The Excuse We Needed: War with Iran Draws Near

From Truth and Culture-Dr. Brian Phillips

American-Iranian relations have been strained for some time, as the U.S. has raised continual concerns that Iran is developing nuclear weapons.  Iran has denied all such charges, claiming that they have only been using nuclear materials for energy development – a practice allowed by international law.

Many Americans defend the idea of military action against Iran because the assumption is that they are guilty of developing a nuclear arsenal, even though there is no proof of those assertions.  After all, Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps is a terrorist group (only designated as such by George W. Bush’s executive order)!  How dangerous the world would be, the thinking goes, if Iran had a nuclear weapon! Wouldn’t they attack Israel?

Well, one could simply ask Egypt and Syria what happens to a nation that attacks Israel.  They were both embarrassingly defeated, though they attacked Israel together.  Additionally, Israel has hundreds of nuclear weapons in its arsenal.  Do Americans really have to worry about their well-being?  It would seem that if America is deeply concerned about Israel’s safety, the simplest move would be to get out of the way.

Perhaps there are other motives for picking a fight with Iran?

David Broder of The Washington Post, one of the more well-respected journalists in recent history and 400 time guest on Meet the Press, argued that starting a war with Iran would be the surest way for Barack Obama to garner conservative support, help the economy, and save his presidency.

Spend 2011-2012 attacking Iran, Broder advised the President, and enjoy your reelection.  Apparently the time has come…

The story broke today that U.S. authorities foiled a plot to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to the U.S.  Two men - Manssor Arbabsiar and Gholam Shakuri – have been charged in the plot and each of them is claimed to have strong ties to the Iranian government.

In fact, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder minced no words on the connection between the alleged assassins and Iran.  He said, “High-up (Iranian) officials…were responsible for this plot.  I think one has to be concerned about the chilling nature of what the Iranian government attempted to do here.”

The Iranian government quickly disavowed any involvement in the plot and released this statement on their English television network – “The Islamic Republic of Iranhas rejected U.S. accusations of the country plotting to assassinate the Saudi envoy to Washington as a prefabricated scenario.”  The denial was repeated by the Iranian spokesman to the United Nations.

Such denials, however, did not stop Holder from calling this a “flagrant violation of U.S. and international law” and promising that the U.S. will hold Iran accountable.

It would seem an open and shut case.  The two men were apprehended and, though both are said to have confessed everything to law enforcement.  Arbabsiar, a naturalized U.S. citizen, was read his Miranda rights and given a public defender (as opposed to the “droning” he would have received on foreign soil).

Arbabsiar reportedly approached a Mexican drug cartel for help in the plot, but his contact turned out to be an agent of the D.E.A.

Yes, indeed, an open and shut case.  And even though Iran denies the allegations of their involvement, all Americans know they are liars, right?

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told The Associated Press that, “the idea that they would attempt to go to a Mexican drug cartel to solicit murder-for-hire to kill the Saudi ambassador, nobody could make that up, right?”

Wait…was she asking or telling?

It remains to be seen what “hold accountable” means, but it seems the war hawks are circling again.  After all, it is election season.

Article also appeared on Antiwar.com – October 12, 2011

I Am a History Teacher & I Lie to My Students

Taken from "Truth & Culture" by Dr. Brian Phillips

On September 30, 2011, I woke up and began my daily routine, preparing for another day of teaching history to high school students.  In the course of an average school year, I literally teach the history of the world – ancient history, the Middle Ages, and the Renaissance, the Enlightenment and modernity.  My eleventh grade students take U.S. History, a required course for any student who plans to graduate.

In that class, we spent a great amount of time going, nearly line by line, through the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.  I tell them that nothing else in U.S. History matters as much as their understanding of these documents.  The Constitution is what protects us, guides us, and rules us as a people.  The Bill of Rights, I say, guarantees that government does not overstep the bounds laid out for it by the Founding Fathers.  Those amendments help protect our dignity, our liberty, and our lives.

I am lying to them…

What I tell them about the Constitution and the Bill of Rights is true, but I fear that, for them and their children (and for my own children) these wonderful documents will rank with the other insignificant dates and dead people of history.  The Founding Fathers will simply be dead guys who had a pretty good idea a few centuries ago.

The proof of this depressing claim is legion – from unconstitutional government programs and departments, to the tyrannical taxes levied against us, to the undeclared wars and “selective service” that will likely take some of the young men in my classes to die in foreign nations (even before they are allowed to drink beer).  Yes, all of these things show it quite clearly.

Our government has trampled what my students memorize, and the rights of the people continue to diminish in shameful ways.  But, surely none can be more shocking than what I witnessed on that morning of September 30^th.  As I drank coffee and ate breakfast, I took a moment to catch up on the morning news.  Fox News led the nation in rejoicing with a “Breaking News” segment that celebrated the death of terrorist Anwar al-Awlaki.

Al-Awlaki was killed by a drone attack in Yemen and, as the Associated Press later reported, he was the intended target of the attack.  Another man, Samir Khan, was also killed in the bombing.  Both were U.S. citizens.

According to the same article, Al-Awlaki was the suspected mastermind of several terrorist plots, including “the attempted 2009 Christmas Day bombing of a U.S.-bound aircraft. The official said that al-Awlaki specifically directed the men accused of trying to bomb the Detroit-bound plane to detonate an explosive device over U.S. airspace to maximize casualties.”

Born in New Mexico, al-Awlaki was never charged with any crime, never received a trial, and though the military could pinpoint his exact location, there was no actual attempt to arrest him.

I reflect over the lies I have told: “No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury…nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law” (5^thAmendment).

Samir Khan, from my own state of North Carolina, was not an intended target, but he did produce a magazine that gave instructions on how to use bombs and weapons and, the Associated Press assures us, it was read by lots of people.  He happened to be in the same caravan of vehicles as al-Awlaki, so he too was killed.  Guilt by association, I guess.

More lies: “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence” (6^th Amendment).

“But,” the bloggers and commentators bellow out, “these men were terrorists!  They relinquished their rights of citizenship when they turned against us!”  The government can take one’s citizenship when they break the law?

There can be little doubt that these men committed treason, so I breathe a momentary sigh of relief.  Perhaps I haven’t completely been dishonest with my students?  “Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort” (Article III, Section 3 of the Constitution).  If only the framers had stopped there.

The next sentence makes me face another round of lies: “No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.”

The attack has been heralded as “the latest in a run of high-profile kills for Washington under President Barack Obama.”  Kills for Washington?  What will my students think?

There can be little doubt that were Khan and al-Awlaki apprehended and tried, they would have either been found guilty or confessed in open court.  But they were not tried.  They were not charged.  They weren’t even apprehended and water-boarded.  They were killed by an armed drone.  Killed for Washington.

Citizens and political leaders throughout the nation are and will continue to rejoice over this fresh kill and the deaths of these men will be used for political capital.  It is election season, after all.  Yes, the same ones who swear to uphold the Constitution will make a name for themselves by assassinating American citizens.  Does my dishonesty know no bounds?

Any right given to the government is one less right retained by the citizens.  I can hear the room of 17-year-olds reciting the 10^th Amendment.  What will become of them when their government defines “bad men” a bit differently?

I climb into my car and make the short drive to school where I must live another day with the realization that I am a history teacher…and I lie to my students.  Perhaps.  But, maybe, just maybe, they will be the ones to lift the veil.  Perhaps they will, by remembering what all others seem to have forgotten, they can reclaim what generations before are seeking to rob.