; provide an objective summary of the text.

CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RI.9-10.8: Delineate and evaluate the argument and specific claims in a text, assessing whether the reasoning is valid and the evidence is relevant and sufficient.

CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.W.9-10.1: Write arguments to support claims in an analysis of substantive topics or texts, using valid reasoning and relevant and sufficient evidence.

CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.SL.9-10.1: Initiate and participate effectively in a range of collaborative discussions (one-on-one, in groups, and teacher-led) with diverse partners on . . . topics, texts, and issues, building on others’ ideas and expressing their own clearly and persuasively.

LESSON 1

OVERVIEW

In this lesson the students will read, analyze, and assess the text of speeches given by First Ladies Eleanor Roosevelt and Elizabeth Ann “Betty” Ford, summarize their main ideas, and answer several comprehension and critical thinking questions. In addition, the students will cite textual evidence to support their responses as well as draw logical inferences from the texts of these speeches.

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND The position of First Lady of the United States has changed with the cultural, political, and social mores of American society. The First Lady is not an elected official, nor does she have any governmental duties. Many twentieth-century First Ladies served as their husbands’ political partners and supported specific causes to improve the quality of life for Americans. The advocacy work undertaken by the First Ladies covered in this teaching unit includes human rights and racial injustice (Eleanor Roosevelt), women’s rights and health issues (Betty Ford), drug abuse (Nancy Reagan), literacy, poverty, and homelessness (Barbara Bush), and health care and women’s rights (Hillary Clinton). During the presidency of Franklin D. Roosevelt (1933–1945), First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt traveled throughout the nation to be “the President’s eyes, ears, and legs” and promote a variety of social and political causes. After her husband’s death and the end of World War II in 1945, Eleanor Roosevelt represented the United States as a delegate to the United Nations General Assembly and served as chairperson of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights. She worked diligently to draft the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and spoke in support of its adoption in a speech, “The Struggle for Human Rights,” on September 28, 1948. This comprehensive human rights policy, which was passed in 1948 by the United Nations, includes guarantees of civil, cultural, political, and social rights to all people. Roosevelt’s activism continued until her death in 1962. First Lady Betty Ford was a close political partner of her husband, Gerald Ford. The hallmark issue championed by Betty Ford was the ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA). In 1972, Congress had passed this proposed amendment, which stipulated that “Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States on account of sex.” On October 25, 1975, First Lady Betty Ford delivered remarks to the International Women’s Year Conference in Cleveland, Ohio, in support of the ratification of the ERA. Ford received the Congressional Gold Medal and the Presidential Medal of Freedom for her efforts to promote breast cancer research, protect disadvantaged children, enhance women’s rights, and raise public awareness of substance abuse.

MATERIALS

• Eleanor Roosevelt, “The Struggle for Human Rights,” September 28, 1948 (excerpts), Eleanor Roosevelt Papers, http://www.gwu.edu/~erpapers

• Betty Ford, “Remarks to the International Women’s Year Conference,” October 25, 1975 (excerpts), Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library and Museum, http://www.fordlibrarymuseum.gov

• Analyzing the Speech (two copies to each student)

PROCEDURE

You may choose to have the students work individually, as partners, or in small groups of three or four.

1. Distribute the excerpts from Eleanor Roosevelt’s “Struggle for Human Rights” speech, September 28, 1948.

2. “Share read” the text with the students by having them follow along silently while you read aloud, modeling prosody, inflection, and punctuation. Ask the class to join in with the reading after a few sentences while you continue to read along with the students, still serving as the model for the class. This technique will support struggling readers and English language learners (ELL).

3. Distribute the Analyzing the Speech worksheets to the students. Each student should receive two copies.

4. Answer Critical Thinking Question No. 1 as a whole class. Please make sure that the students use and cite evidence from the text to answer the question. The purpose of the summary section is for students to put the answer into their own words and demonstrate understanding of both the question and the answer.

5. Students will now answer the rest of the questions on their own or in small groups.

6. Discuss different interpretations developed by the students or student groups.

7. Repeat the process with the excerpts from Betty Ford’s “Remarks to the International Women’s Year Conference,” October 25, 1975. You can have the students answer Critical Thinking Question No. 1 as a class, in their groups, or individually.

8. Discuss different interpretations developed by the students or student groups.

9. Summary and Closure Activity: Direct the students’ attention back to the essential question. For a middle school class: To what extent can the ideas and words of First Ladies inspire us to improve our society? For a high school class: To what extent can the rhetoric of First Ladies be a catalyst for social change? Based on the knowledge and understanding that they acquired from this lesson, the students should develop a viewpoint and a response to the essential question. The students can demonstrate their level of learning by presenting their responses in either a class discussion or a written essay (or exit card). Students should support their ideas and viewpoints with evidence from the speeches of First Ladies Eleanor Roosevelt and/or Betty Ford.

LESSON 2

OVERVIEW

In this lesson the students will read, analyze, and assess speeches by First Ladies Nancy Reagan, Barbara Bush, and Hillary Clinton, summarize their main ideas, and answer several comprehension and critical thinking questions. In addition, the students will cite textual evidence to support their responses as well as draw logical inferences from the texts.

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND Nancy Reagan’s major social initiative as First Lady focused on promoting drug education and prevention programs for children and young adults. On September 14, 1986, President Ronald Reagan and the First Lady appeared on national television to announce a new national campaign that would be known by a catchphrase that Nancy Reagan had coined four years earlier: “Just Say No.” In 1988, Nancy Reagan became the first sitting First Lady to address the United Nations General Assembly, where she spoke about the destructive impact of drug abuse and the evils of international drug- trafficking. During her tenure as First Lady (1989–1993), Barbara Bush devoted herself to eradicating illiteracy and bringing public awareness to the needs of indigent and homeless families. When First Lady Barbara Bush was invited to be the commencement speaker at Wellesley College in 1990, many of the students protested. Critics asserted that the First Lady had defined her life primarily through her husband’s career and had not fully developed her own individual interests and accomplishments. Despite this unfriendly atmosphere, the First Lady viewed her Commencement Address at Wellesley College (June 1, 1990) as an opportunity to highlight the challenges of balancing a family and a career for women in contemporary society. Bush spoke with compassion, encouragement, humor, and sincerity, and won over many of her critics. As First Lady, Hillary Clinton played a vital advisory role, especially on health care and children’s and women’s issues, throughout her husband’s presidency (1993–2001). On September 5, 1995, First Lady Hillary Clinton addressed the UN Fourth World Conference on Women in Beijing, China, as the honorary chair of the US delegation. She enumerated abuses and injustices that have been perpetrated against women around the world, and in the People’s Republic of China in particular. In her speech, entitled “Women’s Rights Are Human Rights,” the First Lady asserted that “it is no longer acceptable to discuss women’s rights as separate from human rights.” Moreover, she told the delegates that domestic and societal violence against women thrives when there is a “crisis of silence and acquiescence.” However, most Chinese citizens were unaware of Clinton’s speech because it was blacked out on the official radio and television stations operated by the Communist government. The First Lady’s impassioned address has been credited as an influential catalyst for globally advancing human rights and women’s rights.

MATERIALS

• Nancy Reagan, “Just Say No,” September 14, 1986 (excerpts), Public Papers of Ronald Reagan, Ronald Reagan Presidential Library and Museum, https://www.reaganlibrary.archives.gov

• Barbara Bush, “Choices and Change: Commencement Address,” June 1, 1990 (excerpts), Commencement Archives, Events, Wellesley College, http://www.wellesley.edu

• Hillary Clinton, “Women’s Rights Are Human Rights,” September 5, 1995 (excerpts), Statements by Governments, Fourth World Conference on Women, United Nations, http://www.un.org

• Analyzing the Speech (three copies to each student)

PROCEDURE

You may choose to have the students do the lessons individually, as partners, or in small groups of three or four.

1. Distribute the excerpts from Nancy Reagan’s “Just Say No” speech, September 14, 1986.

2. Share read the text with the students as described in Lesson 1.

3. Distribute the Analyzing the Speech worksheets. Each student should receive three copies.

4. Have the students answer the questions individually or in small groups. Make sure that they cite evidence from the text to answer the questions.

5. Discuss different interpretations developed by the students or student groups for Nancy Reagan’s speech.

6. Repeat the process with the excerpts from Barbara Bush’s Commencement Address at Wellesley College, June 1, 1990.

7. Discuss different interpretations developed by the students or student groups for Barbara Bush’s speech.

8. Repeat the process with the excerpts from Hillary Clinton’s “Women’s Rights Are Human Rights” speech, September 5, 1995.

9. Discuss different interpretations developed by the students or student groups for Hillary Clinton’s speech.

10. Summary and Closure Activity: Direct the students’ attention back to the essential question. For a middle school class: To what extent can the ideas and words of First Ladies inspire us to improve our society? For a high school class: To what extent can the rhetoric of First Ladies be a catalyst for social change? Based on the knowledge and understanding that they acquired from this lesson, the students should develop a viewpoint and a response to the essential question. The students can demonstrate their level of learning by presenting their responses in either a class discussion or a written essay (or exit card). Students should support their ideas and viewpoints with evidence from the speeches of First Ladies Nancy Reagan, Barbara Bush, and/or Hillary Clinton.

LESSON 3-4

OVERVIEW

In this lesson (or lessons) the students will demonstrate what they have learned through their analysis of the speeches of the First Ladies (Eleanor Roosevelt, Betty Ford, Nancy Reagan, Barbara Bush, and Hillary Clinton) by writing and then staging a dramatic presentation of a mock news conference. The writing of the news conference script as well as the actual presentation to the class will serve to highlight and reinforce the major issues and achievements of the First Ladies that the students have studied over the past two lessons.

MATERIALS

• Eleanor Roosevelt, “The Struggle for Human Rights,” September 28, 1948 (excerpts) • Betty Ford, “Remarks to the International Women’s Year Conference,” October 25, 1975 (excerpts) • Nancy Reagan, “Just Say No,” September 14, 1986 (excerpts) • Barbara Bush, Commencement Address at Wellesley College, June 1, 1990 (excerpts) • Hillary Clinton, “Women’s Rights Are Human Rights,” September 5, 1995 (excerpts) • Analyzing the Speech: Eleanor Roosevelt • Analyzing the Speech: Betty Ford • Analyzing the Speech: Nancy Reagan • Analyzing the Speech: Barbara Bush • Analyzing the Speech: Hillary Clinton • News Conference Organizer (sufficient copies for one question per reporter)

PROCEDURES

1. Divide the class into groups of four to six students.

2. Assign each group one of the five First Ladies’ speeches (or let them select a speech). It is best if all five speeches are used before doubling up on any of the speeches.

3. The students in each group should select who will portray the First Lady. The rest of the group members will take the role of reporters at the news conference. If possible, the students should view a video recording of an actual presidential (or similar political) news conference prior to this activity.

4. Distribute the News Conference Organizer. In each group the students will compose both the questions and the responses to those questions using this form. The students should be careful to cite evidence from the text for the answers that are given by the First Lady. The questions and answers should highlight the major issues brought forth in each speech.

5. Presentation: a. The First Lady delivers the speech.

b. The reporters raise their hands and are selected by the First Lady to ask their questions.

c. This process continues until all of the questions have been posed to the First Lady, one question per reporter. The students could script follow-up questions, if time permits.

6. Repeat the process with all of the groups. This may mean going into another class period to allow time for all the presentations, as well as time to debrief the experience.

7. Have the class debrief the presentations to help students learn how to critique oral presentations effectively. Questions for class discussion could include the following: Which presentations were the most effective? What made them effective? How could the presentations have been improved? 8. Essay Extension: The students could compare and contrast the different speeches with a common theme. For example, they could compare and contrast Betty Ford’s and Barbara Bush’s speeches on the role of women in American society. Or they could analyze the rhetorical style used in the different speeches, comparing Eleanor Roosevelt’s to Nancy Reagan’s, for example.

Eleanor Roosevelt, “The Struggle for Human Rights,” September 28, 1948 (excerpts)

. . . We must not be confused about what freedom is. Basic human rights are simple and easily understood: freedom of speech and a free press; freedom of religion and worship; freedom of assembly and the right of petition; the right of men to be secure in their homes and free from unreasonable search and seizure and from arbitrary arrest and punishment.

We must not be deluded by the efforts of the forces of reaction to prostitute the great words of our free tradition and thereby to confuse the struggle. Democracy, freedom, human rights have come to have a definite meaning to the people of the world which we must not allow any nation

FDR Library to so change that they are made synonymous with suppression and dictatorship. . . .

The basic problem confronting the world today, as I said in the beginning, is the preservation of human freedom for the individual and consequently for the society of which he is a part. We are fighting this battle again today as it was fought at the time of the French Revolution and at the time of the American Revolution. The issue of human liberty is as decisive now as it was then. I want to give you my conception of what is meant in my country by freedom of the individual.

Long ago in London during a discussion with Mr. Vyshinsky, he told me there was no such thing as freedom for the individual in the world. All freedom of the individual was conditioned by the rights of other individuals. That, of course, I granted. I said: “We approach the question from a different point of view; we here in the United Nations are trying to develop ideals which will be broader in outlook, which will consider first the rights of man, which will consider what makes man more free; not governments, but man.”

The totalitarian state typically places the will of the people second to decrees promulgated by a few men at the top.

Naturally there must always be consideration of the rights of others; but in a democracy this is not a restriction. Indeed, in our democracies we make our freedoms secure because each of us is expected to respect the rights of others and we are free to make our own laws.

Freedom for our peoples is not only a right, but also a tool. Freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of information, freedom of assembly—these are not just abstract ideals to us; they are tools with which we create a way of life, a way of life in which we can enjoy freedom.

Sometimes the processes of democracy are slow, and I have known some of our leaders to say that a benevolent dictatorship would accomplish the ends desired in a much shorter time than it takes to go through the democratic processes of discussion and the slow formation of public opinion. But there is no way of insuring that a dictatorship will remain benevolent or that power once in the hands of a few will be returned to the people without struggle or revolution. This we have learned by experience and we accept the slow processes of democracy because we know that short-cuts compromise principles on which no compromise is possible.

Source: The Eleanor Roosevelt Papers Project, http://www.gwu.edu/~erpapers

Betty Ford, “Remarks to the International Women’s Year Conference,” October 25, 1975 (excerpts)

. . . While many new opportunities are open to women, too many are available only to the lucky few.

Many barriers continue to the paths of most women, even on the most basic issue of equal pay for equal work. And the contributions of women as wives and mothers continue to be underrated.

This year is not the time to cheer the visible few, but to work for the invisible many, whose lives are still restricted by custom and code . . .

The limits on women have been formalized into law and structured into social custom. Library of Congress. For that reason, the first important steps have been to undo the laws that hem women in and lock them out of the mainstream of opportunities.

But my own support of the Equal Rights Amendment has shown what happens when a definition of proper behavior collides with the right of an individual to personal opinions. I do not believe that being First Lady should prevent me from expressing my views.

I spoke out on this important issue, because of my deep personal convictions. Why should my husband’s job or yours prevent us from being ourselves? Being ladylike does not require silence.

The Equal Rights Amendment when ratified will not be an instant solution to women’s problems. It will not alter the fabric of the Constitution or force women away from their families.

It will help knock down those restrictions that have locked women in to old stereotypes of behavior and opportunity. It will help open up more options for women.

But it is only a beginning.

The debate over ERA has become too emotional, because of the fears of some—both men and women–about the changes already taking place in America. . . .

Change by its very nature is threatening, but it is also often productive. And the fight of women to become more productive, accepted human beings is important to all people of either sex and whatever nationality. . . .

I have been distressed that one unfortunate outgrowth of the debate has been a lack of appreciation of the role of women as wives and mothers. . . .

We have to take that “just” out of “just a housewife” and show our pride in having made the home and family our life’s work. . . .

Freedom for women to be what they want to be will help complete the circle of freedom America has been striving for during 200 years. As the barriers against freedom for Americans because of race or religion have fallen the freedom of all has expanded. The search for human freedom can never be complete without freedom for women.

By the end of this century, I hope this nation will be a place where men and women can freely choose their life’s work without restrictions or without ridicule.

On the eve of the nation’s third century, let us work to end the laws and remove the labels that limit the imagination and the options of men and women alike.

Source: The Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library and Museum, https://fordlibrarymuseum.gov

Nancy Reagan, “Just Say No” speech, September 14, 1986 (excerpts)

. . . So much has happened over these last years, so much to shake the foundations of all that we know and all that we believe in. Today there’s a drug and alcohol abuse epidemic in this country, and no one is safe from it—not you, not me, and certainly not our children, because this epidemic has their names written on it. Many of you may be thinking: “Well, drugs don’t concern me.” But it does concern you. It concerns us all because of the way it tears at our lives and because it’s aimed at destroying the brightness and life of the sons and daughters of the United States.

Library of Congress For 5 years I’ve been traveling across the country—learning and listening. And one of the most hopeful signs I’ve seen is the building of an essential, new awareness of how terrible and threatening drug abuse is to our society. . . . Listen to this news account from a hospital in Florida of a child born to a mother with a cocaine habit: “Nearby, a baby named Paul lies motionless in an incubator, feeding tubes riddling his tiny body. He needs a respirator to breathe and a daily spinal tap to relieve fluid buildup on his brain. Only 1 month old, he’s already suffered 2 strokes.”

Now you can see why drug abuse concerns every one of us—all the American family. Drugs steal away so much. They take and take, until finally every time a drug goes into a child, something else is forced out—like love and hope and trust and confidence. Drugs take away the dream from every child’s heart and replace it with a nightmare, and it’s time we in America stand up and replace those dreams. Each of us has to put our principles and consciences on the line, whether in social settings or in the workplace, to set forth solid standards and stick to them. There’s no moral middle ground. Indifference is not an option. We want you to help us create an outspoken intolerance for drug use. For the sake of our children, I implore each of you to be unyielding and inflexible in your opposition to drugs. . . .

Our job is never easy because drug criminals are ingenious. They work everyday to plot a new and better way to steal our children’s lives, just as they’ve done by developing this new drug, crack. For every door that we close, they open a new door to death. They prosper on our unwillingness to act. So, we must be smarter and stronger and tougher than they are. It’s up to us to change attitudes and just simply dry up their markets.

And finally, to young people watching or listening, I have a very personal message for you: There’s a big, wonderful world out there for you. It belongs to you. It’s exciting and stimulating and rewarding. Don’t cheat yourselves out of this promise. Our country needs you, but it needs you to be clear-eyed and clear-minded. I recently read one teenager’s story. She’s now determined to stay clean but was once strung out on several drugs. What she remembered most clearly about her recovery was that during the time she was on drugs everything appeared to her in shades of black and gray and after her treatment she was able to see colors again.

So, to my young friends out there: Life can be great, but not when you can’t see it. So, open your eyes to life: to see it in the vivid colors that God gave us as a precious gift to His children, to enjoy life to the fullest, and to make it count. Say yes to your life. And when it comes to drugs and alcohol just say no.

Source: Public Papers of Ronald Reagan, Ronald Reagan Presidential Library and Museum, https://www.reaganlibrary.archives.gov

Barbara Bush, Commencement Address at Wellesley College, June 1, 1990 (excerpts)

. . . In the world that awaits you beyond the shores of Lake Waban, no one can say what your true colors will be. But this I do know: You have a first-class education from a first-class school. And so you need not, probably cannot, live a “paint-by numbers” life. Decisions are not irrevocable. Choices do come back. And as you set off from Wellesley, I hope that many of you will consider making three very special choices.

The first is to believe in something larger than yourself . . . to get involved in some of the big ideas of our time. I chose literacy because I honestly believe that if more people could read,

write and comprehend, we would be that much closer to solving so many of the problems that National Archives plague our nation and our society.

Early on I made another choice which I hope you will make as well. Whether you are talking about education, career or service, you are talking about life . . . and life really must have joy. It’s supposed to be fun!

One of the reasons I made the most important decision of my life . . . to marry George Bush . . . is because he made me laugh. It’s true, sometimes we’ve laughed through our tears . . . but that shared laughter has been one of our strongest bonds. Find the joy in life, because as Ferris Bueller said on his day off . . . “Life moves pretty fast. Ya don’t stop and look around once in a while, ya gonna miss it!” (I am not going to tell George you clapped more for Ferris than you did for George.)

The third choice that must not be missed is to cherish your human connections: your relationships with family and friends. For several years, you’ve had impressed upon you the importance to your career of dedication and hard work, and, of course, that’s true. But as important as your obligations as a doctor, lawyer or business leader will be, you are a human being first and those human connections—with spouses, with children, with friends—are the most important investments you will ever make.

At the end of your life, you will never regret not having passed one more test, not winning one more verdict or not closing one more deal. You will regret time not spent with a husband, a child, a friend or a parent. . . .

Maybe we should adjust faster, maybe we should adjust slower. But whatever the era, whatever the times, one thing will never change: Fathers and mothers, if you have children—they must come first.

. . . Your success as a family . . . our success as a society depends not on what happens in the White House, but on what happens inside your house.

For over 50 years, it was said that the winner of Wellesley’s annual hoop race would be the first to get married. Now they say the winner will be the first to become a C.E.O. Both of these stereotypes show too little tolerance . . . So I want to offer you today a new legend: The winner of the hoop race will be the first to realize her dream . . . not society’s dreams . . . her own personal dream. And who knows? Somewhere out in this audience may even be someone who will one day follow in my footsteps, and preside over the White House as the President’s spouse.

I wish him well!

Source: Commencement Archives, Events, Wellesley College, http://www.wellesley.edu

Hillary Clinton, “Women’s Rights Are Human Rights,” September 5, 1995 (excerpts)

. . . What we are learning around the world is that, if women are healthy and educated, their families will flourish. If women are free from violence, their families will flourish. If women have a chance to work and earn as full and equal partners in society, their families will flourish. . . .

And when families flourish, communities and nations will flourish. . . .

Women comprise more than half the world’s population. Women are 70 percent of the world’s poor, and two-thirds of those who are not taught to read and write. Women are the primary caretakers for most of the world’s children and elderly. Yet much of the work we do is not valued—not by

National Archives economists, not by historians, not by popular culture, not by government leaders.

At this very moment, as we sit here, women around the world are giving birth, raising children, cooking meals, washing clothes, cleaning houses, planting crops, working on assembly lines, running companies, and running countries.

Women also are dying from diseases that should have been prevented or treated; they are watching their children succumb to malnutrition caused by poverty and economic deprivation; they are being denied the right to go to school by their own fathers and brothers; they are being forced into prostitution, and they are being barred from the ballot box and the bank lending office. . . .

I believe that, on the eve of a new millennium, it is time to break our silence. It is time for us to say here in Beijing, and the world to hear, that it is no longer acceptable to discuss women’s rights as separate from human rights.

These abuses have continued because, for too long, the history of women has been a history of silence. Even today, there are those who are trying to silence our words. . . .

It is a violation of human rights when babies are denied food, or drowned, or suffocated, or their spines broken, simply because they are born girls. It is a violation of human rights when women and girls are sold into the slavery of prostitution. It is a violation of human rights when women are doused with gasoline, set on fire and burned to death because their marriage dowries are deemed too small. It is a violation of human rights when individual women are raped in their own communities and when thousands of women are subjected to rape as a tactic or prize of war. It is a violation of human rights when a leading cause of death worldwide among women ages 14 to 44 is the violence they are subjected to in their own homes. . . .

If there is one message that echoes forth from this conference, it is that human rights are women’s rights. . . and women’s rights are human rights.

Let us not forget that among those rights are the right to speak freely. And the right to be heard.

Women must enjoy the right to participate fully in the social and political lives of their countries if we want freedom and democracy to thrive and endure. . . .

Let me be clear. Freedom means the right of people to assemble, organize, and debate openly. It means respecting the views of those who may disagree with the views of their governments. It means not taking citizens away from their loved ones and jailing them, mistreating them, or denying them their freedom or dignity because of the peaceful expression of their ideas and opinions. . . .

Now it is time to act on behalf of women everywhere.

If we take bold steps to better the lives of women, we will be taking bold steps to better the lives of children and families too. . . .

As long as discrimination and inequities remain so commonplace around the world—as long as girls and women are valued less, fed less, fed last, overworked, underpaid, not schooled and subjected to violence in and out of their homes—the potential of the human family to create a peaceful, prosperous world will not be realized.

Source: Statements by Governments, Fourth World Conference on Women, United Nations, http://www.un.org © 2018 The Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History, New York TEACHING WITH DOCUMENTS The Twentieth Century: 1946-2001 37

CRITICAL THINKING NAME PERIOD DATE

ANALYZING THE SPEECH NAME OF FIRST LADY

1 What evidence is given to support the issue being presented? Give three examples.

Answer the question using evidence from the text: In your own words:

What action(s) is this speech promoting? 2

Answer the question using evidence from the text: In your own words:

What are the opposing forces to the ideals or actions promoted by this speech? 3

Answer the question using evidence from the text: In your own words:

4 What is the best (most convincing or most thought-provoking) part of the speech?

Answer the question using evidence from the text: In your own words:

CRITICAL THINKING NAME PERIOD DATE

NEWS CONFERENCE NAME OF FIRST LADY

Write your question here: 1 Answer: Evidence from the text:

2 Write your question here: Answer: Evidence from the text:

3 Write your question here: Answer: Evidence from the text:

March on Washington, August 28, 1963 (National Archives)

Martin Luther King Jr.’s “I Have a Dream” Speech BY TIM BAILEY

UNIT OVERVIEW

Over the course of five lessons, students will read, analyze, and gain a clear understanding of “I Have a Dream,” a speech delivered by Martin Luther King Jr. at the March on Washington on August 28, 1963. The first four lessons require students to read excerpts from the speech “like a detective.” Through summary organizers, practice, and discussion, they will master the technique of identifying key words, creating summaries of document sections and, as an assessment in the final lesson, writing an argumentative essay.

UNIT OBJECTIVES

Students will be able to

• Read and demonstrate understanding of a complex document

• Identify the main ideas, synthesize them, and draw logical inferences from the text.

• Summarize the author’s words and restate the author’s meaning in their own words

• Write an argumentative essay using evidence from the text to support their ideas

NUMBER OF CLASS PERIODS

The unit is structured for five class sessions, but Lessons 1 and 2 can be combined and Lessons 3 and 4 can be combined. In addition, the essay could be assigned as a take-home exercise.

GRADE LEVEL(S): 7–12

COMMON CORE STATE STANDARDS

CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RH.9-10.1: Cite specific textual evidence to support analysis of primary sources, attending to such features as the date and origin of the information.

CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RH.9-10.2: Determine the central ideas or information of a primary source; provide an accurate summary of how key events or ideas develop over the course of the text.

CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RH.9-10.4: Determine the meaning of words and phrases as they are used in a text, including vocabulary describing political, social, or economic aspects of history/social studies.

CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RH.9-10.5: Analyze how a text uses structure to emphasize key points or advance an explanation or analysis.

CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.WHST.9-10.4: Produce clear and coherent writing in which the development, organization, and style are appropriate to task, purpose, and audience.

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

On August 28, 1963, approximately a quarter million people converged on Washington, DC. They came from all over the United States to demand civil and economic rights for African Americans. Many traveled for days—and at great personal risk—to participate. The March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom was one of the largest political rallies in history. There were fears of violence, but the huge crowd remained peaceful as they marched from the Washington Monument to the Lincoln Memorial.

The last speech of the day was given by the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., president of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference. King drew on history—including the promise of equality in the Declaration of Independence and Abraham Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation—to highlight how far African Americans were from reaching the American ideal. He urged his audience to demand equal opportunities and access to jobs, facilities, housing, and the vote. But what transformed the speech into one of the most memorable in American history for the millions of Americans watching and listening in Washington, on radio and television, was the recurring phrase “I have a dream,” repeated eight times with increasing urgency—a dream of what could happen in the nation as well as a more intimate dream of what his own children could achieve when freedom rang everywhere in the United States.

March on Washington, August 28, 1963 (National Archives)

LESSON 1

OVERVIEW

Students will read the first section of the “I Have a Dream” speech given by Martin Luther King Jr. in 1963. In a step- by-step process they will identify key words employed by King and then summarize the text to demonstrate that they understand what King was saying.

OBJECTIVES

Students will be able to

• Understand what was explicitly stated in the speech

• Draw logical inferences

• Summarize a portion of the speech using the author’s words and then their own words

MATERIALS

• Teacher Resource: “I Have a Dream” Speech by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. (excerpts). Reprinted by arrangement with The Heirs to the Estate of Martin Luther King Jr., c/o Writers House as the proprietor New York, NY. Copyright: © 1963 Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. © renewed 1991 Coretta Scott King.

• Summary Organizer #1

• Overhead projector, Elmo projector, or similar device

PROCEDURE

Note: The first lesson is done as a whole-class exercise.

1. Tell the students that they will be exploring what Martin Luther King Jr. said in the “I Have a Dream” speech at the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom in 1963. Resist the temptation to provide more information, as you want the students to develop ideas based solely on King’s words.

2. Read aloud the excerpts from the “I Have a Dream” speech by Martin Luther King Jr. It is important for the students to experience the text as originally intended—in this case as a speech before a large crowd.

3. Tell the students that they will be analyzing the first selection from the speech today and learning how to do in-depth analysis for themselves. The whole class will be going through this process together for the first section of the text.

4. Pass out Summary Organizer #1, which includes the first section of the speech. Display the organizer in a format large enough for the whole class to see. Make certain the students understand that the original text has been edited for this lesson. Explain the purpose and use of ellipses.

5. “Share read” the text with the students. This is done by having the students follow along silently while you begin to read aloud, modeling prosody, inflection, and punctuation. Then ask the class to join in with the reading after a few sentences while you continue to read aloud, still serving as the model for the class. This technique will support struggling readers as well as English language learners (ELL).

6. Explain that the objective is to select “Key Words” from the first section and then use those words to create a brief summary of the text that gets at the gist of what Dr. King was saying.

7. Guidelines for Selecting Key Words: Key Words are very important contributors to understanding the text. They are usually nouns or verbs. Don’t pick “connector” words (are, is, the, and, so, etc.). The number of Key Words depends on the length of the original selection. This selection is 249 words in length, so you can pick up to ten Key Words. The students must know what their Key Words mean, so there will be opportunities to teach students how to use context clues, word analysis, and dictionary skills to discover word meanings.

8. Ask the students to select up to ten words from the text that they believe are Key Words and write them down in their organizers.

9. Survey the class to find out what the most popular choices were. After some discussion and with your guidance, the class should decide on ten Key Words. For example, let’s say that the class decides on the following words: freedom, Emancipation Proclamation (two words that together make up a single idea can be selected if it makes sense in context), hope, Negro, segregation, discrimination, shameful, Declaration of Independence, promise, and unalienable rights. Now, no matter which words the students had previously selected, have them write the words agreed upon by the class or chosen by you into the Key Words list.

10. Explain that the class will use these Key Words to write a brief summary (one or two sentences) that demonstrates an understanding of what King was saying. This exercise should be a whole-class discussion-and-negotiation process. You might find that the class doesn’t need some of the Key Words, which will make the summary even more streamlined. This is part of the negotiation process. The final sentence(s) should be copied into the organizer.

11. Now guide the students in restating the summary sentence(s) in their own words. Again, this is a class negotiation process. “For example, ‘African Americans were promised the same rights as everyone else, but that promise hasn’t been fulfilled yet.’”

12. Wrap up: Discuss vocabulary that the students found confusing or difficult. You could have students use the back of their organizer or a separate vocabulary form to make a note of these words and their meaning.

LESSON 2

OVERVIEW

Students will read the second section of the “I Have a Dream” speech delivered in 1963 by Martin Luther King Jr. In a step-by-step process they will identify key words employed by King and then summarize the text to demonstrate that they understand what King was saying.

OBJECTIVES

Students will be able to

• Understand what was explicitly stated in the speech

• Draw logical inferences

• Summarize a portion of the speech using the author’s words and then their own words

MATERIALS

• Summary Organizer #2

• Overhead projector, Elmo projector, or similar device

PROCEDURE

Note: For this lesson, the students will be working with partners and in small groups.

1. Review what the class did in the previous lesson and what they decided was the gist of the first selection from King’s speech.

2. Distribute Summary Organizer #2 and display a copy in a format large enough for the whole class to see. Tell the students that they will work on the second section of the text with partners and in small groups.

3. Share read the second selection with the students as described in Lesson 1.

4. Review the process of selecting Key Words, writing a summary of the text using those words, and then restating the summary in their own words to show their understanding of the text.

5. Pair the students up and have them work together to select the best Key Words. This passage is 258 words in length, so they can choose up to ten words.

6. Now put two pairs of students together. These four students will negotiate with each other to come up with their final ten Key Words. Be strategic in how you make your groups in order to ensure the most participation by all group members.

7. Once the groups have selected their Key Words, each group will use those words to create a brief summary (one or two sentences) of what Martin Luther King was saying. During this process, try to make sure that everyone is contributing. It is very easy for one student to take control and for the other students to let them do so. All of the students should write their group’s sentence into their organizers.

8. Ask groups to share out the summary sentences that they have created. This should start a teacher-led discussion that points out the qualities of the various responses. How successful were the groups at getting at King’s main idea, and were they careful to use the Key Words in doing so?

9. Now direct the groups to restate their summary sentences in their own words. Again, this is a group negotiation process. After they have decided on a summary, it should be written into their organizers. Again, have the groups share out their responses and discuss the clarity and quality of the responses.

10. Wrap up: Discuss vocabulary that the students found confusing or difficult. If you choose, you could have students use the back of their organizer or a separate vocabulary form to make a note of these words and their meaning.

LESSON 3

OVERVIEW

Students will read the third section of the “I Have a Dream” speech delivered in 1963 by Martin Luther King Jr. In a step-by-step process they will identify key words employed by King and then summarize the text to demonstrate that they understand what King was saying.

OBJECTIVES

Students will be able to

• Understand what was explicitly stated in the speech

• Draw logical inferences

• Summarize a portion of the speech using the author’s words and then their own words

MATERIALS

• Summary Organizer #3

PROCEDURE

Note: For this lesson students will work individually unless you decide they still need the support of a group.

1. Review what the class did in the previous two lessons and what they decided was the gist of the first two selections.

2. Distribute Summary Organizer #3 with the third selection from King’s speech. You may decide to share read the third selection with the students as in prior lessons or have them read it silently to themselves.

3. Review the process of selecting Key Words, writing a summary using those words, and then restating the summary in their own words to demonstrate their understanding of the text. This passage is 237 words in length, so the students can pick up to ten words.

4. After the students have worked through the three steps, have them share out their summaries in their own words in a guided class discussion of the meaning of the text.

5. Wrap up: Discuss vocabulary that the students found confusing or difficult. If you choose, you could have students use the back of their organizer or a separate vocabulary form to make a note of these words and their meaning.

LESSON 4

OVERVIEW

Students will read the fourth section of the “I Have a Dream” speech delivered in 1963 by Martin Luther King Jr. In a step-by-step process they will identify key words employed by King and then summarize the text to demonstrate that they understand what King was saying.

OBJECTIVES

Students will be able to

• Understand what was explicitly stated in the speech

• Draw logical inferences

• Summarize a portion of the speech using the author’s words and then their own words

MATERIALS

• Summary Organizer #4

PROCEDURE

Note: Students will continue to work independently in this lesson.

1. Review what the class did in the previous lessons and what they decided was the gist of the first three selections.

2. Distribute Summary Organizer #4 with the fourth selection from King’s speech. You may decide to share read the text with the students as in prior lessons or have them read it silently to themselves.

3. Review the process of selecting Key Words, writing a summary using those words, and then restating the summary in the students’ own words to demonstrate their understanding of the text. There are 224 words in this selection, so the students can select eight or nine key words.

4. After the students have worked through the three steps, have them share out their summaries in their own words in a guided class discussion of the meaning of King’s words.

LESSON 5

OVERVIEW

The class will first review the meaning of each section of Martin Luther King’s “I Have a Dream” speech. Second, the students will look closely at how Dr. King constructed his speech, particularly his choice of words. Finally, they will write about Dr. King’s speech in a short argumentative essay in which they support their statements with evidence taken directly from Martin Luther King’s own words.

OBJECTIVES

Students will be able to

• Synthesize the work of the prior four days

• Demonstrate an understanding of a speech

• Analyze the author’s writing (speech construction, rhetorical style)

• Write an argumentative essay based on evidence in the text

MATERIALS

• Summary Organizers #1–4 from the previous lessons

• Overhead projector, Elmo projector, or similar device

PROCEDURE

1. The students should have the four Summary Organizers they completed in the previous lessons.

2. Review the work from the previous lessons by asking the students to provide a summary in their own words of each of the four text selections. This is done as a class discussion. Write these short negotiated sentences on the overhead or similar device so the whole class can see them. These summaries should reinforce the students’ understanding of the meaning of King’s speech.

3. Discuss with the students Dr. King’s rhetorical style as well as how the structure of the speech affects its meaning. How does repeating certain phrases strengthen his point or focus his arguments? How does the construction help guide the audience?

4. If the students do not have experience writing an argumentative essay, proceed with a short lesson on essay writing. Otherwise, have them write a short essay in response to one of the prompts in class or as an out-of-class assignment. Remind the students that they must back up any arguments they make with evidence taken directly from the text of King’s “I Have a Dream” speech. The first prompt is designed to be the easiest.

PROMPTS

1. What is Martin Luther King Jr.’s dream, and according to Dr. King how could it become a reality?

2. In his speech Dr. King says that “we’ve come to our nation’s capital to cash a check.” What does he mean by this, and what, as he sees it, will be the result of this action?

3. In his speech, how does Dr. King respond to the question, “When will you be satisfied?” Explain both the reason for this question put to civil rights activists and Dr. King’s response.

TEACHER RESOURCE

“I Have a Dream” Speech by the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. at the March on Washington, 1963 (excerpts)

I am happy to join with you today in what will go down in history as the greatest demonstration for freedom in the history of our nation.

Five score years ago a great American in whose symbolic shadow we stand today signed the Emancipation Proclamation. This momentous decree is a great beacon light of hope to millions of Negro slaves who had been seared in the flames of withering injustice. It came as a joyous daybreak to end the long night of their captivity. But 100 years later the Negro still is not free. One hundred years later the life of the Negro is still badly crippled by the manacles of segregation and the chains of discrimination. One hundred years later the Negro lives on a lonely island of poverty in the midst of a vast ocean of material prosperity. One hundred years later the Negro is still languished in the corners of American society and finds himself in exile in his own land. So we’ve come here today to dramatize a shameful condition.

In a sense we’ve come to our nation’s capital to cash a check. When the architects of our Republic wrote the magnificent words of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, they were signing a promissory note to which every American was to fall heir. This note was a promise that all men—yes, black men as well as white men—would be guaranteed the unalienable rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. . . .

We must forever conduct our struggle on the high plane of dignity and discipline. We must not allow our creative protests to degenerate into physical violence. . . . The marvelous new militancy which has engulfed the Negro community must not lead us to distrust all white people, for many of our white brothers, as evidenced by their presence here today, have come to realize that their destiny is tied up with our destiny.

We can never be satisfied as long as our bodies, heavy with the fatigue of travel, cannot gain lodging in the motels of the highways and the hotels of the cities.

We cannot be satisfied as long as the Negro’s basic mobility is from a smaller ghetto to a larger one. We can never be satisfied as long as our children are stripped of their adulthood and robbed of their dignity by signs stating “For Whites Only.”

We cannot be satisfied as long as the Negro in Mississippi cannot vote and the Negro in New York believes he has nothing for which to vote.

No, no, we are not satisfied, and we will not be satisfied until justice rolls down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream. . . .

I say to you today, my friends, though, even though we face the difficulties of today and tomorrow, I still have a dream. It is a dream deeply rooted in the American dream. I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up, live out the true meaning of its creed: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.”

I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave-owners will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood. I have a dream that one day even the state of Mississippi, a state sweltering with the heat of injustice, sweltering with the heat of oppression, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice.

I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. I have a dream . . . I have a dream that one day in Alabama, with its vicious racists, with its governor having his lips dripping with the words of interposition and nullification, one day right there in Alabama little black boys and black girls will be able to join hands with little white boys and white girls as sisters and brothers.

I have a dream today . . .

This will be the day when all of God’s children will be able to sing with new meaning. “My country, ’tis of thee, sweet land of liberty, of thee I sing. Land where my fathers died, land of the pilgrim’s pride, from every mountain side, let freedom ring.” And if America is to be a great nation, this must become true. So let freedom ring from the prodigious hilltops of New Hampshire. Let freedom ring from the mighty mountains of New York. Let freedom ring from the heightening Alleghenies of Pennsylvania. Let freedom ring from the snowcapped Rockies of Colorado. Let freedom ring from the curvaceous slopes of California.

But not only that. Let freedom ring from Stone Mountain of Georgia. Let freedom ring from Lookout Mountain of Tennessee. Let freedom ring from every hill and molehill of Mississippi, from every mountain side. Let freedom ring . . .

When we allow freedom to ring—when we let it ring from every city and every hamlet, from every state and every city, we will be able to speed up that day when all of God’s children, black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics, will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old Negro spiritual, “Free at last, Free at last, Great God a-mighty, We are free at last.”

Reprinted by arrangement with The Heirs to the Estate of Martin Luther King Jr., c/o Writers House as the proprietor New York, NY. Copyright: © 1963 Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. © renewed 1991 Coretta Scott King.

© 2018 The Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History, New York TEACHING WITH DOCUMENTS The Twentieth Century: 1946-2001 51 “I Have a Dream,” SUMMARY Speech of Martin Luther King Jr. at the March on Washington ORGANIZER 1 for Jobs and Freedom, August 28, 1963

ORIGINAL TEXT

I am happy to join with you today in what will go down in history as the greatest demonstration for freedom in the history of our nation.

Key Words:

______

Summary:

______

In Your Own Words:

______

© 2018 The Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History, New York 52 TEACHING WITH DOCUMENTS The Twentieth Century: 1946-2001 “I Have a Dream,” SUMMARY Speech of Martin Luther King Jr. at the March on Washington ORGANIZER 2 for Jobs and Freedom, August 28, 1963

ORIGINAL TEXT

. . . We cannot walk alone. And as we walk we must make the pledge that we shall always march ahead. We cannot turn back. There are those who are asking the devotees of civil rights, “When will you be satisfied?” We can never be satisfied as long as the Negro is the victim of the unspeakable horrors of police brutality. We can never be satisfied as long as our bodies, heavy with the fatigue of travel, cannot gain lodging in the motels of the highways and the hotels of the cities. We cannot be satisfied as long as the Negro’s basic mobility is from a smaller ghetto to a larger one. We can never be satisfied as long as our children are stripped of their adulthood and robbed of their dignity by signs stating “For Whites Only.” We cannot be satisfied as long as the Negro in Mississippi cannot vote and the Negro in New York believes he has nothing for which to vote. No, no, we are not satisfied, and we will not be satisfied until justice rolls down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream. . . .

Key Words:

______

Summary:

______

In Your Own Words:

______

© 2018 The Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History, New York TEACHING WITH DOCUMENTS The Twentieth Century: 1946-2001 53 “I Have a Dream,” SUMMARY Speech of Martin Luther King Jr. at the March on Washington ORGANIZER 3 for Jobs and Freedom, August 28, 1963

ORIGINAL TEXT

I have a dream today . . .

Key Words:

______

Summary:

______

In Your Own Words:

______

“I Have a Dream,” SUMMARY ORGANIZER 4 Speech of Martin Luther King Jr. at the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom, August 28, 1963

ORIGINAL TEXT

Key Words:

______

Summary:

______

In Your Own Words:

______

This placard was worn by marchers after the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. in Memphis, Tennessee. (Allied Printing, April 8, 1968. The Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History)

Buzz Aldrin on the moon, July 20, 1969 (NASA)

Going to the Moon: Science Fiction v. Science History

BY TIM BAILEY

UNIT OVERVIEW

Over the course of four lessons, students will explore humanity’s quest to travel to the moon. They will analyze three different documents about space exploration: a speech by President John F. Kennedy in 1962; excerpts from a novel by H. G. Wells, The First Men in the Moon (1901); and a New York Times article on the first lunar landing in 1969. Students will use textual evidence from the fiction and nonfiction accounts as well as videos to draw conclusions and write an essay.

UNIT OBJECTIVES

Students will be able to

• Understand what is explicitly stated in a literary or historical text

• Identify key words in fiction or nonfiction texts

• Explain and defend their analysis of a primary source in a class discussion

• Discuss the historical perception of an event or idea based on video clips

• Compare and contrast the presentation of a historical event in a video and a newspaper article

• Engage in a class discussion evaluating the approaches of the written and filmed versions of a historical event

• Compare and contrast the presentation of historical events in fiction and nonfiction texts

• Write a short essay comparing fiction and nonfiction presentations of events using evidence from primary sources

NUMBER OF CLASS PERIODS: 4

GRADE LEVEL(S): 9–12

COMMON CORE STATE STANDARDS

CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RH.11-12.1: Cite specific textual evidence to support analysis of primary and secondary sources, connecting insights gained from specific details to an understanding of the text as a whole.

CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RH.11-12.2: Determine the central ideas or information of a primary or secondary source; provide an accurate summary that makes clear the relationships among the key details and ideas.

CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RH.11-12.6: Evaluate authors’ differing points of view on the same historical event or issue by assessing the authors’ claims, reasoning, and evidence.

CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RH.11-12.7: Integrate and evaluate multiple sources of information presented in diverse formats and media in order to address a question or solve a problem.

CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.WHST.11-12.1: Write arguments focused on discipline-specific content.

LESSON 1

OVERVIEW

In the first lesson, students will closely read excerpts from a speech President John F. Kennedy gave at Rice University on September 12, 1962, and demonstrate their understanding of the text through answers to critical thinking questions and class discussion.

OBJECTIVES

Students will be able to

• Understand what is explicitly stated in a speech

• Summarize portions of the speech using the author’s words and then their own words

• Explain and defend their analysis of a primary source text in a class discussion

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

In September 1962 the United States was losing the space race to the Soviet Union. On October 4, 1957, the Soviet Union had successfully put Sputnik I, the first man-made satellite, into orbit. The United States followed suit on January 31, 1958, with the launch of the satellite Explorer I. Next, Soviet cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin became the first person in space on April 12, 1961; American astronaut Alan Shepherd became the second man in space a month later. On May 25, 1961, President John F. Kennedy announced to a joint session of Congress his intention to put an American astronaut on the moon before the end of the decade. This time, Kennedy vowed, America would beat the Soviet Union in the space race. And although the technology for reaching the moon did not even exist at that time, Kennedy took his case for a moon landing to the American people in a speech at Rice University in Texas on September 12, 1962.

MATERIALS

• Video of President John F. Kennedy’s speech on space exploration, Rice University, September 12, 1962, https://www. jfklibrary.org/JFK/Historic-Speeches.aspx

• President John F. Kennedy’s speech on space exploration, Rice University, September 12, 1962 (excerpts), John F. Kennedy Presidential Library and Museum, https://www.jfklibrary.org/JFK/Historic-Speeches.aspx

• Critical Thinking Questions: John F. Kennedy’s Rice University Speech, 1962

PROCEDURE

You may choose to have the students work individually, as partners, or in small groups of no more than three or four.

1. Discuss the information in the Historical Background.

2. If you have time, show the class the video of President Kennedy’s speech at Rice University on September 12, 1962. A link is provided in the Materials list.

3. Hand out the excerpts from Kennedy’s speech. Make certain that students understand that the original text has been edited for this lesson. Explain the purpose and use of ellipses.

4. Depending on the reading level of the students, you can let them read the speech silently to themselves or have the class “share read” it together. This is done by having the students follow along silently while you begin reading aloud, modeling prosody, inflection, and punctuation. Then ask the class to join in with the reading after a few sentences while you continue to read aloud with the students, still serving as the model for the class. This technique will support struggling readers as well as English language learners (ELL).

5. Hand out the Critical Thinking Questions worksheet. Students will answer each question by using evidence taken directly from the text and then restating each answer in their own words. They can brainstorm as partners or small groups but must complete their own organizer in order to complete the assignment. Remember to emphasize that they are to first use Kennedy’s words to express what is important in the text and then summarize the meaning of the text in their own words.

6. Class discussion: Have groups or individual students share their answers and compare with other groups’ work.

LESSON 2

OVERVIEW

The students will read selections from H. G. Wells’s classic science fiction novelThe First Men in the Moon, written in 1901, in which Wells envisions the building of a spacecraft that travels to the moon. The students will analyze the text not for its scientific validity according to a twenty-first-century point of view, but for how Wells describes space travel and a moon landing using only his imagination and the scientific knowledge of his time.

OBJECTIVES

Students will be able to

• Discuss the historical perception of space travel based on two video clips

• Identify key words in a fictional text

• Summarize the meaning of a fictional text in their own words

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

The First Men in the Moon was written by noted science fiction author H. G. Wells and was published in 1901. It is the story of an English businessman who becomes interested in the work of an eccentric physicist named Dr. Cavor. Cavor has created a substance, which he calls “cavorite,” that blocks the effects of gravity. The professor builds a spherical spacecraft, using cavorite’s unique properties, to fly to the moon. This book as well as Jules Verne’sFrom the Earth to the Moon (1865) inspired one of the earliest films ever made,Le Voyage dans la Lune, in 1902. The story of The First Men in the Moon was turned into a film in 1964.

MATERIALS

• Trailer, The First Men in the Moon (Columbia Pictures, 1964), Turner Classic Movies, http://www.tcm.com/ mediaroom/video/199165/First-Men-In-The-Moon-Original-Trailer-.html

• Le Voyage dans la Lune (Georges Méliès, 1902). Source: Internet Archive, http://archive.org/details/ Levoyagedanslalune

• Summary Organizer: The First Men in the Moon (selections). The complete text of H. G. Wells’s The First Men in the Moon is online at Google Books or Project Gutenberg.

PROCEDURE

You may choose to have the students work individually, as partners, or in small groups of no more than three or four.

1. Discuss the information in the Historical Background.

2. Show the class the two video clips (links are provided above) from the films Le Voyage dans la Lune and The First Men in the Moon. Discuss the perception of space travel at the turn of the twentieth century based on these films.

3. Hand out Summary Organizer: The First Men in the Moon. Depending on the students’ reading levels, they can either read the text silently to themselves or you can share read it with the class as described in Lesson 1.

4. Students will read the four selections from the novel and choose key words from each selection. They will put the key words into the box on the right. They will use these key words and their own words to answer the question associated with each text selection. Students can brainstorm as partners or in small groups but must complete their own organizer in order to complete the assignment. Remember to emphasize that the students are to first use ells’sW words to identify what is important in the text and then summarize the meaning of the text in their own words.

5. Class discussion: Have groups or individual students share their answers and summaries and compare with other groups’ work.

LESSON 3

OVERVIEW

The students will analyze and compare two different primary sources describing the lunar landing of Apollo 11 on July 20, 1969, one a video presentation, the other a newspaper article.

OBJECTIVES

Students will be able to

• Compare the presentation of a historical event in a video to that in a newspaper article

• Engage in a class discussion evaluating the approaches of the written and filmed reports of a historical event

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

“Houston, Tranquility Base here, the Eagle has landed.” With these words two American astronauts, Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin, fulfilled President Kennedy’s vision of landing a man on the moon. Six hours later Mission Commander Neil Armstrong immortalized the following words as he became the first person to step onto the surface of the moon: “That’s one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind. After billions of dollars and nearly a decade devoted to reaching the moon, the United States had won this important lap of the space race with the Soviet Union in the ongoing Cold War.

MATERIALS

• “Man on the Moon - Apollo 11 - Cronkite Broadcast Pt3” (10 minutes), YouTube, http://www.youtube.com or NASA videos at http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/hd/apollo11.html (several videos of the moon landing and first moon walk)

• “Men Walk on Moon,” by John Noble Wilford, New York Times, July 21, 1969 (excerpts)

• Apollo 11: The First Lunar Landing Video and “Men Walk on Moon” worksheet

PROCEDURE

You may choose to have the students work individually, as partners, or in small groups of no more than three or four.

1. Show the class one or more of the videos of the moon landing.

2. Hand out the Apollo 11 worksheet. Ask the students to complete the first section relating to the video clip(s).

3. Hand out excerpts from the New York Times article “Men Walk on Moon.” Depending on the students’ reading levels, you can either let them read the article for themselves or have the class share read it as described in Lesson 1. Once they have read the text, ask the students to complete the second section of the worksheet.

4. Class discussion: Have the students or student groups share out their choices for the most important parts of both the video broadcast and the newspaper article describing the first lunar landing.

LESSON 4

OVERVIEW

The students will compare and contrast two versions of a “first lunar landing”: the fictional account in H. G. Wells’s 1901 novel, The First Men in the Moon, and John Noble Wilford’s New York Times report on the Apollo 11 landing in 1969.

OBJECTIVES

Students will be able to

• Analyze the similarities and the differences between a novel and a newspaper report

• Compare and contrast the content of fiction and nonfiction texts on similar topics

• Write a short essay evaluating the accuracy of H. G. Wells’s account of space travel and a lunar landing

MATERIALS

• Summary Organizer: The First Men in the Moon (selections), by H. G. Wells

• “Men Walk on Moon,” by John Noble Wilford, New York Times (excerpts)

• Compare and Contrast: The First Men in the Moon v. “Men Walk on Moon”

PROCEDURE

You may choose to have the students complete the worksheet individually, as partners, or in small groups of no more than three or four. Each student is responsible for writing his or her own essay.

1. Hand out the Compare and Contrast worksheet and make sure the students have the two completed assignments from Lessons 2 and 3 in hand for reference.

2. Have the students fill out the worksheet using exact wording from the two texts, The First Men in the Moon and the New York Times article, as they draw their comparisons. This will give them good textual evidence to refer to when they write their essays.

3. Each student will write an essay that answers the question “How accurate was H. G. Wells in his vision of space travel and a lunar landing?” The students must use textual evidence from both the novel and the newspaper article to make their arguments.

JOHN KENNEDY, Address at Rice University, September 12, 1962 (excerpts)

. . . The exploration of space will go ahead, whether we join in it or not, and it is one of the great adventures of all time, and no nation which expects to be the leader of other nations can expect to stay behind in the race for space.

Those who came before us made certain that this country rode the first waves of the industrial revolutions, the first waves of modern invention, and the first wave of nuclear power, and this generation does not intend to founder in the backwash of the coming age of space. We mean to be a part of it—we mean to lead it. . . . We have vowed that we shall not see space filled with weapons of mass destruction, but with instruments of knowledge and understanding.

Yet the vows of this Nation can only be fulfilled if we in this Nation are first, and, therefore, we intend to be first. In short, our leadership in science and in industry, our hopes for peace and security, our obligations to ourselves as well as others, all require us to make this effort, to solve these mysteries, to solve them for the good of all men, and to become the world’s leading space-faring nation.

We set sail on this new sea because there is new knowledge to be gained, and new rights to be won, and they must be won and used for the progress of all people. For space science, like nuclear science and all technology, has no conscience of its own. Whether it will become a force for good or ill depends on man, and only if the United States occupies a position of pre- eminence can we help decide whether this new ocean will be a sea of peace or a new terrifying theater of war. . . .

There is no strife, no prejudice, no national conflict in outer space as yet. Its hazards are hostile to us all. Its conquest deserves the best of all mankind, and its opportunity for peaceful cooperation may never come again. But why, some say, the moon? Why choose this as our goal? And they may well ask why climb the highest mountain. . . .

We choose to go to the moon. We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win. . . .

The growth of our science and education will be enriched by new knowledge of our universe and environment, by new techniques of learning and mapping and observation, by new tools and computers for industry, medicine, the home as well as the school. Technical institutions . . . will reap the harvest of these gains.

And finally, the space effort itself, while still in its infancy, has already created a great number of new companies, and tens of thousands of new jobs. Space and related industries are generating new demands in investment and skilled personnel. . . .

But if I were to say, my fellow citizens, that we shall send to the moon, 240,000 miles away from the control station in Houston, a giant rocket more than 300 feet tall, the length of this football field, made of new metal alloys, some of which have not yet been invented, capable of standing heat and stresses several times more than have ever been experienced, fitted together with a precision better than the finest watch, carrying all the equipment needed for propulsion, guidance, control, communications, food and survival, on an untried mission, to an unknown celestial body, and then return it safely to earth, re-entering the atmosphere at speeds of over 25,000 miles per hour, causing heat about half that of the temperature of the sun . . . and do all this, and do it right, and do it first before this decade is out—then we must be bold.

Source: John F. Kennedy Presidential Library and Museum, https://www.jfklibrary.org

CRITICAL THINKING NAME PERIOD DATE

PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY’S RICE UNIVERSITY SPEECH

In his speech President Kennedy argues that the United States needs not only to participate in space exploration, 1 but also to lead it. What arguments does he make to back up this position?

Answer (Remember to use exact wording from the text): Summarize in your own words in one sentence:

2 According to President Kennedy, what tangible benefits would our society gain by going to the moon? Answer (Remember to use exact wording from the text): Summarize in your own words in one sentence:

3 What difficulties in going to the moon does the President present in his speech? Answer (Remember to use exact wording from the text): Summarize in your own words in one sentence:

How does President Kennedy explain his statement “We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other 4 things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard”?

Answer (Remember to use exact wording from the text): Summarize in your own words in one sentence:

NAME PERIOD DATE

SUMMARY The First Men in the Moon, by H. G. Wells (selections) ORGANIZER

Chapter 3 “Imagine a sphere,” [Professor Cavor] explained, “large enough to hold two people and their luggage. It will be made of steel lined with thick glass; it will contain a proper store of solidified air, concentrated food, water-distilling apparatus, and so forth. And enamelled, as it were, on the outer steel——” “Cavorite?” [A fictional substance that blocks the effects of gravity invented by Professor Cavor.] “Yes.” “But how will you get inside?” . . . “That’s perfectly easy. An air-tight manhole is all that is needed. That, of course, will have to be a little complicated; there will have to be a valve, so that things may be thrown out, if necessary, without much loss of air.” “Like Jules Verne’s thing in ‘A Trip to the Moon’?” But Cavor was not a reader of fiction. “I begin to see,” I said slowly. “And you could get in and screw yourself up while the Cavorite was warm, and as soon as it cooled it would become impervious to gravitation, and off you would fly—” “At a tangent.” “You would go off in a straight line—” I stopped abruptly. “What is to prevent the thing travelling in a straight line into space for ever?” I asked. “You’re not safe to get anywhere, and if you do—how will you get back?” “I’ve just thought of that,” said Cavor. “That’s what I meant when I said the thing is finished. The inner glass sphere can be air-tight and, except for the manhole, continuous, and the steel sphere can be made in sections, each section capable of rolling up after the fashion of a roller blind. These can easily be worked by springs, and released and checked by electricity conveyed by platinum wires fused through the glass. All that is merely a question of detail. So you see, that except for the thickness of the blind rollers, the Cavorite exterior of the sphere will consist of windows or blinds, whichever you like to call them. Well, when all these windows or blinds are shut, no light, no heat, no gravitation, no radiant energy of any sort will get at the inside of the sphere, it will fly on through space in a straight line, as you say. But open a window, imagine one of the windows open! Then at once any heavy body that chances to be in that direction will attract us—”

Key words from the text: Using the key words, describe how Dr. Cavor’s spacecraft will be able to fly to the moon.

Chapter 4 “Why have we no chairs?” I asked. “I’ve settled all that,” said Cavor. “We shan’t need them.” “Why not?” “You will see,” he said, in the tone of a man who refuses to talk. . . . There came a little jerk, a noise like champagne being uncorked in another room, and a faint whistling sound. For just one instant I had a sense of enormous tension, a transient conviction that my feet were pressing downward with a force of countless tons. It lasted for an infinitesimal time. But it stirred me to action. “Cavor!” I said into the darkness, “my nerve’s in rags. . . . I don’t think——” I stopped. He made no answer. “Confound it!” I cried; “I’m a fool! What business have I here? I’m not coming, Cavor. The thing’s too risky. I’m getting out.” “You can’t,” he said. “Can’t! We’ll soon see about that!” He made no answer for ten seconds. “It’s too late for us to quarrel now, Bedford,” he said. “That little jerk was the start. Already we are flying as swiftly as a bullet up into the gulf of space.” . . . He pointed to the loose cases and bundles that had been lying on the blankets in the bottom of the sphere. I was astonished to see that they were floating now nearly a foot from the spherical wall.

Key words from the text: In a few sentences, using the key words, summarize this scene:

Chapter 7 As we saw it first it was the wildest and most desolate of scenes. We were in an enormous amphitheatre, a vast circular plain, the floor of the giant crater. Its cliff-like walls closed us in on every side. From the westward the light of the unseen sun fell upon them, reaching to the very foot of the cliff, and showed a disordered escarpment of drab and greyish rock, lined here and there with banks and crevices of snow. This was perhaps a dozen miles away, but at first no intervening atmosphere diminished in the slightest the minutely detailed brilliancy with which these things glared at us. They stood out clear and dazzling against a background of starry blackness that seemed to our earthly eyes rather a gloriously spangled velvet curtain than the spaciousness of the sky.

Key words from the text that help “paint a picture in In a few sentences, using the key words, summarize this your imagination”: scene:

Chapter 8 We were no longer in a void. An atmosphere had arisen about us. The outline of things had gained in character, had grown acute and varied; save for a shadowed space of white substance here and there, white substance that was no longer air but snow, the arctic appearance had gone altogether. Everywhere broad rusty brown spaces of bare and tumbled earth spread to the blaze of the sun. Here and there at the edge of the snowdrifts were transient little pools and eddies of water, the only things stirring in that expanse of barrenness. The sunlight inundated the upper two blinds of our sphere and turned our climate to high summer, but our feet were still in shadow, and the sphere was lying upon a drift of snow.

Imagine it! Imagine that dawn! The resurrection of the frozen air, the stirring and quickening of the soil, and then this silent uprising of vegetation, this unearthly ascent of fleshiness and spikes. Conceive it all lit by a blaze that would make the intensest sunlight of earth seem watery and weak. And still around this stirring jungle, wherever there was shadow, lingered banks of bluish snow.

Key words: In a few sentences, using the key words, summarize this scene:

Apollo 11: The First Lunar Landing Video and “Men Walk on Moon”

Apollo 11 Video Coverage: Choose the most important events or images and list them below.

“Men Walk on Moon”, by John Noble Wilford, New York Times: Choose the most important words and phrases in this article and write them below.

John Noble Wilford, “Men Walk on Moon,” New York Times, July 21, 1969 (excerpts)

Houston, Monday, July 21—Men have landed and walked on the moon. Two Americans, astronauts of Apollo 11, steered their fragile four-legged lunar module safely and smoothly to the historic landing yesterday at 4:17:40 P.M., Eastern daylight time. Neil A. Armstrong, the 38-year-old civilian commander, radioed to earth and the mission control room here: “Houston, Tranquility Base here. The Eagle has landed.” The first men to reach the moon—Mr. Armstrong and his co-pilot, Col. Edwin E. Aldrin, Jr. of the Air Force—brought their ship to rest on a level, rock-strewn plain near the southwestern shore of the arid Sea of Tranquility. About six and a half hours later, Mr. Armstrong opened the landing craft’s hatch, stepped slowly down the ladder and declared as he planted the first human footprint on the lunar crust: “That’s one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind.” His first step on the moon came at 10:56:20 P.M., as a television camera outside the craft transmitted his every move to an awed and excited audience of hundreds of millions of people on earth. Tentative Steps Test Soil Mr. Armstrong’s initial steps were tentative tests of the lunar soil’s firmness and of his ability to move about easily in his bulky white spacesuit and backpacks and under the influence of lunar gravity, which is one-sixth that of the earth. “The surface is fine and powdery,” the astronaut reported. “I can pick it up loosely with my toe. It does adhere in fine layers like powdered charcoal to the sole and sides of my boots. I only go in a small fraction of an inch, maybe an eighth of an inch. But I can see the footprints of my boots in the treads in the fine sandy particles.” . . . Outside their vehicle the astronauts had found a bleak world. It was just before dawn, with the sun low over the eastern horizon behind them and the chill of the long lunar nights still clinging to the boulders, small craters and hills before them. Colonel Aldrin said that he could see “literally thousands of small craters” and a low hill out in the distance. But most of all he was impressed initially by the “variety of shapes, angularities, granularities” of the rocks and soil where the landing craft, code- named Eagle had set down. . . . Apollo 11’s journey into history began last Wednesday from launching pad 39-A at Cape Kennedy, Fla. After an almost flawless three-day flight, the joined command ship and lunar module swept into an orbit of the moon yesterday afternoon. The three men were awake for their big day at 7 A.M. when their spacecraft emerged from behind the moon on its 10th revolution, moving from east to west across the face of the moon along its equator. . . . LM Ready for Descent The lunar module was ready. Its four legs with yard-wide footpads were extended so that the height of the 16-ton vehicle now measured 22 feet and 11 inches and its width 31 feet. Mr. Armstrong stood at the left side of the cockpit, and Colonel Aldrin at the right. Both were loosely restrained by harnesses. They had closed the hatch to the connecting tunnel. The walls of their craft were finely milled aluminum foil. If anything happened so that it could not return to the command ship, the lunar module would be too delicate to withstand a plunge through earth’s atmosphere, even if it had the rocket power. Nearly three-fourths of the vehicle’s weight was in propellants for the descent and ascent rockets—Aerozine 50 and nitrogen oxide, which substituted for the oxygen, making combustion possible. It was an ungainly craft that creaked and groaned in flight. But years of development and testing had determined that it was the lightest and most practical way to get two men to the moon’s surface.

As Mr. Armstrong and Colonel Aldrin rode the lunar module back around to the moon’s far side, the rocket engine in the vehicle’s lower stage was pointed toward the line of flight. The two pilots were leaning toward the cockpit controls, riding backwards and facing downward. “Everything is ‘go,’” they were assured by Mission Control. Their on-board guidance and navigation computer was instructed to trigger a 29.8-second firing of the descent rocket, the 9,870-pound-thrust throttable engine that would slow down the lunar module and send it toward the moon on a long, curving trajectory. . . . The lunar module was slowing down. At an altitude of about 7,200 feet, with the landing site still about five miles ahead, the computer commanded control jets to fire and tilt the bug-shaped craft almost upright so that its triangular windows pointed forward. . . . “You’re ‘go’ for landing,” Mission Control informed the two men. The Eagle closed in, dropping about 20 feet a second, until it was hovering almost directly over the landing area at an altitude of 500 feet. Its floor was littered with boulders. It was when the craft reached an altitude of 300 feet that Mr. Armstrong took over semimanual control for the rest of the way. The computer continued to have control of the rocket firing, but the astronaut could adjust the craft’s hovering position . . . Finally, Mr. Armstrong found the spot he liked, and the blue light on the cockpit flashed to indicate that five-foot-long probes, like curb feelers, on three of the four legs had touched the surface. “Contact light,” Mr. Armstrong radioed. He pressed a button marked “Stop” and reported, “okay, engine stop.” There were a few more cryptic messages of functions performed. Then Maj. Charles M. Duke, the capsule communicator in the control room, radioed to the two astronauts: “We copy you down, Eagle.” “Houston, Tranquility Base here. The Eagle has landed.” “Roger, Tranquility,” Major Duke replied. “We copy you on the ground. You got a bunch of guys about to turn blue. We are breathing again. Thanks a lot.”

Source: New York Times

NAME PERIOD DATE

Compare and Contrast: The First Men in the Moon v. “Men Walk on Moon”

Use the chart below to analyze these two accounts of traveling to and landing on the moon.

Similarities Differences

An American soldier in Vietnam, 1969 (National Archives)

The Lessons and Legacy of the Vietnam War

BY RON NASH

UNIT OVERVIEW

Over the course of two lessons, the students will examine, explain, and evaluate several primary sources (letter, speech, chart, testimony, memorandum, etc.) that address the controversial issues of pardons for draft evaders and the morality of American involvement in the Vietnam War. The students’ knowledge will be assessed through the completion of worksheets, participation in discussions, and presentation of their responses to two essential questions.

UNIT OBJECTIVES

Students will be able to

• Close read informational text for comprehension and critical analysis • Identify, explain, and summarize the ideas, issues, and messages, both literal and inferential, that are presented in the primary sources • Cite evidence from the text to support responses to the comprehension and critical thinking questions • Compare and contrast the viewpoints expressed in the primary sources • Collaborate effectively with classmates to develop and express points of view based on textual evidence

NUMBER OF CLASS PERIODS: 4

GRADE LEVEL(S): 8–12

COMMON CORE STATE STANDARDS

CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RI.8.1: Cite the textual evidence that most strongly supports an analysis of what the text says explicitly as well as inferences drawn from the text.

CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RI.8.2: Determine a central idea of a text and analyze its development over the course of the text, including its relationship to supporting ideas; provide an objective summary of the text.

CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.SL.8.1: Engage effectively in a range of collaborative discussions (one-on-one, in groups, and teacher-led) with diverse partners on topics, texts, and issues, building on others’ ideas and expressing their own clearly.

CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.W.8.1: Write arguments to support claims with clear reasons and relevant evidence.

CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RH.9-10.1: Cite specific textual evidence to support analysis of primary and secondary sources, attending to such features as the date and origin of the information.

CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RH.9-10.2: Determine the central ideas or information of a primary or secondary source; provide an accurate summary of how key events or ideas develop over the course of the text.

CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.SL.9-10.1: Initiate and participate effectively in a range of collaborative discussions (one-on-one, in groups, and teacher-led) with diverse partners on topics, texts, and issues, building on others’ ideas and expressing their own clearly and persuasively.

CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.W.9-10.1: Write arguments to support claims in an analysis of substantive topics or texts, using valid reasoning and relevant and sufficient evidence.

OBJECTIVES

In this lesson the students will read, analyze, and assess a senator’s letter, congressional testimony, and a flow chart on the question of clemency for draft evaders. The students will highlight and summarize the documents’ main ideas and messages and answer questions based on the texts and the chart. They will cite textual evidence to support their responses as well as draw inferences to develop a point of view on this lesson’s essential question: “To what extent should Americans who evaded or resisted military service in the Vietnam War have received amnesty and clemency?”

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

Other than the Civil War, the Vietnam War was the most divisive war in our nation’s history and the first war in which the United States did not achieve its primary military objective. The nature of the war was complex and its duration challenged the administrations of Dwight Eisenhower (1953–1961), John Kennedy (1961–1963), Lyndon Johnson (1963–1969), and Richard Nixon (1969–1974). On one level the Vietnam War was a manifestation of the Cold War conflict between the forces of expansion and containment of Communism in Asia. According to President Eisenhower’s “domino theory,” a communist victory in Vietnam would threaten and ultimately undermine the ability of other nations (such as Cambodia, Laos, Thailand, Indonesia, Malaysia, and the Philippines) in Southeast Asia to resist Communism. On another level, the Vietnam conflict was a civil war between two nationalistic factions, Communists in the northern region and non-Communists in the southern region, for political control of the recently formed nation of Vietnam, once known as French Indochina.

As the military involvement of the United States in this war escalated and more and more Americans were killed and injured without any compensatory political or military success, the American people became increasingly disillusioned with their government’s policies. Critics of US policy, known as “doves,” demanded the withdrawal of American military forces from the conflict, which they viewed as merely a civil war between the North Vietnamese and South Vietnamese. Supporters of American involvement in the Vietnam conflict, known as “hawks,” cited the threatening menace of Communism spreading into Southeast Asia.

As the American public became increasingly divided and polarized on the war, the demonstrations organized by both sides (protestors and supporters) grew larger and more militant. War protestors burned draft cards, took over buildings, shut down college campuses, and conducted huge protest rallies in the nation’s capital and major cities. Moreover, thousands of young men evaded the military draft by changing their identities, “going underground,” or moving to Canada, which did not extradite “draft dodgers” back to the United States.

President Nixon’s strategy, known as “Vietnamization,” focused on the withdrawal of American troops from Vietnam and an increase in military assistance and training for South Vietnamese troops. Nixon also ordered heavy bombing raids in North Vietnam and on the enemy’s supply and transportation routes in Cambodia and Laos to pressure the North Vietnamese to negotiate a cease-fire. These policies increased protests in the United States. Finally, in January 1973, the United States, North Vietnam, and South Vietnam signed the Paris Peace Accords. The United States agreed to withdraw soldiers from Vietnam, and the North Vietnamese agreed to release all American prisoners of war. The bitter civil war continued between the North Vietnamese and the South Vietnamese for two more years until the North Vietnamese forces defeated the South Vietnamese in 1975, and Vietnam was re-united as a communist nation.

In the United States, the Vietnam War left deep wounds. More than 58,000 American troops had been killed, more than 300,000 soldiers had been wounded, some Vietnam veterans returned home with major physical ailments and deep psychological problems, and the financial cost of the war exceeded $120 billion dollars, leaving a huge national debt and spiraling inflation. Moreover, American society had become polarized (“hawks” vs. “doves”) in a way that it had not been since the Civil War. Ironically, the American people faced the daunting task of re-uniting a nation that had been torn apart by a long conflict in a distant land.

In an attempt to heal the nation, President Gerald Ford (1974–1977) issued a proclamation on September 16, 1974, that offered amnesty with certain conditions (conditional clemency) to Americans who had evaded the draft between 1964 and © 2017 The Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History, New York TEACHING WITH DOCUMENTS The Twentieth Century: 1946-2001 77 1973. To gain amnesty and avoid criminal penalties, the 210,000 young men who had refused to appear before draft boards or had fled the United States had to reaffirm their allegiance to the United States and serve two years working in a public service job. In January 1977, President Jimmy Carter (1977–1981) granted unconditional pardons to most Vietnam-era draft evaders, asserting that “reconciliation calls for an act of mercy to bind the nation’s wounds and to heal the scars of divisiveness.” However, critics argued that pardons would encourage future draftees to defy the law and would show disrespect for the men who had served honorably and for those who had died in Vietnam.

MATERIALS

• Chart: Military Service of the Vietnam Generation • Document Analysis: The Vietnam Generation • Letter from Senator Edward Kennedy, April 25, 1973, The Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History, GLC09526 • Document Analysis: Letter • Testimony of John H. Geiger, Commander, American Legion, to the Senate Subcommittee on Administrative Practice and Procedure of the Committee on the Judiciary, March 1, 1972 (excerpts), Hearing before the Subcommittee on Administrative Practice and Procedure of the Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate, 92nd Congress, 2nd Session on Selective Service System Procedures and Administrative Possibilities for Amnesty, February 28, 29, March 1, 1972 (Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 1972), 239–240 • Document Analysis: Testimony of John H. Geiger, March 1, 1972

PROCEDURE

The students may complete the lesson individually, as partners, or in small groups of three or four. 1. Refer to the Historical Background to provide students with a general foundation for the Vietnam era (1954–1975). However, be careful not to reveal too much information; you want the students to base their understanding of the issues on their close reading of the document. 2. Distribute the Military Service of the Vietnam Generation chart and its accompanying Document Analysis worksheet to the students. They will analyze the chart by completing the questions to gain an understanding of military service and draft evasion. 3. Distribute Senator Edward Kennedy’s letter and the accompanying Document Analysis worksheet. Determine whether the students can read this text independently. If so, go to step 4. If the text level is too challenging, then “share read” the letter with the class. Have the students follow along silently while you begin reading aloud, modeling prosody, inflection, and punctuation. After you have read a few sentences, ask the class to join in while you continue to serve as the model. This technique will support struggling readers as well as English language learners (ELL). 4. Have the students close read the text on their own, using the Document Analysis worksheet as a guide. If you are having students brainstorm or collaborate with partners or in small groups, let them negotiate appropriate responses. However, the students must fill in their own worksheets. Students will then share their important phrase choices, answers to the critical thinking questions, and insights about the document with their classmates. The students’ responses in each group can be compared for similarities and differences. 5. Repeat this process with the excerpts from the testimony of John Geiger, Commander, American Legion, before the Senate Subcommittee. 6. Summary and closure activity: Direct the students’ attention to the lesson’s essential question: “To what extent should Americans who evaded or resisted military service in the Vietnam War have received amnesty and clemency?” Based on the knowledge and understanding that the students acquired from this lesson, they should be asked to develop a viewpoint and a response to this essential question. The students can demonstrate their level of learning by presenting their answers orally in class or in written essay or exit-card responses. Students should support their ideas and viewpoints with evidence from the documents: (a) The Vietnam Generation Chart, (b) Senator Kennedy’s Letter to Mr. Thursby, and (c) the excerpts from John Geiger’s Testimony before the Senate Subcommittee.

LESSON 2

OBJECTIVES

In this lesson the students will read, analyze, and assess excerpts from the congressional testimony and a government memorandum on the question of the morality or immorality of American involvement in the Vietnam War. The students will highlight and summarize the documents’ main ideas and messages as well as answer a series of comprehension and critical thinking questions based on the text. They will cite textual evidence to support their responses as well as draw inferences to develop a point of view on this lesson’s essential question: “To what extent was the United States’ involvement in Vietnam a moral or immoral war?”

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

Please refer to the “Historical Background” statement in Lesson One as well as the following information.

The longer the Vietnam War lasted and its brutality and futility became more apparent, discontent and division grew on the American home front. While supporters of the war continued to believe in the objectives of halting the spread of Communism into Southeast Asia and defending Vietnam against invasion and insurgency, an increasing number of Americans protested mounting casualties and costs as well as interference in a civil war that did not threaten the security of the United States.

Strong opposition developed among college students who would become eligible for the draft after graduation. Throughout 1967 and 1968 antiwar demonstrations and peace marches occurred on college campuses and in major cities across the nation. During these rallies college students often occupied campus buildings and chanted such defiant slogans as, “Hey, hey, LBJ, how many kids did you kill today?” When President Nixon ordered bombing raids in Cambodia to destroy Communist cells and North Vietnamese sanctuaries in April 1970, the antiwar movement intensified to a critical level. On May 4, four college students were killed by members of the National Guard during an antiwar demonstration on the campus of Kent State University in Ohio. Ten days later, two students were killed by police at Jackson State University in Mississippi during an anti-war demonstration.

Journalists who had visited Vietnam added their voices to the chorus of protest in reports that criticized American involvement in the war. These “stories from the front” about bombing raids and land mines that wounded and killed civilians and the use of destructive new weapons, like napalm and the Agent Orange herbicide, which burned villages and defoliated jungles, added to the opposition, as did the death of soldiers and the physical and mental problems (depression, drug use, and chemical exposure) experienced by some of the men who came home. In 1970, the nation was shocked when it learned of the atrocities that had occurred in 1968 around the village of My Lai when a platoon of American soldiers massacred more than five hundred Vietnamese civilian men, women, and children. In 1971, the New York Times published the Pentagon Papers, a classified government history of military plans and operations of the Vietnam War, which revealed the deceptions, inaccuracies, mistakes, and untruths of policymakers. The New York Times later concluded (June 23, 1996) that President Johnson and his administration “systematically lied, not only to the public but also to Congress.” By 1972, public opinion polls indicated that two-thirds of the American people wanted the United States to withdraw its troops and end its participation in Vietnam.

Amid these conditions and events and the growing combat casualties and economic costs (ultimately over 58,000 American lives and $120 billion dollars), many Americans posed the question: “To what extent was the United States’ involvement in Vietnam a moral or immoral war?”

MATERIALS • Testimony of John Kerry, Vietnam Veteran, before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, April 22, 1971 (excerpts), Congressional Record. Proceedings and Debates of the 92nd Congress, 1st ed., vol. 117, part 9: April 20, 1971, to April 27, 1971 (Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 1971)

• Document Analysis: Testimony of John Kerry, April 22, 1971

• Memorandum from Secretary of State Henry A. Kissinger to President Richard M. Nixon on the Lessons of Vietnam, May 12, 1975 (excerpts), Selected Documents on the Vietnam War, Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library & Museum, Grand Rapids, Michigan, http://www.fordlibrarymuseum.gov

• Document Analysis: Henry A. Kissinger’s Memorandum, May 12, 1975

PROCEDURE

The students may complete the lesson individually, as partners, or in small groups of three or four.

1. Refer to the Historical Background to provide students with a general foundation for the Vietnam era (1954–1975). However, be careful not to reveal too much information; you want the students to base their understanding of the issues on their close reading of the document.

2. Distribute the excerpts from the Testimony of John Kerry before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and the accompanying Document Analysis worksheet. Determine whether the students can read this text independently. If so, go step 3. If the text level is too challenging, then “share read” the speech with the class as described in Lesson 1.

3. Have the students close read the text on their own, using the Document Analysis worksheet as a guide. If you are having students brainstorm or collaborate with partners or in small groups, let them negotiate appropriate responses. However, the students must fill in their own worksheets. Students will then share their important phrase choices, answers to the critical thinking questions, and insights about the document with their classmates. The students’ responses in each group could also be compared for similarities and differences.

4. Repeat this process with the excerpts from Henry A. Kissinger’s Memorandum to President Nixon on the Lessons of Vietnam.

5. An additional activity for group interaction and whole-class discussion would be for the pupils to compare Kerry’s testimony and Kissinger’s memorandum. Which account is more persuasive regarding such issues as the morality or immorality of the Vietnam War and whether or not American involvement in this conflict should be viewed as honorable and worthwhile or disgraceful and a failure? Why was the Vietnam War such a divisive experience for Americans?

6. Summary and closure activity: Direct the students’ attention to the lesson’s essential question: “To what extent was the United States’ involvement in Vietnam a moral or immoral war?” Basing their response to this essential question on the knowledge and understanding they have acquired from the lesson, the students should be asked to develop a viewpoint. The students can demonstrate their level of learning by presenting their answers orally in class or in written essay or exit-card responses. Students should support their ideas and viewpoints with evidence from the documents: (a) Transcript of John Kerry’s Testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, April 22, 1971, and (b) Memorandum from Secretary of State Henry A. Kissinger to President Richard M. Nixon on the Lessons of Vietnam, May 12, 1975.

Military Service of the Vietnam Generation

Total Population 53,100,000

Men Women 26,800,000 26,300,000

Error Enlisted Drafted Never Served Never Served Served in the Military -115,000 8,720,000 2,215,000 15,980,000 26,050,000 250,000

Served in the Military 10,395,000 Deferred, Never Served Served in Exempted, or in Vietnam Vietnam Disqualified 244,000 6,431 15,410,000 Served before Served during Vietnam Era Vietnam Era Apparent Draft 2,320,000 8,615,000 Less-Than-Honorable Killed in Vietnam Offenders 570,000 Discharges 9 500

Served in Non- Served in Vietnam Never Went Combat Unit Combat Unit to Vietnam Accused Draft Offenders 1,600,000 550,000 6,465,000 209,517 Unaccused Draft Offenders 360,000 Convicted Fugitives Cases 8,750 (as of 1/77) Dropped 3,000 197,750

Unaccused Persons Persons Who Never Who Committed Imprisoned Probation or Registered for Selective Service 3,250 Suspended Sentence the Draft Felonies 5,500 250,000 110,000

Less-Than- Killed Wounded Honorable Discharges 58,286 270,000 563,000

Imprisoned after Administratively Court-Martial Discharged 34,000 529,000

As of 2017, 58,295 US military personnel killed in Vietnam.

CRITICAL THINKING NAME PERIOD DATE

DOCUMENT ANALYSIS: CHART, MILITARY SERVICE OF THE VIETNAM GENERATION

Examples from the chart must be cited in answering these questions.

1. Compare the number of drafted versus enlisted military in the Vietnam generation. What conclusions can you draw from this data?

______

2. What does the chart tell you regarding the soldiers who served in Vietnam versus the number of soldiers who served but never were assigned to Vietnam?

______

3. What conclusion(s) can be drawn regarding combat versus non-combat units in Vietnam?

______

4. What percentage of the Vietnam generation never served in the military? What percentage of the Vietnam generation were apparent draft offenders?

______

5. What conclusions can be drawn when you compare the number of apparent draft offenders to the number of unaccused draft offenders?

______

6. What categories make up the accused draft offender cohort?

______

7. Where do women fit into the Selective Service System? What conclusions can be drawn from this fact?

______

Letter from Senator Edward Kennedy, April 25, 1973

Dear Mr. Thursby:

Thank you for taking the time to express your views on amnesty.

We all are relieved that the war is finally at an end and that the nation can turn its attention to reconciliation and healing the wounds and bitterness created by this long and costly conflict.

Our first task must be to provide security and comfort to the prisoners of war and to help restore them to American society. A like task lies ahead for the disabled veterans and those who became addicted to drugs while overseas. Some humanitarian relief also must be provided to the people of Southeast Asia in their struggle to rebuild a nation ravaged by war.

As part of this postwar adjustment, we must examine the question of how to treat those who refused induction by going underground or by leaving their country. During hearings held last year by the Senate Subcommittee on Administrative Practice and Procedure, the diversity of opinions was symbolized by the national commander of the American Legion in his statement against amnesty, and by the testimony of a young man who had completed a Federal prison sentence for refusing induction. This young man issued a strong plea for amnesty. There was testimony by one father of a young soldier killed in Vietnam against amnesty. Yet another father of a soldier killed in Vietnam testified for unconditional amnesty. The same contradictory recommendations came in testimony from Vietnam veterans themselves.

In seeking to understand how best to proceed, I believe that our nation can look back at the twenty nine instances of amnesty granted by Presidents in the past, including the unconditional amnesty after the Civil War. We often gain wisdom through learning what other men did at other times in our history. It seems that when the nation was most divided against itself, as it was after the Civil War, the end of hostilities was followed by the most sweeping amnesty in an effort to bind the wounds of war.

While the national interest requires reconciliation, there can be no amnesty for those who committed crimes and then deserted, nor for those whose motives had no relationship to the question of conscientious objection. For these, there only can be a return to face whatever judicial proceedings are demanded under the law.

For the others, these who out of deep belief, felt that they could not maim or kill another human being who was no threat to their lives or the security of their families, another judgment must be made. I believe that we may well examine the view of President Andrew Johnson when he granted at Christmas in 1868 a full pardon to all those who fought against the Union. He said that a “retaliatory or vindictive policy, attended by unnecessary disqualifications, pains, penalties” could only tend to hinder reconciliation among the people.

But the first and immediate task is to care for the addict, the jobless and the wounded veterans home from Southeast Asia. It is our nation’s responsibility to help them right now. And only after we can insure that they are given every opportunity to rebuild their lives, can we then seek the answers to amnesty with the ultimate goal of restoring to our country the unity which this long and cruel conflict divided.

Sincerely,

Edward M. Kennedy

Source: The Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History, New York, GLC09526

CRITICAL THINKING NAME PERIOD DATE

DOCUMENT ANALYSIS: LETTER FROM SENATOR EDWARD KENNEDY, APRIL 25, 1973

Important Phrase: Which phrase in the letter is the most powerful?

Phrase:______

Why is this phrase important or powerful?

______

Examples from the text must be cited in answering these questions.

1. What does Senator Kennedy say is America’s first task after the war has come to an end?

______

2. Why does Kennedy see the options for the treatment of “those who refused induction” as contradictory?

______

3. Describe the overall tone of Kennedy’s letter.

______

4. How did Senator Kennedy prioritize the tasks that would lead to “healing” in the aftermath of the Vietnam War? To what extent do you agree or disagree with his priorities? Briefly explain.

______

5. What limitations did Kennedy place on amnesty as a policy?

______

6. Who is exempted from amnesty? What should the consequences of their actions be, according to Kennedy?

______

Testimony of John H. Geiger, Commander, American Legion, to the Senate Subcommittee on Administrative Practice and Procedure of the Committee on the Judiciary, March 1, 1972 (excerpts)

. . . Proponents of amnesty at the present time fall into two categories. One group advocates unconditional amnesty for all military deserters and draft evaders. This group reasons that the Vietnam conflict is an immoral war for the United States; that those who recognize this and follow their conscience ought not to suffer any legal penalties for being right while their country was wrong; and, therefore, amnesty should be a blanket recognition of this.

Some spokesmen for this view, go so far as to advocate full veterans’ rights and pensions for deserters and draft evaders for their sufferings in Canada, Sweden and elsewhere. . . .

The second group of proponents offer amnesty to draft evaders but not to military deserters providing that draft evaders prove their sincerity by performing alternate service for their country.

The American Legion believes that most draft evaders and deserters consciously decided to refuse to accept their responsibilities as citizens under the law; that they evaded their responsibilities by flouting our laws and legal remedies rather than by going through the available, legal channels of redress; that their actions in declining to obey certain laws distasteful to them is contrary to sound legal and moral standards; and that the obligations of citizenship cannot be applied to some and evaded by others.

The American Legion resolved that: “We go on record as opposing any attempt to grant amnesty or freedom from prosecution to those men who either by illegally avoiding the draft or desertion from the Armed Forces failed to fulfill their military obligation to the United States.” In other words, we of the American Legion firmly believe that giving any wholesale amnesty— whether conditional or unconditional—would make a mockery of the sacrifices of those men who did their duty, assumed the responsibilities in time of conflict and—in many cases—were killed, seriously wounded, or now lie in a prison camp somewhere in Indochina. . . .

How can any general amnesty be explained to these men? How can amnesty be explained to parents, wives, children—all those who have lost a son, husband, or a father in their country’s service? How can we excuse ourselves to the prisoners of war, the missing in action, or to their suffering families for offering amnesty? Furthermore, what would be the effect on the morale of our Armed Forces if amnesty were granted [?] . . .

Amnesty might even be the last bitter pill to our servicemen now caught in a web of confusion and held in disdain by those who hate the war and would do anything to drive us out of it in dishonor, including destroying our Armed Forces on the field of battle and their spirit. Our men are fighting the enemy. They are fighting dangerous drugs, they are fighting hatred and misunderstanding at home. . . .

We cannot afford to add the issue of a general amnesty to those problems at this time. . . . Our official position to amnesty is not a total opposition to it but an opposition to any sort of amnesty—with or without conditions—to all draft evaders as a class. Our resolution asks that all draft evaders be prosecuted.

This means that we would like each case to be heard in court and tried on its merits. The courts can deal with the particulars of each case and exercise leniency or sternness, based on the actual facts . . . about each particular draft evader. . . . Any request for prosecution implies not only the possible finding of their guilt but the finding of innocence and the avenues for redress, appeal, and pardon are available to all persons who are prosecuted.

Source: Hearing before the Subcommittee on Administrative Practice and Procedure of the Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate, 92nd Congress, 2nd Session on Selective Service System Procedures and Administrative Possibilities for Amnesty, February 28, 29, March 1, 1972 (Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 1972), 239–240.

CRITICAL THINKING NAME PERIOD DATE

DOCUMENT ANALYSIS: TESTIMONY OF JOHN H. GEIGER, MARCH 1, 1972

Important Phrase: Which phrase in the testimony is the most powerful?

Phrase:______

Why is this phrase important or powerful?

______

Examples from the text must be cited in answering these questions.

1. Why did American Legion Commander John Geiger testify before the Senate subcommittee?

______

2. How did Geiger distinguish between two categories of amnesty proponents?

______

3. Why was the American Legion opposed to granting amnesty or freedom, whether conditional or unconditional, to draft evaders and military deserters?

______

4. According to Geiger, how would granting amnesty to draft evaders and military deserters affect veterans who served in the Vietnam War?

______

5. Why did Geiger believe that prosecuting draft evaders and military deserters was a fair and reasonable method to resolve these issues? Do you agree or disagree with Geiger’s position? Briefly explain your viewpoint.

______

Testimony of John Kerry, Vietnam Veteran, before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, April 22, 1971 (excerpts)

. . . I am not here as John Kerry. I am here as one member of the group of 1,000 which is a small representation of a very much larger group of veterans in this country, and were it possible for all of them to sit at this table they would be here and have the same kind of testimony. . . .

. . . In our opinion, and from our experience, there is nothing in South Vietnam, nothing which could happen that realistically threatens the United States of America. And to attempt to justify the loss of one American life in Vietnam, Cambodia, or Laos by linking such loss to the preservation of freedom, which those misfits supposedly abuse, is to us the height of criminal hypocrisy, and it is that kind of hypocrisy which we feel has torn this country apart. . . . We found that not only was it a civil war, an effort by a people who had for years been seeking their liberation from any colonial influence whatsoever, but also we found that the Vietnamese whom we had enthusiastically molded after our own image were hard put to take up the fight against the threat we were supposedly saving them from.

We found most people didn’t even know the difference between communism and democracy. They only wanted to work in rice paddies without helicopters strafing them and bombs with napalm burning their villages and tearing their country apart. They wanted everything to do with the war, particularly with this foreign presence of the United States of America, to leave them alone in peace, and they practiced the art of survival by siding with whichever military force was present at a particular time, be it Vietcong, North Vietnamese, or American. . . .

We rationalized destroying villages in order to save them. We saw America lose her sense of morality as she accepted very coolly a My Lai and refused to give up the image of American soldiers who hand out chocolate bars and chewing gum.

We learned the meaning of free fire zones, shooting anything that moves, and we watched while America placed cheapness on the lives of orientals.

We watched the U.S. falsification of body counts, in fact the glorification of body counts. We listened while month after month we were told the back of the enemy was about to break. . . . and so we watched while men charged up hills because a general said that hill has to be taken, and after losing one platoon or two platoons they marched away to leave the high ground for the reoccupation by the North Vietnamese because we watched pride allow the most unimportant of battles to be blown into extravaganzas, because we couldn’t lose, and we couldn’t retreat, and because it didn’t matter how many American bodies were lost. . . .

We are asking Americans to think about that because how do you ask a man to be the last man to die in Vietnam? How do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake? But we are trying to do that, and we are doing it with thousands of rationalizations. . . .

We are asking here in Washington for some action, action from the Congress of the United States of America which has the power to raise and maintain armies, and which by the Constitution also has the power to declare war. . . . We have come here, not to the President, because we believe that this body can be responsive to the will of the people, and we believe that the will of the people says that we should be out of Vietnam now. . . .

Source: Congressional Record. Proceedings and Debates of the 92nd Congress, 1st ed., vol. 117, part 9: April 20, 1971, to April 27, 1971 (Washington DC: US Government Printing Office, 1971)

CRITICAL THINKING NAME PERIOD DATE

DOCUMENT ANALYSIS: TESTIMONY OF JOHN KERRY, APRIL 22, 1971

Important Phrase: Which phrase in the testimony is the most powerful?

Phrase 1:______

Why is this phrase important or powerful?

______

Examples from the text must be cited in answering these questions.

1. For whom did John Kerry say he was speaking?

______

2. Why did he describe US involvement in the Vietnam War as “the height of criminal hypocrisy”?

______

3. How did Kerry characterize the conflict in ietnam?V Why is this characterization important to his analysis?

______

4. How did John Kerry portray Vietnamese understanding of politics and of the differences between communism and democracy?

______

5. Why did Kerry appeal to Congress and not to the President to take action on US involvement in the Vietnam War?

______

Memorandum from Secretary of State Henry A. Kissinger to President Richard M. Nixon on the Lessons of Vietnam, May 12, 1975 (excerpts)

. . . Vietnam represented a unique situation, geographically, ethnically, politically, militarily and diplomatically. . . . It was the longest war in American history, the most distant, the least obviously relevant to our nation’s immediate concerns, and yet the American people supported our involvement and its general objectives until the very end. The people made enormous sacrifices. I am convinced that, even at the end, they would have been prepared to support a policy that would have saved South Vietnam if such an option had been available to use. . . .

One clear lesson that can be drawn, however, is the importance of absolute honesty and objectivity in all reporting, within and from the Government as well as from the press. U.S. official reports tended for a long time to be excessively optimistic, with the result that official statements did not make clear to the American people how long and how tough the conflict might turn out to be. . . . Such positive trends as did emerge came too slowly to justify optimistic Washington assessments. In Vietnam, the situation was generally worse than some reported and better than others reported. But the pessimistic reports, even if they were inaccurate, began to look closer to the mark until almost any government statement could be rejected as biased, not only by the opposition but by an increasingly skeptical public.

Another lesson would be the absolute importance of focusing our own remarks and the public debate on essentials . . . The [South Vietnamese] Government was facing an enemy who had assassinated, tortured and jailed an infinitely greater number [of people] . . . North Vietnamese and Viet Cong tactics were infinitely more brutal. The Mylai incident tarnished the image of an American Army that had generally—though not always—been compassionate in dealing with the [Vietnamese] civilian population. . . . It was the Communists who rejected free elections and . . . did not have popular support. . . .

Of equal importance may be a dedication to consistency. . . . When we entered, many did so in the name of morality. Before the war was over, many opposed it in the name of morality. But nobody spoke of the morality of consistency, or of the virtue of seeing something through . . .

In the end, we must ask ourselves whether it was all worth it, or at least what benefits did we gain. I believe the benefits were many, though they have long been ignored . . .

I have always believed, as have many observers, that our decision to save South Vietnam in 1965 prevented Indonesia from falling to Communism and probably preserved the American presence in Asia. This not only means that we kept our troops. It also means that we kept our economic presence as well as our political influence, and that our friends—including Japan— did not feel that they had to provide for their own defense. . . . It is worth remembering how much greater the impact would have been ten years ago when the Communist movement was still widely regarded as a monolyth destined to engulf us all. Therefore, in our public statements, I believe we can honorably avoid self-flagellation and that we should not characterize our role in the [Vietnam] conflict as a disgraceful disaster. I believe our efforts, militarily, diplomatically and politically, were not in vain. We paid a high price but we gained ten years of time and we changed what then appeared to be an overwhelming momentum. I do not believe our soldiers or our people need to be ashamed.

Source: Henry A. Kissinger, Memorandum to President Richard Nixon on the Lessons of Vietnam, May 12, 1975, http://www. fordlibrarymuseum.gov

DOCUMENT ANALYSIS: HENRY A. KISSINGER’S MEMORANDUM, MAY 12, 1975

Important Phrase: Which phrase in the memorandum is the most powerful?

Phrase:______

Why is this phrase important or powerful? ______

______

Examples from the text must be cited in answering these questions.

1. Why did Secretary of State Kissinger assert that the Vietnam War was “a unique situation”?

______

2. How did the lack of “absolute honesty and objectivity” in government reporting affect the attitudes of the American people toward the Vietnam War?

______

3. According to Kissinger, why should the American people have supported the South Vietnamese in their war against the North Vietnamese and the Viet Cong?

______

4. Why did Kissinger argue that the American people and soldiers should not feel disgraced or ashamed by the US role in the Vietnam conflict? Do you agree or disagree with Secretary Kissinger’s position? Briefly explain your viewpoint.

______

An East German policeman standing at a newly created opening in the Berlin Wall, November 14, 1989 (National Archives)

The Fall of the Berlin Wall

BY RON NASH

UNIT OVERVIEW

In these lessons, which focus on the fall of the Berlin Wall in autumn 1989, the students will analyze and assess a variety of textual and visual primary and secondary source materials (diary entry, map of Berlin, newspaper article, Berlin Wall photograph, and Cold War political cartoons) as well as determine what is “implied” in and what can be “inferred” from the visual and textual evidence in these source materials.

UNIT OBJECTIVES

Students will be able to

• Distinguish between “implication” and “inference” (“imply” v. “infer”) and identify, determine, and understand their proper application and usage in visual and written source materials

• Analyze and assess the meaning and importance of textual and visual primary source materials to understanding historical events

• Develop a viewpoint, present it, and write a response to the lesson’s essential question based on textual and visual evidence

• Collaborate effectively with classmates in small groups to explain, interpret, and evaluate the information that is presented by the textual and visual source materials in this lesson

NUMBER OF CLASS PERIODS: 2

GRADE LEVEL(S): 7–12

COMMON CORE STATE STANDARDS

CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RL.9-10.4: Determine the meaning of words and phrases as they are used in the text, including figurative and connotative meanings; analyze the cumulative impact of specific word choices on meaning and tone (e.g., how the language evokes a sense of time and place; how it sets a formal or informal tone).

CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RL.11-12.1: Cite strong and thorough textual evidence to support analysis of what the text says explicitly as well as inferences drawn from the text, including determining where the text leaves matters uncertain.

CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RH.11-12.7: Integrate and evaluate multiple sources of information presented in diverse formats and media (e.g., visually, quantitatively, as well as in words) in order to address a question or solve a problem.

CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.W.11-12.1: Write arguments to support claims in an analysis of substantive topics or texts, using valid reasoning and relevant and sufficient evidence.

ESSENTIAL QUESTION

“To what extent did internal or external forces cause the fall of the Berlin Wall?”

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

The city of Berlin, Germany, played a central role in the Cold War between the Soviet Union and the United States in the decades after World War II. When Germany surrendered in 1945, the four Allied nations (Great Britain, France, the Soviet Union, and the United States) split Berlin, and all of Germany, into four zones of occupation.

In 1948 the Soviet Union declared that Great Britain, France, and the United States could no longer have access to Berlin through the East German (Soviet-controlled) zone. In response, the western Allies flew in food and other supplies in a program known as the “Berlin Airlift.” The blockade of Berlin was lifted in May 1949.

In August 1961, the pro-Soviet East German government erected the “Berlin Wall,” which severed access between West Berlin and East Berlin. The wall of eleven-foot-high concrete segments, 302 watchtowers, a series of bunkers and anti- vehicle trenches, and barbed-wire fencing extended for twenty-three miles through residential Berlin. The primary purpose of the Berlin Wall was to stem mass defections and demonstrate the weakness of the West. Between 1961 and 1989, 192 East German people were killed and 200 were injured trying to cross. However, more than 5,000 East Germans successfully crossed the Berlin Wall.

President John F. Kennedy gave a speech in Berlin on June 26, 1963: “Freedom has many difficulties and democracy is not perfect, but we have never had to put a wall up to keep our people in, to prevent them from leaving us . . . When all are free, then we can look forward to that day when this city will be joined as one . . . [when] all free men, wherever they may live, are citizens of Berlin, and, therefore, as a free man, I take pride in the words ‘Ich bin ein Berliner.’”

Twenty-four years later, on June 12, 1987, President Ronald Reagan, in a speech delivered at the Brandenburg Gate in West Berlin, challenged Mikhail Gorbachev, the general secretary of the Communist Party and leader of the Soviet Union, to tear down the Berlin Wall: “If you seek peace, if you seek prosperity for the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, if you seek liberalization, come here . . . Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!”

Gorbachev, addressing a deteriorating economy in the Soviet Union, announced in 1989 that the Soviets would no longer support Communist governments in Eastern Europe. As grassroots challenges to these Communist governments swept across Eastern Europe, East Berlin’s Communist Party announced on November 9, 1989, a general open-borders and travel policy for East Germany and East Berlin, “effective immediately, without delay.” Huge crowds assembled at the Berlin Wall, demanding that border guards open the gates. The guards permitted East Germans to pass to West Berlin and West Germany without checking documentation. Nearly one year after the fall of the Berlin Wall, East Germany and West Germany were officially reunited as one nation on October 3, 1990.

LESSON 1

OBJECTIVES Students will be able to • Distinguish between “implication” and “inference” (“imply” v. “infer”) and identify, determine, and understand their proper application and usage in visual and written source materials • Analyze and assess the meaning and importance of textual and visual primary source materials to understanding historical events • Develop a viewpoint, present it, and write a response to the lesson’s essential question based on textual and visual evidence • Collaborate effectively with classmates in small groups to explain, interpret, and evaluate the information that is presented by the textual and visual source materials in this lesson

MATERIALS • Photograph: “Helping a Comrade over the Berlin Wall,” November 9, 1989 (Copyright © Robert Maass) • Implications and Inferences (2 copies per student) • Map: “Divided Berlin,” IEG-MAPS, Leibniz-Institut für Europäische Geschichte, Mainz, Germany, http://www.ieg-maps.uni-mainz.de/ • Newspaper Article: Serge Schmemann, “Clamor in the East; East Germany Opens Frontier to the West for Migration or Travel; Thousands Cross,” New York Times, November 10, 1989 (excerpts) • Guiding Questions (nos. 1 to 8) for the “Clamor in the East” article in New York Times • Computer projector, overhead projector, or similar device for display purposes

PROCEDURE 1. Explain the distinction between “implication” and “inference” (“imply” v. “infer”) and how these cognitive processes are opposite yet complementary in their focus and function. Use simple examples to present and discuss the distinction with the students. For example, “My friend ignored me.” Implication: “His silence implied he was angry.” Inference: “I inferred from his silence he was angry.” 2. As a historical example and focus for this lesson, display the photograph “Helping a Comrade over the Berlin Wall,” taken by Robert Maass on November 9, 1989, and distribute the Implications and Inferences worksheet. The students should complete both columns of the worksheet by listing and briefly explaining what meanings and messages are “implied” (suggested) in this photograph and what conclusions can be “inferred” (drawn) from this photograph. You can have the students work individually or collaboratively in small groups for this learning activity. Upon completion of the worksheet, individual students or small groups should share their implications and inferences with their classmates. 3. Display and direct the students’ attention to the essential question: “To what extent did internal or external forces cause the fall of the Berlin Wall?” Explain how this thought-provoking essential question will serve as the lens through which the students will examine, explain, and evaluate the historical information from the textual and visual source materials concerning the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989. 4. Display and distribute copies of the map of “Divided Berlin,” which shows the location of the Berlin Wall, and the Implications and Inferences worksheet. Once again, ask the students to complete both columns by listing and briefly explaining what meanings and messages are implied and what conclusions can be inferred. The students can work individually or collaboratively. Individual students or small groups should share their implications and inferences with their classmates.

5. Divide the class into small groups of three or four students, if this was not done previously. Distribute the excerpt from the New York Times article, “Clamor in the East; East Germany Opens Frontier to the West for Migration or Travel; Thousands Cross” (November 10, 1989), written by Serge Schmemann, and the Guiding Questions. Paragraphs in the article text are numbered to help students find answer locations. In their groups the students will read and discuss the article and collaboratively answer the questions with written responses concerning the author’s implications and the inferences that the students can reasonably draw from the article. Upon completion, students from each group should share and compare their written responses to the questions with their classmates.

6. As a summary activity and instructional closure, refer the students’ attention back to the essential question, “To what extent did internal or external forces cause the fall of the Berlin Wall?” and direct them to give a written response supporting their viewpoints with evidence from the implications in and inferences from the visual and textual sources. If time permits, you can call on several students to orally share their responses.

LESSON 2

OBJECTIVES

Students will be able to

• Analyze and assess the meaning and importance of textual and visual primary source materials to understanding historical events

• Develop a viewpoint, present it, and write a response to the lesson’s essential question based on textual and visual evidence

• Collaborate effectively with classmates in small groups to explain, interpret, and evaluate the information that is presented by the textual and visual source materials in this lesson

MATERIALS

• Diary entry by Robert Darnton, November 16, 1989, printed in Robert Darnton, Berlin Journal: 1989-1990 (New York: W. W. Norton, 1991), 74–75.

• Guiding Questions (nos. 1 to 4) for Diary Entry by Robert Darnton, November 16, 1989

• Political Cartoons related to the Berlin Wall and the Cold War by Herblock. Source: The Herb Block Foundation

- “Stop, Go, Walk,” November 7, 1989

- “For Whom the Bell Tolls,” November 30, 1989

- “Here It Takes All the Running You Can Do Just to Stay in the Same Place,” December 14, 1989

• Implications and Inferences (3 copies per student)

• Computer projector, overhead projector, or similar device for display purposes

PROCEDURE

1. The students will work in the small groups that were arranged in the previous lesson. Distribute copies of the diary entry of November 16, 1989, by Robert Darnton and the Guiding Questions for that text.” In their groups the students will read and discuss the diary excerpt and collaboratively answer the questions with written responses concerning the writer’s implications and the students’ inferences. What reasonable conclusions and sound judgments can they make concerning this historical event. Students from each group should share and compare their written responses to these questions.

2. Display and distribute copies of three political cartoons by Herblock—“Stop, Go, Walk,” November 7, 1989; “For Whom the Bell Tolls,” November 30, 1989; and “Here It Takes All the Running You Can Do Just to Stay in the Same Place,” December 14, 1989—as well as three copies of the Implications and Inferences worksheet to each student. Ask the students to complete both columns of the chart for each cartoon. One or two students from each small group should share their implications and inferences. Note: This activity can be supplemented with two other images that are available on the Library of Congress website: “’Tis the season,” by Oliphant at http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/oliphant/vc007245.jpg and “I can’t believe my eyes,” by Edmund Valtman at http://www.loc.gov/rr/print/swann/valtman/images/valt21.jpg.

3. As a summary activity and instructional closure for this lesson, refer the students’ attention back to the essential question, “To what extent did internal or external forces cause the fall of the Berlin Wall?” Direct them to support their viewpoints and responses with evidence from all the visual and textual sources they have examined, explained, and evaluated in previous lessons. If time permits, several students can orally share their responses.

© 2017 The Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History, New York 96 TEACHING WITH DOCUMENTS The Twentieth Century: 1946-2001 “Helping a Comrade over the Berlin Wall,” November 1989 (© Robert Maass) “Helping a Comrade over the Berlin Wall,” © 2017 The Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History, New York TEACHING WITH DOCUMENTS The Twentieth Century: 1946-2001 97

IMPLICATIONS AND INFERENCES

Source Title______

Implications Inferences

1. 1.

2. 2.

3. 3.

4. 4.

5. 5.

Serge Schmemann, “Clamor in the East; East Germany Opens Frontier to the West for Migration or Travel; Thousands Cross,” New York Times, November 10, 1989 (excerpts)

BY SERGE SCHMEMANN, Special to The New York Times Published: November 10, 1989

A Jubilant Horde

1. East Germany on Thursday lifted restrictions on emigration or travel to the West, and within hours tens of thousands of East and West Berliners swarmed across the infamous Berlin Wall for a boisterous celebration.

2. Border guards at Bornholmer Strasse crossing, Checkpoint Charlie and several other crossings abandoned all efforts to check credentials, even though the new regulations said East Germans would still need passports and permission to get across. Some guards smiled and took snapshots, assuring passers-by that they were just recording a historic event.

Politburo Announcement

3. The mass crossing began about two hours after Gunter Schabowski, a member of the Politburo, had announced at a press conference that permission to travel or emigrate would be granted quickly and without preconditions, and that East Germans would be allowed to cross at any crossing into West Germany or West Berlin. “We know this need of citizens to travel or leave the country,” Mr. Schabowski said. “Today the decision was taken that makes it possible for all citizens to leave the country through East German crossing points.”

4. Mr. Schabowski also said the decision ended the agreement to let East Germans leave through Czechoslovakia and other countries. Some 50,000 East Germans have left through Czechoslovakia, and a 14-mile-long queue of East German cars was reported Thursday at the Schirnding border crossing on the Czech-West German border. Since September, thousands more have left through Hungary and Poland.

Flag Waving in the West

5. Once Mr. Schabowski’s announcement was read on radio and television, a tentative trickle of East Germans testing the new regulations quickly turned into a jubilant horde, which joined at the border crossings with crowds of flag-waving, cheering West Germans. Thousands of Berliners clambered across the wall at the Brandenburg Gate, passing through the historic arch that for so long had been inaccessible to Berliners of either side.

6. Similar scenes were reported in Lubeck, the only other East German city touching the border, and at other border crossings along the inter-German frontier.

7. All through the night and into the early morning, celebrating East Berliners filled the Kurfurstendamm, estW Berlin’s “great white way,” blowing trumpets, dancing, laughing and absorbing a glittering scene that until now they could glimpse only on television.

8. Many East Germans said they planned to return home the same night. The Mayor of West Berlin, Walter Momper, toured border crossings in a police radio truck and urged East Berliners to return.

9. East German radio announced that the uncontrolled crossings would be ended at 8 A.M. today, after which East Germans would be required to obtain a visa.

10. The extraordinary breach of what had been the most infamous stretch of the Iron Curtain marked the culmination of an extraordinary month that has seen the virtual transformation of East Germany under the dual pressures of unceasing

flight and continuing demonstrations. It also marked a breach of a wall that had become the premier symbol of Stalinist oppression and of the divisions of Europe and Germany into hostile camps after World War II.

An Effort to Stem a Tide

11. The immediate reason for the decision was evidently a recognition by East Germany’s embattled authorities that they could not stem the outward tide by opening the door a crack and hoping that rapid liberalization at home would end the urge to flee. They now seemed to hope that an open door would quickly let out those who were determined to leave, and give pause to those who had doubted the sincerity of the Government’s pledge of profound change.

12. The Berlin wall—first raised on Aug. 13, 1961, to halt a vast hemorrhage of East Germans to the est—evolvedW into a double row of eight-foot-high concrete walls with watchtowers, electronic sensors and a no man’s land in between. Frequent attempts to breach the barrier often ended in death, and the very sophistication of the wall became a standing indictment of the system that could hold its people only with such extraordinary means.

13. The decision to allow East Germans to travel freely came on a day when Egon Krenz, the new East German leader, was reported to have called for a law insuring free and democratic elections. In a speech to the Communist Party’s Central Committee on Wednesday night that was published today, Mr. Krenz also called for new laws on freedom of assembly, association and the press. But he gave no details.

14. Mr. Schabowski’s announcement about the unimpeded travel was greeted with an outburst of emotion in West Germany, whose Constitution sustains the hope of a reunited Germany and whose people have seen in the dramatic changes in East Germany the first glimmers of an end to division.

Source: The New York Times, November 10, 1989. © The New York Times. All rights are reserved. Used by permission and protected by the Copyright Laws of the United States of America. The printing, copying, redistribution, or transmission of this content without express written permission is prohibited.

Guiding Questions: Serge Schmemann, “Clamor in the East,” New York Times, November 10, 1989

1. What do you infer from the use of the word “infamous” in paragraph 1?

______

2. What can you infer from paragraphs 2 and 3 regarding the activity at the border crossings?

______

3. Describe the border activity in paragraph 4.

______

4. What is implied by the phrase “a tentative trickle . . . quickly turned into a jubilant horde” in paragraph 5?

______

5. What can you infer from the section “Flag Waving in the West”? Give evidence to support your conclusions.

______

6. What is implied in paragraphs 7 through 9? What can you infer from these paragraphs? Be sure to make clear distinctions.

______

7. What inferences can you make regarding major changes in East Germany in paragraphs 10 and 11?

______

8. Why is the wall described as a “standing indictment of the system” in paragraph 12?

______

Diary Entry by Robert Darnton, November 16, 1989 (Quoted with the permission of the author)

Professor Robert Darnton was in Berlin in November 1989, and recorded the events surrounding the fall of the Berlin Wall.

1. On the morning after, November 10, when both Berlins woke up wondering whether the first flood through the Wall had been a dream, the West Berlin tabloid Volksblatt ran two headlines, shoulder to shoulder, on its front page: “The Wall Is Gone” and “Bonn Demands the Destruction of the Wall.”

2. Both were right. The Wall is there and it is not there. On November 9, it cut through the heart of Berlin, a jagged wound in the middle of a great city, the Great Divide of the Cold War. On November 10, it had become a dance floor, a picture gallery, a bulletin board, a movie screen, a videocassette, a museum, and, as the woman who cleaned my office put it, “nothing but a heap of stone.” The taking of the Wall, like the taking of the Bastille, transformed the world. No wonder that a day later, in Alexanderplatz, East Berlin, one conqueror of the Wall marched in a demonstration with a sign saying simply, “1789–1989.” He had helped dismantle the central symbol around which the postwar world had taken shape in the minds of millions.

3. To witness symbolic transformation on such a scale is a rare opportunity, and it raises many questions. To begin with the most concrete: What happened between November 9 and 12, and what does it mean?

4. The destruction of the Wall began in the early evening of Thursday, November 9, soon after the first wave of East Berliners, or Ossis, as they are called by the West Berliners here, burst upon the West, One Ossi, a young man with a knapsack on his back, somehow hoisted himself up on the Wall directly across from the Brandenburg Gate. He sauntered along the top of it, swinging his arms casually at his sides, a perfect target for the bullets that had felled many other wall jumpers, like Peter Fechter, an eighteen-year-old construction worker, who was shot and left to bleed to death a few feet in front of Checkpoint Charlie on August 17, 1962. Now, twenty-seven years later, a new generation of border guards took aim at a new kind of target and fired—but only with power hoses and without much conviction. The conqueror of the Wall continued his promenade, soaked to the skin, until at last the guards gave up. Then he opened his knapsack and poured the water toward the East, in a gesture that seemed to say, “Good-bye to all that.”

Source: Robert Darnton, Berlin Journal, 1989–1990, New York: Norton, 1991.

Guiding Questions: Diary Entry by Robert Darnton, November 16, 1989

1. What does Darnton infer from the West Berlin tabloid headlines in paragraph 1? Cite the evidence provided in paragraph 2.

______

2. In paragraph 2, what does Darnton imply when he writes, “The taking of the Wall, like the taking of the Bastille, transformed the world”?

______

3. What does Darnton imply in the beginning sentence of paragraph 3? What can you infer from this statement? Explain your reasoning.

______

4. What can you infer from the depiction of the young man who “sauntered” across the wall in paragraph 4? Support your conclusions with evidence from the text.

______

“Here It Takes All the Running You Can Do Just to Stay in the Same Place,” December 14, 1989 A 1989 Herblock Cartoon © The Herb Block Foundation

Remains of the World Trade Center in New York City, September 14, 2001, and propaganda poster found in Afghanistan, 2002 (National Archives)

Osama bin Laden’s Declaration of Jihad against Americans BY TOBY SMITH

UNIT OVERVIEW

Over the course of these five lessons, students will read and analyze Osama bin Laden’s Declaration of Jihad against Americans, published in 1996, five years before the attacks against the United States on September 11, 2001. Students will synthesize the information in this text by writing summaries of selections from the original text and, by the end of the unit, will demonstrate their understanding of the text by answering questions in an argumentative and/or informative writing style.

UNIT OBJECTIVES

Students will be able to

• Read and demonstrate understanding of a complex text

• Identify and synthesize main ideas and draw logical inferences from the text

• Summarize the author’s ideas and restate those ideas in their own words

• Engage in classroom discussions with other students to compare perspectives on the text

• Write an argumentative essay supported by evidence from the text

NUMBER OF CLASS PERIODS:

The unit is structured for five class sessions, but depending on the nature and dynamics of your classes you may combine Lessons 2 and 3 or Lessons 3 and 4.

GRADE LEVEL(S): 9–12

COMMON CORE STATE STANDARDS

CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RH.9-12.1: Read closely to determine what the text says explicitly and to make logical inferences from it; cite specific textual evidence when writing or speaking to support conclusions drawn from the text.

CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RH.9-12.2: Determine central ideas or themes of a text and analyze their development; summarize the key supporting details and ideas.

CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RH.9-12.4: Interpret words and phrases as they are used in a text, including determining technical, connotative, and figurative meanings, and analyze how specific word choices shape meaning or tone.

CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RH.9-12.6: Assess how point of view or purpose shapes the content and style of a text.

CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.WH.9-12.1: Write arguments to support claims in an analysis of substantive topics or texts, using valid reasoning and relevant and sufficient evidence.

© 2017 The Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History, New York 108 TEACHING WITH DOCUMENTS The Twentieth Century:TEACHING 1946-2001 WITH DOCUMENTS The Twentieth Century: 1946-2001 108 HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

On May 1, 2011, American soldiers killed al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden at his compound near Islamabad, Pakistan. Intelligence officials believe bin Laden was responsible for many deadly acts of terrorism, including the 1998 bombings of the US Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania and the September 11, 2001 attacks on the Pentagon and the World Trade Center. He had been on the FBI’s “most wanted” list for more than a decade.

Osama bin Laden: Early Life Osama bin Laden was born in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia in 1957 or 1958. He was the 17th of 52 children born to Mohammed bin Laden, a Yemeni immigrant who owned the largest construction company in the Saudi kingdom. Young Osama had a privileged, cosseted upbringing. His siblings were educated in the West and went to work for his father’s company (by then an enormous conglomerate that distributed consumer goods like Volkswagen cars and Snapple beverages across the Middle East), but Osama bin Laden stayed close to home. He went to school in Jiddah, married young and, like many Saudi men, joined the Islamist Muslim Brotherhood.

Osama bin Laden: The Pan-Islamist Idea For bin Laden, Islam was more than just a religion: It shaped his political beliefs and influenced every decision he made. While he was at college in the late 1970s, he became a follower of the radical pan-Islamist scholar Abdullah Azzam, who believed that all Muslims should rise up in jihad, or holy war, to create a single Islamic state. This idea appealed to the young bin Laden, who resented what he saw as a growing Western influence on Middle Eastern life. In 1979, Soviet troops invaded Afghanistan; soon afterward, Azzam and bin Laden traveled to Peshawar, a Pakistani city on the border with Afghanistan, to join the resistance. They did not become fighters themselves, but they used their extensive connections to win financial and moral support for the mujahideen (the Afghan rebels). They also encouraged young men to come from all over the Middle East to be a part of the Afghan jihad. Their organization, called the Maktab al-Khidamat (MAK) served as a global recruitment network—it had offices in places as far away as Brooklyn and Tucson, Arizona—and provided the migrant soldiers, known as “Afghan Arabs,” with training and supplies. Most important, it showed bin Laden and his associates that it was possible to put pan-Islamism into practice.

Osama bin Laden: Building al-Qaida In 1988, bin Laden created a new group, called al-Qaida (“the base”) that would focus on symbolic acts of terrorism instead of military campaigns. After the Soviets withdrew from Afghanistan in 1989, bin Laden returned to Saudi Arabia to step up fundraising for this new and more complicated mission. However, the comparatively pro-Western Saudi royal family feared that bin Laden’s fiery pan-Islamist rhetoric might cause trouble in the kingdom, and so they tried to keep him as quiet as they could. They took away his passport and spurned his offer to send “Afghan Arabs” to guard the border after Iraq invaded Kuwait in 1990. Then, adding insult to injury, they sought help from the US (the infidel US) instead. Furious about being snubbed, bin Laden vowed that it was al-Qaida, and not the Americans, who would one day prove to be “master of this world.” Early the next year, bin Laden left Saudi Arabia for the more militantly Islamist Sudan. After one more year of preparation, al-Qaida struck for the first time: A bomb exploded in a hotel in Aden, Yemen, that had housed American troops on their way to a peacekeeping mission in Somalia. (No Americans died in the blast, but two Austrian tourists did.)

Osama bin Laden: Worldwide Jihad Emboldened, bin Laden and his associates embraced violent jihad in earnest. For example, they trained and armed the Somali rebels who killed 18 American servicemen in Mogadishu in 1993. They were also linked to the 1993 bombing of New York’s World Trade Center; the attempted assassination of Egyptian president Hosni Mubarek in 1995; the bombing of a US National Guard training center in Riyadh that same year; and the truck bomb that destroyed the Khobar Towers, an American military residence in Dharan, in 1996.

Osama bin Laden: “Public Enemy #1” In an attempt to protect himself from arrest and win even more recruits to al-Qaida’s deadly cause, bin Laden moved from Sudan to Afghanistan in 1996. Meanwhile, the scale of al-Qaida’s attacks continued to increase.

Source: History.com Staff, “Osama bin Laden,” History.com, A+E Networks, 2009. http://www.history.com/topics/osama- bin-laden. Accessed March 11, 2015.

VOCABULARY

In this unit, students will encounter vocabulary (Tier Two words, content-specific words, etc.) that they do not know. This is one of the main reasons for having students work in groups: they can figure out the meanings of words in context. If the students are truly stuck, have them write down the terms that are giving them trouble and place them in a “parking lot” or on post-it notes for further class discussion. You can provide a definition if the term is critical to understanding the passage.

jihad:

1. a holy war undertaken as a sacred duty by Muslims

2. any vigorous, emotional crusade for an idea or principle

umma:

1. the community of Islamic believers; the Muslim world

LESSON 1

OVERVIEW

Students will read the first section of Osama bin Laden’s Declaration of Jihad against Americans, published in 1996. In a step-by-step process they will identify key words employed by bin Laden and then summarize the text to demonstrate that they understand what bin Laden was saying. The whole class will work together on the first section of the document.

OBJECTIVES

Students will be able to

• Read and analyze a complex text

• Identify key words in the original text

• Recognize what is explicitly stated and draw logical inferences

• Summarize the text in their own words

MATERIALS

• Teacher Resource: Osama bin Laden’s “Declaration of Jihad against Americans,” 1996 (excerpts). Source: “Osama bin Laden’s Declaration of Jihad against Americans,” 1996, English translation published in Milestone Documents in World History (Salem Press, [2009]), available on the website of the National September 11 Memorial & Museum, http://www.911memorial.org/911-primary-sources.

• Summary Organizer #1

• LCD Projector, Overhead Projector, Elmo, or Smartboard

PROCEDURE

1. Tell the students that immediately following the terrorist attacks on the United States on September 11, 2001, many people asked why someone would do this and who exactly was responsible. Explain that one source of information about the attacks of September 11 is a declaration of jihad written by Osama bin Laden in 1996. Resist providing more information about the document so the students can develop ideas based solely on bin Laden’s words.

2. Tell the students that they will analyze the first part of the text in this lesson and that they will learn how to do in- depth analysis for themselves. The whole class will be going through this process together for the first section of the document.

3. Distribute Summary Organizer #1. This contains the first selection from bin Laden’s declaration. Display the organizer in a format large enough for the whole class to see. Make certain students understand that the original text has been edited for this lesson. Explain the purpose and use of ellipses.

4. “Share read” the text with the students. This is done by having the students follow along silently while you begin to read aloud, modeling prosody, inflection, and punctuation. Then ask the class to join in with the reading after a few sentences while you continue to read aloud, still serving as the model for the class. This technique will support struggling readers as well as English language learners (ELL).

5. Explain that the objective is to select Key Words from the first section and then use those words to create a summary sentence that gets at the gist of what bin Laden was saying in the first paragraph.

6. Guidelines for Selecting Key Words: Key Words are very important contributors to understanding the text. They are usually nouns or verbs. Don’t pick “connector” words (are, is, the, and, so, etc.). The number of Key Words depends on the length of the original selection. This selection is 144 words long so you can pick seven or eight Key Words. The students must know what their Key Words mean, so there will be opportunities to teach students how to use context clues, word analysis, and dictionary skills to discover word meanings.

7. Ask the students to select seven or eight words from the text that they believe are Key Words and write them down on their organizers.

8. Survey the class to find out what the most popular choices are. After some discussion and with your guidance, the class should decide on the final Key Words. For example, the class might choose the following words:oppression , immoral, dispossessed, imperial arrogance (two words that together make up a single idea can be selected if it makes sense in context), enemies, and prevented. Now, no matter which words the students had previously selected, have them write the words agreed upon by the class into the Key Words list in their organizers.

9. Explain that the class will use these Key Words to write a brief summary (one or two sentences) that gets at the gist of what bin Laden was saying. This should be a whole-class discussion-and-negotiation process. For example, “I (bin Laden) want to get rid of polytheistic believers from Arabic nations and believe that Islamic peoples’ rights have been taken away and have been devalued by nations of the West (the US and its allies) while the United Nations have allowed this to happen and not allowed us to fight.” You might find that the class decides they don’t need the some of the words to make the sentence even more streamlined. This is part of the negotiation process. Copy the final sentence into the organizer.

10. Now guide the students in restating the summary sentence(s) in their own words. Again, this is a class negotiation process. For example, “Osama bin Laden is angry with the United States / Judeo-Christian nations / the West for treat- ing Arabic people poorly and/or killing them. He wants people who believe in more than one god out of the Middle East and for his people to fight against them.”

11. Wrap up: Discuss vocabulary that the students found confusing or difficult. You could have students use the back of their organizer or a separate vocabulary form to make a note of these words and their meaning.

LESSON 2

OVERVIEW Students will read the second section of Osama bin Laden’s Declaration of Jihad against Americans. In a step-by-step process they will identify key words employed by bin Laden and then summarize the text to demonstrate that they understand what bin Laden was saying. In this lesson the students will work in pairs and small groups.

OBJECTIVES Students will be able to

• Read and analyze a complex text • Identify key words in the original text • Recognize what is explicitly stated and draw logical inferences • Summarize the text in their own words

MATERIALS • Summary Organizer #2 • LCD Projector, Overhead Projector, Elmo, or Smartboard

PROCEDURE 1. Review what the class worked on in the previous lesson and what they decided was the gist of the first selection.

2. Distribute Summary Organizer #2 with the second section of bin Laden’s declaration. Share read the text as described in Lesson 1.

3. Put a copy of Summary Organizer #2 on display in a format large enough for all of the class to see. Explain that today they will be going through the same process as yesterday but as partners and in small groups.

4. Review the process of selecting Key Words, writing a summary of the text using those words, and then restating the summary in their own words to show their understanding of the text.

5. Pair the students up and have them work together to select the best Key Words. This passage is 210 words in length, so they can choose nine or ten words.

6. Now put two pairs of students together. These four students will negotiate with each other to come up with their final nine or ten Key Words. Be strategic in how you make your groups in order to ensure the most participation by all group members.

7. Once the groups have selected their Key Words, each group will use those words to create a brief summary (one or two sentences) of what Osama bin Laden was saying. During this process, try to make sure that everyone is contributing. It is very easy for one student to take control and for the other students to let them do so. All of the students should write their group’s negotiated sentence into their organizers.

8. Ask groups to share out the summary sentences they have created. This should start a teacher-led discussion that points out the qualities of the various responses. How successful were the groups at comprehending bin Laden’s main idea, and were they careful to use the Key Words in doing so?

9. Now direct the groups to restate their summary sentences in their own words. Again, this is a negotiation process. After they have decided on a summary, it should be written into their organizers. Have the groups share out their responses and discuss the clarity and quality of the various responses.

10. Wrap up: Discuss vocabulary that the students found confusing or difficult. You could have students use the back of their organizer or a separate vocabulary form to make a note of these words and their meaning.

LESSON 3

OVERVIEW

Students will read the third section of Osama bin Laden’s Declaration of Jihad against Americans. In a step-by-step process they will identify key words employed by bin Laden and then summarize the text to demonstrate that they understand what bin Laden was saying. Today they will continue to work in pairs and small groups.

OBJECTIVES

Students will be able to

• Read and analyze a complex text

• Identify key words in the original text

• Recognize what is explicitly stated and draw logical inferences

• Summarize the text in their own words

MATERIALS

• Summary Organizer #3

PROCEDURE

1. Review what the class worked on in the previous lesson and what they decided was the gist of the first and second selections from bin Laden’s declaration.

2. Distribute Summary Organizer #3 with the third section of bin Laden’s declaration. Share read the text as described in Lesson 1.

3. Review the process of selecting Key Words, writing a summary of the text using those words, and then restating the summary in their own words to show their understanding of the text.

4. Think-Pair-Share: Students will individually choose eight or nine Key Words (this selection is 178 words in length).

5. Pair the students up and have them negotiate which Key Words to select. After they have decided on their words, the students will write those words in the Key Words box of their organizers.

6. Now put two pairs together. These two pairs go through the same negotiation process to come up with their Key Words. Be strategic in how you make your groups in order to ensure the most participation by all group members.

7. Once they have selected their Key Words, have the student groups work together to write a brief summary of the text using the Key Words. All of the students should write their negotiated sentence into their organizer.

8. Now direct the groups to restate their summary sentences in their own words. Again, this is a negotiation process. After they have decided on a summary, it should be written into their organizers. Have the groups share out their responses and discuss the clarity and quality of the various responses.

9. Wrap up: Discuss vocabulary that the students found confusing or difficult. You could have students use the back of their organizer or a separate vocabulary form to make a note of these words and their meaning.

LESSON 4

OVERVIEW

Students will read the fourth, and final, section of Osama bin Laden’s Declaration of Jihad against Americans. In a step- by-step process they will identify key words employed by bin Laden and then summarize the text to demonstrate that they understand what bin Laden was saying. The students will complete the summary organizer independently for this lesson.

OBJECTIVE

Students will be able to

• Read and analyze a complex text

• Identify key words in the original text

• Recognize what is explicitly stated and draw logical inferences

• Summarize the text in their own words

MATERIALS

• Summary Organizer #4

PROCEDURE

1. Review what the class worked on in the previous lesson and what they decided was the gist of the first, second, and third selections from bin Laden’s declaration.

2. Distribute Summary Organizer #4 with the fourth, and final, section of bin Laden’s declaration. Share read the text as described in Lesson 1.

3. Tell the students that they will be working independently throughout this lesson. Review the process of selecting Key Words, writing a summary of the text using those words, and then restating the summary in their own words to show their understanding of bin Laden’s text. This text selection is 194 words in length, so they can select nine words.

4. After the students have worked through the three steps, have them share out their summaries in their own words in a guided class discussion of the meaning of the text.

5. Wrap up: Discuss vocabulary that the students found confusing or difficult. You could have students use the back of their organizer or a separate vocabulary form to make a note of these words and their meaning.

LESSON 5

OVERVIEW

First, the students will review the meaning of each section of Osama bin Laden’s “Declaration of Jihad against Americans.” Second, they will write a short argumentative essay about bin Laden’s declaration in which they support their statements with evidence taken directly from the text.

OBJECTIVES

Students will be able to

• Demonstrate an understanding of a complex text

• Write a short essay supporting an argument based on evidence from the text

MATERIALS

• Summary Organizers #1–#4

• LCD Projector, Overhead Projector, Elmo, or Smartboard

• Optional: A writing or graphic organizer of your choice to help students structure the essay

PROCEDURE

1. Distribute the excerpts from Osama bin Laden’s Declaration of Jihad against Americans and ask the students to read it silently to themselves.

2. Ask the students for their best summary of selection one. This is done as a negotiation or discussion with your support. You may write this short sentence on the overhead or similar device. The same procedure is used for selections two, three, and four. The completed summaries should reinforce the students’ understanding of the meaning and purpose of bin Laden’s declaration.

3. If the students do not have experience writing an argumentative essay, proceed with a short lesson on essay writing. Otherwise, have them write a short essay in response to one of the prompts in class or as an out-of-class assignment. Remind the students that they must back up any arguments they make with evidence taken directly from the text of bin Laden’s Declaration of Jihad against Americans. The first prompt is designed to be the easiest.

Sample Writing Prompts / Summative Assessments

Task 1: Description/Explanation

After reading and summarizing Osama bin Laden’s Declaration of Jihad against Americans, write an essay that describes three possible reasons for Osama bin Laden’s condemnation of the United States and its allies (the West). Support your discussion with evidence from the text.

Task 2: Arguments

After reading and summarizing Osama bin Laden’s Declaration of Jihad against Americans, write an essay that argues for one primary reason for bin Laden’s condemnation of the United States and its allies (the West). What implications can you draw? Which category (social, political, economic) does the cause fall into? Explain. Support your argument with evidence from the text.

Task 3: Analysis

After reading and summarizing Osama bin Laden’s Declaration of Jihad against Americans, write an essay that evaluates the strength of bin Laden’s rhetoric and examines the impact it had on nationalistic (anti-Western) feelings throughout his terrorist network. Be sure to support your position with evidence from the text.

(Note: Information found outside of this text is necessary for the students to respond to this question. Students need to understand that bin Laden was able to motivate the al-Qaida network to ultimately carry out the 9/11 attacks and inflict economic and emotional harm on the United States and its allies.)

Osama bin Laden’s Declaration of Jihad against Americans, 1996 (excerpts from English translation)

Expel the Polytheists from the Arabian peninsula.

A Letter from Sheikh Osama bin Muhammad bin Laden to his Muslim Brothers across the world, and particularly those in the Arabian peninsula. . . . It is no secret to you, my brothers, that the people of Islam have been afflicted with oppression, hostility, and injustice by the Judeo-Christian alliance and its supporters. This shows our enemies’ belief that Muslims’ blood is the cheapest and that their property and wealth is merely loot. Your blood has been spilt in Palestine and Iraq, and the horrific images of the massacre in Qana in Lebanon are still fresh in people’s minds. . . . All this has happened before the eyes and ears of the world, but the blatant imperial arrogance of America, under the cover of the immoral United Nations, has prevented the dispossessed from arming themselves. . . . This injustice was inflicted on us, too, as we were prevented from talking to Muslims and were hounded out of Saudi Arabia to Pakistan, Sudan, and then Afghanistan. That is what led to this long absence of mine . . . People are struggling even with the basics of everyday life, and everyone talks frankly about economic recession, price inflation, mounting debts, and prison overcrowding. Low-income government employees talk to you about their debts in the tens or hundreds of thousands of riyals, whilst complaining that the riyal’s value is declining dramatically. Domestic debts owed by the government to its citizens have reached 340 billion riyals, and are rising daily due to usurious interest, let alone all the foreign debt. People are wondering: are we really the biggest source of oil in the world? They feel that God is bringing this torture upon them because they have not spoken out against the regime’s injustice and illegitimate behaviour, the most prominent aspects of which are its failure to rule in accordance with God’s law, its depriving of legal rights to its servants, its permitting the American occupiers into Saudi Arabia, and its arresting of righteous scholars—inheritors of the Prophet’s legacy—and unjustly throwing them in prison. . . . Brother Muslims in Saudi Arabia, does it make any sense at all that our country is the biggest purchaser of weapons from America in the world and America’s biggest trading partner in the region, while at the very same time the Americans are occupying Saudi Arabia and supporting—with money, arms, and manpower—their Jewish brothers in the occupation of Palestine and their murder and expulsion of Muslims there? Depriving these occupiers of the huge returns they receive from their trade with us is a very important way of supporting the jihad against them, and we expect you to boycott all American goods. Men of the radiant future of our umma of Muhammad, raise the banner of jihad up high against the Judeo-American alliance that has occupied the holy places of Islam. God told his Prophet: “He will not let the deeds of those who are killed for His cause come to nothing; He will guide them and put them in a good state; He will admit them into the Garden He has already made known to them.” . . . And the al-Jami al-Sahih notes that the Prophet said: “The best martyrs are those who stay in the battle line and do not turn their faces away until they are killed. They will achieve the highest level of Heaven, and their Lord will look kindly upon them. When your Lord looks kindly upon a slave in the world, He will not hold him to account.” And he said: “The martyr has a guarantee from God: He forgives him at the first drop of his blood and shows him his seat in Heaven. He decorates him with the jewels of faith, protects him from the torment of the grave, keeps him safe on the day of judgment, places a crown of dignity on his head with the finest rubies in the world, marries him to seventy-two of the pure virgins of paradise and intercedes on behalf of seventy of his relatives,” as related by Ahmad al-Tirmidhi in an authoritative hadith. . . . Lord, bless your slave and messenger Muhammad, and his family and companions. Our final prayer is praise to God, Lord of the worlds. Your brother in Islam, Osama bin Muhammad bin Laden

Source: “Osama bin Laden’s Declaration of Jihad against Americans,” 1996, English translation published in Milestone Documents in World History (Salem Press, [2009]), available on the website of the National September 11 Memorial & Museum, http://www.911memorial.org/911-primary-sources.

NAME PERIOD DATE

SUMMARY ORGANIZER 1 Osama bin Laden’s Declaration of Jihad, 1996

Original Text:

Expel the Polytheists from the Arabian peninsula.

A Letter from Sheikh Osama bin Muhammad bin Laden to his Muslim Brothers across the world, and particularly those in the Arabian peninsula.

. . . It is no secret to you, my brothers, that the people of Islam have been afflicted with oppression, hostility, and injustice by the Judeo-Christian alliance and its supporters. This shows our enemies’ belief that Muslims’ blood is the cheapest and that their property and wealth is merely loot. Your blood has been spilt in Palestine and Iraq, and the horrific images of the massacre in Qana in Lebanon are still fresh in people’s minds. . . . All this has happened before the eyes and ears of the world, but the blatant imperial arrogance of America, under the cover of the immoral United Nations, has prevented the dispossessed from arming themselves. . . .

Key Words:

______

Summary:

______

In Your Own Words:

______

NAME PERIOD DATE

SUMMARY ORGANIZER 2 Osama bin Laden’s Declaration of Jihad, 1996

Original Text:

This injustice was inflicted on us, too, as we were prevented from talking to Muslims and were hounded out of Saudi Arabia to Pakistan, Sudan, and then Afghanistan. That is what led to this long absence of mine . . . People are struggling even with the basics of everyday life, and everyone talks frankly about economic recession, price inflation, mounting debts, and prison overcrowding. Low-income government employees talk to you about their debts in the tens or hundreds of thousands of riyals, whilst complaining that the riyal’s value is declining dramatically. Domestic debts owed by the government to its citizens have reached 340 billion riyals, and are rising daily due to usurious interest, let alone all the foreign debt. People are wondering: are we really the biggest source of oil in the world? They feel that God is bringing this torture upon them because they have not spoken out against the regime’s injustice and illegitimate behaviour, the most prominent aspects of which are its failure to rule in accordance with God’s law, its depriving of legal rights to its servants, its permitting the American occupiers into Saudi Arabia, and its arresting of righteous scholars—inheritors of the Prophet’s legacy—and unjustly throwing them in prison. . . . Key Words: ______

______

Summary:

______

In Your Own Words:

______

NAME PERIOD DATE

SUMMARY ORGANIZER 3 Osama bin Laden’s Declaration of Jihad, 1996

Original Text:

Brother Muslims in Saudi Arabia, does it make any sense at all that our country is the biggest purchaser of weapons from America in the world and America’s biggest trading partner in the region, while at the very same time the Americans are occupying Saudi Arabia and supporting—with money, arms, and manpower—their Jewish brothers in the occupation of Palestine and their murder and expulsion of Muslims there? Depriving these occupiers of the huge returns they receive from their trade with us is a very important way of supporting the jihad against them, and we expect you to boycott all American goods. Men of the radiant future of our umma of Muhammad, raise the banner of jihad up high against the Judeo-American alliance that has occupied the holy places of Islam. God told his Prophet: “He will not let the deeds of those who are killed for His cause come to nothing; He will guide them and put them in a good state; He will admit them into the Garden He has already made known to them.”

Key Words:

______

Summary:

______

In Your Own Words:

______

NAME PERIOD DATE

SUMMARY ORGANIZER 4 Osama bin Laden’s Declaration of Jihad, 1996

Original Text:

. . . And the al-Jami al-Sahih notes that the Prophet said: “The best martyrs are those who stay in the battle line and do not turn their faces away until they are killed. They will achieve the highest level of Heaven, and their Lord will look kindly upon them. When your Lord looks kindly upon a slave in the world, He will not hold him to account.” And he said: “The martyr has a guarantee from God: He forgives him at the first drop of his blood and shows him his seat in Heaven. He decorates him with the jewels of faith, protects him from the torment of the grave, keeps him safe on the day of judgment, places a crown of dignity on his head with the finest rubies in the world, marries him to seventy-two of the pure virgins of paradise and intercedes on behalf of seventy of his relatives,” as related by Ahmad al-Tirmidhi in an authoritative hadith. . . .

Lord, bless your slave and messenger Muhammad, and his family and companions. Our final prayer is praise to God, Lord of the worlds.

Your brother in Islam,

Osama bin Muhammad bin Laden

Key Words:

______

Summary:

______

In Your Own Words:

______