english
nederlands
Indymedia NL
Independent Media Centre of the Netherlands
Indymedia NL is an independent free communication organisation. Indymedia offers an alternative approach to the news by using an open publishing method for text, images, video and audio.
> contact > search > archive > help > join > publish news > open newswire > disclaimer > chat
Search

 
All Words
Any Word
Contains Media:
Only images
Only video
Only audio

Dossiers
Agenda
CHAT!
LINKS

European NewsReal

MDI's complaint against Indymedia.nl
Courtcase Deutsche Bahn vs. Indymedia.nl
Topics
anti-fascisme / racisme
europa
feminisme
gentechnologie
globalisering
kunst, cultuur en muziek
media
militarisme
natuur, dier en mens
oranje
vrijheid, repressie & mensenrechten
wereldcrisis
wonen/kraken
zonder rubriek
Events
G8
Oaxaca
Schinveld
Schoonmakers-Campagne
Help
Tips for newbies
A short intro into Indymedia NL
The policy of Indymedia NL
How to join?
Donate
Support Indymedia NL with donations!
Lawsuits cost a lot of money, we appreciate every (euro)cent you can spare!

You can also direct your donation to Dutch bank account 94.32.153 on behalf of Stichting Vrienden van Indymedia, Amsterdam (IBAN: NL41 PSTB 0009 4321 53)
Indymedia Network

www.indymedia.org

Projects
print
radio
satellite tv
video

Africa
ambazonia
canarias
estrecho / madiaq
kenya
nigeria
south africa

Canada
hamilton
london, ontario
maritimes
montreal
ontario
ottawa
quebec
thunder bay
vancouver
victoria
windsor
winnipeg

East Asia
burma
jakarta
japan
manila
qc

Europe
alacant
andorra
antwerpen
armenia
athens
austria
barcelona
belarus
belgium
belgrade
bristol
bulgaria
croatia
cyprus
estrecho / madiaq
euskal herria
galiza
germany
grenoble
hungary
ireland
istanbul
italy
la plana
liege
lille
madrid
malta
marseille
nantes
netherlands
nice
norway
oost-vlaanderen
paris/île-de-france
poland
portugal
romania
russia
scotland
sverige
switzerland
thessaloniki
toulouse
ukraine
united kingdom
valencia
west vlaanderen

Latin America
argentina
bolivia
brasil
chiapas
chile
chile sur
colombia
ecuador
mexico
peru
puerto rico
qollasuyu
rosario
santiago
tijuana
uruguay
valparaiso

Oceania
adelaide
aotearoa
brisbane
burma
darwin
jakarta
manila
melbourne
oceania
perth
qc
sydney

South Asia
india
mumbai

United States
arizona
arkansas
atlanta
austin
baltimore
big muddy
binghamton
boston
buffalo
charlottesville
chicago
cleveland
colorado
columbus
danbury, ct
dc
hampton roads, va
hawaii
houston
hudson mohawk
idaho
ithaca
kansas city
la
madison
maine
miami
michigan
milwaukee
minneapolis/st. paul
new hampshire
new jersey
new mexico
new orleans
north carolina
north texas
nyc
oklahoma
omaha
philadelphia
pittsburgh
portland
richmond
rochester
rogue valley
saint louis
san diego
san francisco
san francisco bay area
santa barbara
santa cruz, ca
seattle
tallahassee-red hills
tampa bay
tennessee
united states
urbana-champaign
utah
vermont
western mass
worcester

West Asia
armenia
beirut
israel
palestine

Topics
biotech

Process
discussion
fbi/legal updates
indymedia faq
mailing lists
process & imc docs
tech
volunteer
Credits
This site is produced by volunteers using free software where possible.

The system we use is available from:mir.indymedia.de
an alternative is available from: active.org.au/doc

Thanks to indymedia.de and mir-coders for creating and sharing mir!

Contact:
info @ indymedia.nl
Afghan fundamentalist books: US imports
Jared Israel - 09.04.2002 12:36

The US government, it said, waged war on Afghanistan, "against Islamic fundamentalism". However, where did these fundamentalist schoolbooks in Afghanistan come from??

=======================================
BUSH & THE MEDIA COVER-UP THE JIHAD SCHOOLBOOK SCANDAL
By Jared Israel
[Posted 9 April 2002]
=======================================
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!"


In a forthcoming article we will examine other "unintended consequences" of US policy in Afghanistan.


-- Jared Israel


Emperor´s Clothes is Under Attack!
(See note at end)


***********************
FURTHER READING:
***********************
1) ´Congressman: U.S. Set Up Anti-Taliban to be Slaughtered´ can be read at
 http://emperors-clothes.com/misc/rohr.htm


2) ´Washington´s Backing of Afghan Terrorists: Deliberate Policy.´
A Washington Post article with introduction by ´Emperor´s Clothes´. Can be read at  http://emperors-clothes.com/docs/anatomy.htm


3) ´CIA worked with Pakistan to create Taliban´
From ´Times of India.´ Can be read at  http://emperors-clothes.com/docs/pak.htm


4) ´´Gaping Holes in the ´CIA vs. bin Laden´ Story,´´ by Jared Israel can be read at
 http://emperors-clothes.com/news/probestop-i.htm


*******************
FOOTNOTES
*******************
A) Washington Post, March 23, 2002, "From U.S., the ABC´s of Jihad; Violent Soviet -Era Textbooks Complicate Afghan Education Efforts."
 http://emperors-clothes.com/news/abc.htm

B) The Boston Globe March 17, 2002, Sunday, THIRD EDITION FOCUS; Pg. E1 "THE TASK: EDUCATING A GENERATION OF WOMEN, AND QUICKLY WITH A FEMALE LITERACY RATE OF LESS THAN 4 PERCENT, TEACHERS FACE OBSTACLES EVEN WITH THE TALIBAN GONE" By Elizabeth Neuffer

c) The Daily Telegraph (Sydney), March 25, 2002 * WORLD; Pg. 19, "Girls´ return spells out school changes - WAR ON TERROR: A NATION´S HOPE"
By ALEXANDRE PEYRILLE and MEHRDAD BALALI in Kabul


D) Omaha World-Herald, February 8, 2002 EDITORIAL; Pg. 6B


E) March 16, 2002 Saturday, FDCH Political Transcripts, "GEORGE W. BUSH DELIVERS WEEKLY RADIO ADDRESS"
--
Fwd. from URL -  http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/jared/jihad.htm

Website: http://www.tenc.net
 

Read more about: wereldcrisis

supplements
> indymedia.nl > search > archive > help > join > publish news > open newswire > disclaimer > chat
DISCLAIMER: Indymedia NL uses the 'open posting' principle to promote freedom of speech. The news (text, images, audio and video) posted in the open newswire of Indymedia NL remains the property of the author who posted it. The views in these postings do not necesseraly reflect the views of the editorial team of Indymedia NL. Furthermore, it is not always possible to guarantee the accuracy of the postings.