Bush & the Media Cover Up the Jihad Schoolbook Scandal
April 09 2002, http://www.uscrusade.com/
by Jared Israel, emperors-clothes.com
Have you heard about the Afghan Jihad schoolbook
scandal?
Or perhaps I should say, "Have you heard about
the Afghan Jihad schoolbook scandal that's waiting to
happen?"
Because it has been almost unreported in the Western
media that the US government shipped - and continues to
ship - millions of Islamist (that's short for Islamic
fundamentalist) textbooks into Afghanistan.
Only one English-speaking newspaper we could find has
investigated this issue: the Washington Post. The story
appeared March 23rd. (A)
According to Washington Post investigators, over the
past twenty years the US has spent millions of dollars
producing fanatical schoolbooks, which were then
distributed in Afghanistan.
"The primers, which were filled with talk of
jihad and featured drawings of guns, bullets,
soldiers and mines, have served since then [i.e.,
since the violent destruction of the Afghan secular
government in the early 1990s] as the Afghan school
system's core curriculum. Even the Taliban used the
American-produced books..." -- Washington Post,
23 March 2002 (A)
According to the Post, these violent Islamist
schoolbooks, which "served...as the Afghan school
system's core curriculum" produced "unintended
consequences."
Core curriculum? Unintended consequences?
Yes, reports the Washington Post, according to unnamed
officials the schoolbooks "steeped a generation in [Islamist]
violence."
How could this result be unintended? Did they expect
that having fundamentalist schoolbooks in the core
curriculum would produce moderate Muslims?
LET'S BE REASONABLE
Nobody with normal intelligence could expect to
distribute millions of violent Islamist schoolbooks
without influencing school children towards violent
Islamism. Therefore one would assume that the unnamed US
officials who, we are told, are distressed at these
"unintended consequences" must previously have
been unaware of the Islamist content of the schoolbooks.
But surely someone was aware. The US government can't
write, edit, print and ship millions of violent, Muslim
fundamentalist primers into Afghanistan without somebody
in high places (in the US government) approving those
primers.
So if the books weren't supposed to be Islamist, that
is, if their fanatical content contradicted US policy in
Afghanistan, shouldn't the mass media and top
politicians, such as President George Bush, now be
calling for an investigation? Shouldn't they be demanding
to know the identity of the official or officials who
subverted the *intended* US policy by flooding
Afghanistan with jihad primers?
Indeed, considering the disastrous consequences,
shouldn't US officials and the media be questioning the
very practice of violating the sovereignty of other
countries by distributing millions of Islamic
fundamentalist schoolbooks?
Yet after a thorough Internet search we could find no
evidence that any mainstream Western newspaper, with the
exception of the Washington Post, or any TV station or
government leader has questioned - let alone denounced -
sending fundamentalist schoolbooks to Afghanistan.
Quite the contrary.
For example, here's what the Boston Globe (owned by
the NY Times) wrote about the old textbooks:
"Those schoolbooks that still exist are pro-Taliban
screeds and deemed unusable."
-- Boston Globe, March 17, 2002 (B)
This is implicitly misleading. How could Elizabeth
Neuffer, who wrote this article, and who is the Globe's
UN Bureau Chief, not know that these schoolbooks were
made in USA? Was the UN also involved in distributing the
Islamist books? Perhaps instead of hiding US complicity,
she should do some investigative reporting!
Other newspapers went further, lying more elaborately
about US involvement. Here is the Daily Telegraph from
Sydney, Australia:
[START DAILY TELEGRAPH EXCERPT]
"AFGHAN children ran, skipped and dawdled to
their classrooms like pupils everywhere yesterday for
the start of a new school year -- with girls and
women teachers back in class and subjects like math
replacing the Islamic dogma of the Taliban.
"In a symbolic break from a war-scarred past,
children opened new textbooks written by Afghan
scholars based at universities in the US.
"There are even pictures of people -- images
banned by the fundamentalist Taliban."
- The Daily Telegraph (Sydney), March 25, 2002 (C)
[END DAILY TELEGRAPH EXCERPT]
By beginning the article with the irrelevant but
cheery image, "Afghan children ran, skipped and
dawdled, etc.," the Telegraph prepares us for an
upbeat news experience. We are not disappointed. In the
new schoolbooks, we are told:
"There are even pictures of people -- images
banned by the fundamentalist Taliban."
This creates the impression that the Taliban were
responsible for the bad old texts. Good thing we invaded
Afghanistan and brought US influence to bear!
Unfortunately, as the Washington Post investigators
reported:
"Even the Taliban used the American-produced
books, though the radical movement scratched out
human faces in keeping with its strict fundamentalist
code." -- Washington Post, March 23, 2002
Other than their objections to the human face, the
Taliban were perfectly happy with the US-produced primers.
Next, as if presenting evidence of a sea change, the
Telegraph tells us great news: Afghan children now have
new schoolbooks "written by Afghan scholars based at
universities in the US."
Similarly, an article five weeks earlier in the Omaha
World-Herald declares that, "Afghanistan stands at
least a chance of hauling a modern, healthy society up
out of the ashes of war and oppression," partly
because University of Nebraska at Omaha "officials
and staffers" will be "cranking up their
presses in neighboring Pakistan" to churn out
schoolbooks, all funded by "a $ 6.5 million grant
from the U.S. Agency for International Development [AID]."
(D)
Neither newspaper mentions the fact that the bad *old*
schoolbooks "were developed in the early 1980s under
an AID grant to the University of Nebraska-Omaha and its
Center for Afghanistan Studies." -- Washington Post,
March 23, 2002)
What about the US government? Have any US congressmen
demanded an investigation to find out who in the US
government was involved in the production of jihad
primers that "steeped a generation in [Islamist]
violence"?
No they have not.
SPEAKING OF FORKED TONGUES...
What about George Walker Bush?
You may recall that George and Laura Bush have made
passionate speeches denouncing Islamic fundamentalism. At
first Mr. Bush told us we needed to attack Afghanistan in
order to stop Mr. bin Laden. But later on he (and Laura
Bush) told us we were fighting to crush the vicious
fundamentalists.
Has George Bush said anything about the textbooks?
Yes, Mr. Bush talked about the jihad primers in a
March 16th radio broadcast. He held nothing back:
"And before the end of the year, we'll have
sent almost 10 million of them [that is, new
textbooks] to the children of Afghanistan. These
textbooks will teach tolerance and respect for human
dignity *instead of indoctrinating students with
fanaticism and bigotry*." -- My emphasis - Radio
Broadcast, March 16, 2002 (E)
Note the phrase, "instead of indoctrinating
students with fanaticism and bigotry."
So according to Bush, Afghan school children won't
have to contend with bad schoolbooks anymore because
finally the US has taken charge, replacing those other
guys, those evil educators who published textbooks "indoctrinating
students with fanaticism and bigotry."
The amazing thing is not only that he tells such total
lies but that he delivers them with such righteous
indignation.
What about the new textbooks? Will they "teach
tolerance and respect for human dignity" as Honest
George promises?
To be precise (which may be an unwise move in the New
World Order) how will the new textbooks that George Bush
Junior is shipping into Afghanistan differ from the old
ones?
You know, those old books that were also designed at
the University of Nebraska at Omaha and also paid for by
US AID? You know, those old, un-American books that
George Bush Junior attacked for "indoctrinating
students with fanaticism and bigotry"? You know,
those terrible old books that were shipped into
Afghanistan by US AID when George Bush Senior was
President?
Here's the Washington Post again:
"On Feb. 4, [Chris Brown, head of book
revision for AID's Central Asia Task Force] arrived
in Peshawar, the Pakistani border town in which the
textbooks were to be printed, to oversee hasty
revisions to the printing plates. Ten Afghan
educators labored night and day, scrambling to
replace rough drawings of weapons with sketches of
pomegranates and oranges, Brown said."] - My
emphasis, Washington Post, March 23, 2002
So it appears that the only change is that some
violent pictures have been removed from the printing
plates and some fruit has been added. There is no
indication that the texts have been changed.
What does a non-fundamentalist Afghan educator think
about the new schoolbooks?
"'The pictures [in the old schoolbooks] are
horrendous to school students, *but the texts are
even much worse,'* said Ahmad Fahim Hakim, an Afghan
educator who is a program coordinator for Cooperation
for Peace and Unity, a Pakistan-based nonprofit.'"
-- (My emphasis, Washington Post, March 23, 2002)
So the Untied States government is right now shipping
into Afghanistan millions of Islamic Fundamentalist
schoolbooks whose texts, according to a non-Fundamentalist
Afghan educator, are not just "horrendous,"
they are "much worse."
Is it possible that this is all a terrible mistake?
That Mr. Bush and US AID just don't know what's in the
new schoolbooks?
Apparently not.
According to the Washington Post, the
"White House defends the religious content" of
the schoolbooks. And as for US AID, the Agency for
International Development, which pays for the books:
'It's not AID's policy to support
religious instruction,' Stratos said. 'But we went
ahead with this project because the primary purpose .
. . is to educate children, which is predominantly a
secular activity.'"
(-- Washington Post, March 23, 2002)
So because education is predominantly secular it's OK
for the schoolbooks to be fundamentalist. Likewise, since
marriage is predominatly monogamous it's OK to cheat on
your wife. And since banks are after all mainly places
where people deposit money to keep it safe, it's fine to
go rob a bank.
Got it?
Mr. Bush describes the texts of the old books as
"indoctrinating students with fanaticism and bigotry."
But note, having been republished in the new books, these
exact same texts have undergone a transformation. They
have been reborn as "religious instruction" (says
US AID) or "religious content"
(says the White House). It's a modern
miracle.
Reading these news reports and statements one might
feel a certain sympathy for citizens of the US and allied
countries, required to hold in their minds at one time a)
the conviction that Mr. Bush is sincerely fighting
Islamic fundamentalism in Afghanistan and b) the
knowledge that the US is spending millions of dollars to
indoctrinate Afghan school children with Islamic
fundamentalism.
Not to worry. This problem has been solved by the US
and allied mass media, which, with the exception of the
Washington Post, have never told their readers and
viewers who it was that produced the old books or what it
is that's in the new ones.
Even the Washington Post has pulled its punches. For
example, consider the headline of the March 23rd article,
the only one that deals critically with the jihad primers.
Here's the headline:
"From U.S., the ABC's of Jihad; Violent
Soviet-Era Textbooks Complicate Afghan Education
Efforts."
"Violent Soviet-Era textbooks." This phrase
doesn't even make it clear that the books were shipped in
by theUSA! They could have been hateful *Russian* books.
And the phrase, "Complicate Afghan Education
Efforts" sounds like the books are hindering current
US attempts at effecting progressive change. Nobody would
guess from this headline that US AID has been forcing
Islamic fundamentalist texts on Afghan kids for 20 years.
And that they're still importing the same fundamentalist
texts today.
(This is important because studies show that with any
given article, most people only read the headline.)
In the body of the article itself the Post asserts
without offering any evidence that steeping "a
generation in [Islamist] violence" was an "unintended
consequence" of giving these kids violent Islamist
schoolbooks.
"Unintended consequence" is fast becoming
the US Establishment's favorite excuse for the many
disasters of its foreign policy. "We didn't know. We
weren't prepared. We used old maps. We didn't see the
train. We thought there were tanks in the refugee column.
Who could have expected this to happen?" and on and
on.
But does the case of the Islamist textbooks seem like
"unintended consequences?" Or, quite the
contrary, doesn't it show every indication of being
"deliberate policy!"
1) 'Congressman: U.S. Set Up Anti-Taliban to be Slaughtered' This account of how the US covertly supported the Taliban can be read at
http://emperors-clothes.com/misc/rohr.htm
2) 'Washington's Backing of Afghan Terrorists: Deliberate Policy' Article from "Washington Post' with introductory note from 'Emperor's Clothes'. Can be read at http://emperors-clothes.com/docs/anatomy.htm
3) 'Taliban Camps U.S. bombed in Afghanistan Were Built by NATO'
Documentation from the 'N.Y. Times'. U.S. and Saudi aid to Afghan-based terrorism totaled $6 billion or more. Can be read at http://emperors-clothes.com/docs/camps.htm
4) 'CIA worked with Pakistan to create Taliban'
From 'Times of India.' Can be read at http://emperors-clothes.com/docs/pak.htm
5) 'Osama bin Laden: Made In USA'
Excerpt from article on U.S. bombing of a pill factory in Sudan in August 1998. Argues that bin Laden was and still may be a CIA asset. Can be read at http://www.emperors-clothes.com/articles/jared/madein.htm
6) 'Excerpts from News Reports - Bin Laden in the Balkans' evidence that bin Laden aided or is aiding the U.S.-sponsored forces in Bosnia, Kosovo and Macedonia. Can be read at http://emperors-clothes.com/news/binl.htm
7) 'The Creation Called Osama,' by Shamsul Islam can be read at http://emperors-clothes.com/analysis/creat.htm
Reproduced from:
http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/jared/jihad.htm
|
Features
Fallujah and the Reality of War Saturday, November 6, 2004
Contempt from above Tuesday, May 11, 2004
Iraqi newspaper is closed down Monday, March 29, 2004
Blix: Iraq war was illegal Friday, March 5, 2004
In Iraq, the word for US profits is caucuses Thursday, January 29, 2004
Predictions for the US in this 'crucial year' Sunday, January 4, 2004
Another crisis, Mr Annan Sunday, January 4, 2004
A nation gripped by paranoia Sunday, January 4, 2004
Seeing no evil doesn't mean there is no evil Saturday, January 3, 2004
African-American Woman Brings Us Hope For Peace Saturday, January 3, 2004
No respect for international law Sunday, December 28, 2003
Controlling the 'Fourth Front' Sunday, December 21, 2003
Iraq's Real Weapon Of Mass Destruction Wednesday, December 17, 2003
Saddam's capture: Irrelevant, except for American voters Tuesday, December 16, 2003
Let Saddam face ICC for trial Tuesday, December 16, 2003
Saddam Hussein has been Captured Sunday, December 14, 2003
America's arrogance knows no bounds Sunday, December 14, 2003
Our sympathies, Mr Nahas Saturday, December 13, 2003
Betrayal of the American people Saturday, December 6, 2003
There Were Nine Crusades, Bush's Makes The Tenth Thursday, December 4, 2003
Paying The Price For An Infantile 'War' Sunday, November 23, 2003
Defining the Resistance in Iraq Monday, November 10, 2003
Those who broke Iraq should pay to fix it Thursday, October 16, 2003
Bush's different tune Saturday, October 4, 2003
Another Falsehood on Iraq Goes Unchallenged Tuesday, September 30, 2003
|