Myth-information.

I usually make it a point of not blogging about things that transpire in my classroom, because I tend to think that what happens there should stay there.  Pretty much.  But I’m going to make an exception today to make a point.  And it probably won’t get me in trouble to share this, so here goes:

My students, as usual, are starting the year with a unit on persuasive writing.  I teach them the basic persuasive writing stra-teegeries by having them read samples of persuasive essays (good writing and bad), by taking those pieces apart, and then analyzing what the writers did to make their points (and what they should’ve done and didn’t).  Then we do classroom debates and a whole lot of writing.  And arguing.

For our first sample essay, I read aloud and shared with my kids the essay written by Leonard Pitts* on the day after the attacks of September 11, 2001.    It’s a very powerful piece of work, and it’s chock full to the gills with all the neat stuff I’m trying to teach my gang.  Plus, it makes for a good out-loud dramatic reading.  It really gets their attention.

Anyway, this past week, after I read the piece, we talked about the kids’ memories of that day, and about how the world had changed since the attacks took place.  I also had to remind them that the piece had been written less than 48 hours after the Towers fell, so, at that time, we didn’t really know exactly who was responsible for what had happened. That explains some of the language used in the essay.

One of my kids raised her hand (I have very active and involved kids this year).  I called on her.  “We knew who attacked us.  Iraq attacked us.”

I had to explain that, again, at that time, “we” (meaning the majority of the American people) didn’t know for sure who the attackers were, but within a day or two, we were being told that a terrorist organization called al-Qaida was responsible for the slaughter.  “Right,” she said.  “The terrorists from Iraq.”

I tend to love moments like this.

Okay, I said.  I told the kids I’d give extra class participation points to a volunteer who would go home that night and find out the countries of origin of the nineteen September 11th hijackers.  I do that a lot: it encourages them to go out and find answers to their questions themselves.  It’s also a good way to get answers to questions I can’t tackle myself.  This wasn’t the case here.  I knew the answer.  I wanted them to see it for themselves.  So one of the kids volunteered.  He came in the next day with a printout.   I asked the question: Where were they from?  He read the list of countries.  No sign of Iraq on that list.  That led to a LOT of other questions, but that’s not what I teach, and not the point of the lesson, so I said we’d come back to all that another day.  But before we ended, I polled the class: How many of you thought the hijackers were Iraqi?

Almost every hand went up.

That goes to the point of this excellent piece by Dick Polman, which appeared in today’s Philadelphia Inquirer. 

The resilient myth that Saddam Hussein plotted 9/11 is proof that Mark Twain was right when he said, “A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes” …

Even today, long after this 9/11 myth has been officially and repeatedly discredited, roughly 40 percent of Americans still insist that Hussein conspired with al-Qaeda to bring down the Twin Towers. And it’s a fair bet that this myth will remain in mass circulation as long as proponents of the Iraq war persist in believing that it is savvy politics to prey on people’s ignorance.

Consider, for instance, the current TV ads – sponsored by a White House front group known as Freedom’s Watch – that seek to shore up waning support for the Iraq war by perpetuating the canard that 9/11 was a Hussein production. In their quest to stoke emotions in defiance of fact, the ad-makers aren’t exactly subtle. First, some military vets are shown making the case for staying in Iraq. Then, in the key image, we’re back on 9/11. The north tower is burning, the second tower is seconds away from igniting, and these words flash on the screen: They Attacked Us.

The ad doesn’t state that “they” refers to the Iraqis, but clever advertising is all about connecting the dots. Denizens of the reality-based community – including many in Philadelphia, who have probably seen this ad aired locally – are likely shaking their heads at this effrontery. Wasn’t this myth put to rest years ago?…

(I hate those ads, by the way.)  And for the rest of his essay, Polman debunks – again – the mythical connections between 9-11 and Iraq.  And yet, it’s obvious that not only do large numbers of people still believe this lie, but people who should know better and who should do better are still willing to stoop to using this lie to score cheap, exploitative political points.

To the point where now our kids believe it, too.

In our reading classes, we start the year with a neat little book called The Children’s Story by James Clavell.  We use this to discuss propaganda in conjunction with the unit on government that’s being taught in our social studies classes.  We also use it as an introduction to media literacy.  It’s a scary little cautionary tale from the Cold War, but it really makes a powerful point: that the minds of our children are very impressionable, and that they can be molded and shaped -very quickly and easily - for good or ill.  And that most of all, we have to teach our kids to ask questions, to be skeptical, to think for themselves, to weigh facts against opinions.  And to be suspicious of the voice of Power.

All things some adults have to learn, too, it seems.

(*: Please note that this copy of the essay by Mr. Pitts appears on a web site which is using this column as a sort of pro-war rant, something with which I disagree.  However, it’s the only version of the piece I could find on the web.  I wanted you to see it.  Feel free to ignore the other stuff.)