News
Behind the Headlines
Two-Cents Worth
Articles
Testimony
Bible Questions
Internet Articles (2006)
Internet Articles (2005)
Internet Articles (2004)
Internet Articles (2003)
Internet Articles (2002)
Internet Articles (2001)
Books
Books
Order
Books
January 19, 2002
Islamic Brainwashing now part of politically correct public school California school curriculum
By
Jon Christian Ryter
Copyright 2002 - All Rights Reserved
To distribute this article, please post this web address or hyperlink
It
was one of those cyber stories that just popped up on the Internet one
night a week or so ago. Initially it seemed destined to remain there.
It was one of those “right-wing” stories that, even though it
had a certain ring of truth to it, it seemed almost too extreme to be
true.
Since 1947 the United States Supreme Court
has hammered any school, or school teacher, in America who has ever entertained
the idea of promoting religion in the classroom. The wall of separation
between Church and State that has now become an “iron curtain”
was initially conceived in the minds of the nine old men on the high court
in 1898. It has pretty much been the “rule of law” since Everson
v Board of Education in 1947 and McCollum v Board of Education a year
later. That fact notwithstanding, it was now being reported by various
Internet sources that a public school system in California was mandating
that all students—even fundamental Christian and Jewish students
whose ideology would be diametrically opposed to Islam—to study the
Muslim faith in the classrooms. Of course, since it is construed as a
violation of the Constitution to mandate any religious studies in the
classrooms of America’s public school systems, this was one of those
stories that seemed too incredulous to believe.
Of course, astute Americans have long realized
that the “wall of separation” between Church and State in the
United States was an extremely selective “wall.” It has been
focused specifically and exclusively on Christianity. When you examine
the landmark Supreme Court cases on religious rights and the abridgment
of those rights you will quickly discover that in every instance where
religious rights were abrogated the rights lost were lost to Christians...and
in every instance where religious rights were broadened they were expanded
to non-Christian faiths such as Buddhism, Islam...or witchcraft (which
is the religion of Satan).
The State of California has long been viewed
by the more “straight-laced” Christian community as “Sodom
on the Pacific,” with San Francisco, America’s first homosexual
haven, serving as Gomorrah. Hollywood—together with its morality-challenged
movie actors and actresses who view life through a warped rose-colored
prism—doubles as Sodom. It is no wonder then that a program demanding
the forced “study” of Islam could be mandated in the California
school system.
The first inkling that something was “constitutionally
amiss” with the California school system came shortly after the Christmas/New
Year’s break when students in San Luis Obispo, Byron and Brentwood,
California returned to their classrooms to discover that they would be
forced to “study” Islam during a three week program. What infuriated
Christian parents most is that those same students who were being forced
to study a religion which denies the deity of Jesus Christ were denied
the right—by the same school board—to wear crosses or other
symbols of Christianity or Judaism because that jewelry defied the Supreme
Court’s standing “separation” theory (even though, by the
widest stretch of the imagination—and based on case law—students
cannot be construed as the target of the separation doctrine. The separation
doctrine deals exclusively with government or quasi-government or public
agencies or offices—such as the public school system that cannot
legally mandate that their students “study” the Muslim faith
(even under the guise of “ancient culture”).
The first inkling that something was wrong
in Sodom came when students brought home handouts that discussed what
was being taught in their classrooms. Adding insult to injury after the
September 11 tragedy, parents discovered that their children were forced
to wear an Islamic robe, adopt a Muslim name by which they would be addressed
throughout the course of study and, in one school in San Luis Obispo,
to stage their own Jihad. In this post-September 11 era, parents argued
most vehemently that forcing their children to pretend they were Muslim
warriors fighting for Islam was wrong. In addition, students were required
to stage a make-believe pilgrimage to Mecca. One angry parent complained
to the Washington Times (the only major newspaper in the nation to report
the story) that they ‘...could never teach Christianity like this.”
Students who cannot bring a Christian Bible
to school, or quote Scriptures from their Bibles without running the risk
of being suspended, were forced to memorize Islamic scriptures from the
Koran (Qu’ran) in a course on Islam that is one of eleven “special
education” units that has been added to California’s social
studies classes that is now being taught all over the State. In other
words, the initial reports which suggested that the Islamic training course
was isolated to a few counties, was incorrect. The
class, which is now included in California’s curriculum standards,
was approved by State officials in 1998.
Jennifer Schroeder, the parent who
sought help from the Pacific Justice Institute, was told by the
principle of the San Luis Obispo school principle that she could not “opt
out” of the program on religious grounds. Clearly, if the school
board in San Luis Obispo had decided to hold a three week study on Christianity
and a principal denied the parents of an Islamic student the right to
“opt out,” several things would have happened. First, such an
egregious act would have headlined the evening news on every television
network. Second, the principal would have been fired before breakfast
the next day. Third, the American Civil Liberties Union would have
filed a multi- million dollar lawsuit against the school board. Fourth,
the U.S. Justice Department would have launched an investigation. Finally,
Maxine Waters, Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Louis Farrakhan and
the Islamic Council for Religious Something-or-other would have
been fighting each other for air time to denounce the Christian bigots
who were proselytizing for converts in the Islamic pool.
Peggy Green, the superintendent of
the Union School District in Byron told the Washington Times on Tuesday,
Jan. 15, 2002 that her schools are only “teaching” about Islam,
not promoting Islam as a faith. “We are not teaching religion,”
Green insisted. “We are teaching the California state-mandated
standards with state-adopted textbooks. Dressing up in costume, role-playing
and simulation games are all used to stimulate class discussion and are
common teaching practices used in other subjects as well,” she said,
adding, “There’s nothing to get upset about.” Green added
that “...her schools teach all religions in the same way.”
By that, Green apparently meant all
non-Judeo-Christian classes since California—like the other 49 States—believe
that teaching anything about Christianity (even the basic tenets of that
faith) violates the constitutional precept of separation as devised by
nine old men who apparently never read the 1st Amendment.
Learning that the Washington Times was investigating
the myriad of Internet reports on the Islamic brainwashing, Roger Wolfertz,
the deputy general counsel for the California Department of Education
told the newspaper that promoting any religion in a public school would
violate State code. Of course, everyone knew that. Wolfertz should
have sat in the class. Just as forcing students—regardless of their
theological perspective—to read the Holy Bible could, and very likely
would, be construed as promoting a religion, it is hard to understand
how Wolfertz or Peggy Green could, with a straight face,
insist that forcing students of any theological perspective to read, and
memorize, Koranic scripture could be construed as anything other than
promoting a religion.
What the State
of California did in 1998 is expressly forbidden by the 1st Amendment.
By mandating a “course” in Islam, the State of California legislated
a state-sanctioned religion and then tried to disguise it as a course
in “ancient culture.” Critics of the program who learned
about the course from Internet reports initiated by the Pacific Justice
Institute and an article written for Assist News Service by
Assembly of God pastor and former PTL associate Austin Miles were
outraged when they learned that California schools were forcing Christian
students to “study” Islam. “I don’t think 7th graders
should be reading the Koran,” Phyllis Schlafly, president
of Eagle Forum told the Times. “They shouldn’t be playing
games with another religion...It’s just an outrage.” Ken
Conner, who replaced Gary Bauer as president of Family Research
Council agreed with Schlafly. Conner told the Times
that if students were to dress up like Pilgrims and give thanks to God
in the classroom, civil rights activists “...would be apoplectic.
[It] reflects a terrible double standard. Anything that smacks of Christianity
is systematically excluded in the classroom, but everything less like
Wicca to Islam is welcomed. This case exhibits all the more that Christians
find themselves in a disfavored class of religion...”
Conner’s assessment was, unfortunately,
all too correct.
The California liberals have shown, all
too graphically and much too frequently, that it is not the free exercising
of religious liberty which they find objectionable, it is the exercising
of Christianity which they find distasteful.
The California State School Board used such
secrecy and stealth to implement the new class, called World History
and Geography: Medieval and Early Modern Times that only teachers
with a “need to know” were “in the loop.” Elizabeth
Christina Lemings, a school teacher in the Union School District,
was one of those not important enough to be in the loop. She found out
about the program when her son Joseph, a student in the school
where she teaches, brought home one of the handouts. Angered by the double
standard, she contacted Assist News. Miles interviewed her
at her school. “We could never teach Christianity like this,”
Lemings told him. “We can’t even mention the name of
Jesus in the public schools, but over there...” she pointed
to the adjacent building, “...they teach Islam as the true religion—and
students are taught about Islam and how to pray to Allah.”
Sounds like a violation of the Church and
State doctrine to me. Of course, to the politically-correct liberal who
actually believes that racism can only be practiced by whites against
blacks and never blacks against whites, they can’t see a violation
of the separation doctrine unless the religion being “taught,”
“hawked,” or worshiped is Christianity.
Like Jennifer Schroeder, who told
the Pacific Justice Institute that the new text book used in that
short term course presented Islam in a positive manner but depicted Christianity
in a negative light, Lemings saw the same thing and confessed her
frustrations to Miles. References to Christianity were centered
on martyrdom during the Inquisition and the Salem witch hunts—the
text of which was printed in bold face type to make certain Christianity
was very clearly and noticeably depicted as a vindictive, punitive religion
that used fear to keep its followers in line. No mention was made of the
Muslim propensity to cut off the hands and feet of petty thieves, and
the beheading of murderers, adulteresses, homosexuals, or those despised
by the Islamic community—in particular those attempting to convert
Muslims to Judaism, Christianity, Buddhism or Hinduism.
The textbook, Across the Centuries,
was printed by Houghton-Mifflin. Showing its liberal bias, the
textbook presents the “miraculous events” Muhammad claimed
led up to his writing the Koran (Qu’ram) as fact. When miraculous
events are described with respect to Christianity, disclaimers are used
in every instance to mitigate them, thereby denying Christian miracles
the credibility afforded Muslim claims that lack physical evidence.
The
Houghton-Mifflin Role and the Oil Foundations
As radio commentator Paul Harvey
might say, “...and now for the rest of the story.” It was not
accidental that the book Across the Centuries suddenly appeared
on the market. Nor was it an accident that it was an inflammatory anti-Christian
text that presented Islam as the one true faith. Nor was it by accident
that the book was purchased by the California State Board of Education
for inclusion in its curriculum.
While most of those who read copies of the
Austin Miles cyber article published by Assist News Service
or emails containing hyperlinks or excerpts from the news release posted
by the Pacific Justice Institute immediately thought that the “special
course” was speedily concocted by politically-correct National
Education Association bureaucrats in California to mitigate anti-Islamic
sentiment in the United States after the 9.11 tragedy. Not true.
By Saturday, January 19, 2002 California
school authorities and the news media were attempting to justify the program
as a post-September 11 initiative that was necessary due to the volume
of threats against Arab and other Islamic Americans. Reports of hate crimes
and harassment against Arab-Americans flood Islamic advocates’ offices
although only one incident of actual violence against someone thought
to be an Arab American and one threat of violence against five Islamic
students in Palmdale, California in retaliation to 9.11 was reported to,
or confirmed by, police departments anywhere in the United States in
the wake of the World Trade Center and Pentagon attacks. Nevertheless,
based on reports issued by Islamic groups, the media reported that hundreds
of instances of harassment, intimidation and violence had occurred.
In Portland, Oregon, parents of Islamic
students at the Muslim Educational Trust School asked city police
to station officers at the school to prevent retaliation for the September
11 attack. The police, after carefully noting that there had been no violence
against the Portland Islamic community, nor had there been any threats
to Islamics in the Portland area, increased patrols in the school zone
but declined to post ‘sentries.” The parents filed intimidation
reports with the Council of American-Islamic Relations which immediately
reported the “incident” as another example of Islamic harassment.
The school’s administrator recruited parents to walk the school grounds
throughout the day to prevent “retaliation.”
In Palmdale, California there were threats.
Angry students posted an Islamic “hit list”
that contained the names of all five Islamic students in Palmdale High
School. All five students were temporarily removed from the school. Two
of them—Indonesian Muslims—were brothers, Abdul and Hanif
Bachmid. Until the September 11 attack the Bachmid brother’s
mother, Aisha Attamimi, said the family had never experienced any
form of discrimination in the United States. It was the Palmdale incident
that brought Department of Education Secretary Rod Paige into the
fray. Paige sent a “dear colleague” letter to every educator
in the United States urging teachers to implement classroom discussions
and assemblies honoring the victims of 9.11 and educating the student
bodies not to foster hate or target Arab-American students for harassment
or blame.
Inadvertently Paige, who was trying
to prevent potential violence from occurring in America’s schools,
opened the floodgates that began the spin that Islam is a religion of
peace and that only extremists like Osama bin Laden advocated violence.
And, also inadvertently, Paige caused the initial reaction expressed
by most American Christians and Jews when news of the Islamic “education”
program dribbled into the national news over a period of two weeks. They
automatically believed it was a post-September 11 “spin” program.
It was not. The California program actually began in 1990 when Muslim
activist and Sacramento-area businessman Shabbir Mansuri
formed the Council on Islamic Education.
In April, 1986 Muslim advocate Uzma Unus
wrote the following in Islamic Horizons magazine: “Most history
books present Islam in a very negative way. In one case I heard a teacher
compare Prophet Muhammad to Hitler. Another one said that
Muslims forced people who followed pagan religions to convert to Islam...About
90% of what is written in the history books is either false or twisted
around to make Islam sound like a terrorist religion.” Very clearly,
since Israel gained statehood in 1948 the Muslims have confirmed over
and over again that Islam is a terrorist religion. If there was any doubt
after watching one suicide bomber after another kill innocent Jewish men,
women and children, Osama bin Laden and his al Qaeda terrorists,
Yassir Arafat and his Palestinian Liberation Front terrorists,
Hamas and the Hezbollah have more than confirmed the terrorist
nature of Islam.
In 1988 Shabbir Mansuri, a
Fountain Valley, California businessman (outside Sacramento), decided
to do something about what he called “the false description of Islam”
in America. Mansuri founded the Council on Islamic Education
in 1990 and immediately began to engage in a dialogue with several textbook
manufacturers without much luck. The textbook companies in America weren’t
too interested in Mansuri’s views; nor were they prepared
to challenge the United States Supreme Court by publishing thousands of
copies of a textbook that contained a theological dialogue which which
most Americans disagreed. Using his Islamic connections in the oil rich
Mideast Arabian peninsula nations, Mansuri discovered that oil
company foundations who endow most institutions of higher learning in
the United States also profited handsomely from their 68% ownership of
most of the oil pumped from beneath the sands of the Arabian desert were
very interested in his plight.
The Rockefeller family, which owns
controlling interest in the Seven Sisters (now ten oil companies
that are slowly remerging back into the original Standard Oil in
order to exercise more global clout): Mobil, Exxon, Chevron, Standard
Oil of New Jersey, Standard Oil of Ohio, Amoco, Sunoco, Conoco, Texaco,
Atlantic Richfield, and British Petroleum [now known as BP
America]) has, throughout most of its tainted history, been very conscious
of the public’s perception of the Rockefeller name since that
perception has never been good. The Seven Sisters and Royal
Dutch Shell actually own, in partnership agreements with the Arab
nations, almost every oil well in the Mideast, in what is now commonly
called Russia, and in the South Pacific with the People’s Republic
of China. A secret agreement was signed between Exxon/Mobil, Texaco/Amoco
and the People’s Republic of China almost two years ago to
“farm” what is believed to be the largest untapped oil reserve
in the world in the South China Sea around the Pacific islands America
won from Japan in World War II. Those islands: Baker Island, Howland Island,
Jarvis Island, Johnson Atoll, Kingman Reef, Nassau Island and Palmyra
Island were abandoned by the Clinton-Gore Administration. When
residents on those islands petitioned Clinton Secretary of State Madeleine
K. Albright to re-establish American sovereignty on them, Albright
refused to recognize their “American” status. When the Clinton
Administration renounced American claims to the islands, the People’s
Republic of China claimed sovereignty of over 1,000 nautical miles
of the South China Sea—precisely where these massive oil deposits
were discovered over 20 years ago. Immediately after this occurred, the
People’s Republic of China announced a joint IPO with Exxon/Mobil
and Texaco/Amoco. Now, in addition to the Seven Sisters being in
bed with Iraq, Iran, Libya, Syria and our tepid pseudo-allies in the Gulf
States, we now learn that the Seven Sisters are also in bed with
our most dedicated enemy (and most recent “trading partner”
who dumps trillions of dollars of slave labor goods in America every year
and uses trades the balance of payments for weapons systems which they
have promised to use to destroy us in a nuclear firestorm when they are
sufficiently armed).
Since a growing number
of Americans are beginning to realize that American and European oil cartels
own a major interest in the Mideast oil fields, do oil companies—whose
foundations control the education curriculum of every university they
endow—have a growing need to paint Islam as a religion of peace?
You bet your life they do.
Houghton-Mifflin
and the Council on Islamic Education
By 1999 textbook companies—particularly
Houghton-Mifflin—were suddenly very interested in Mansuri’s
views. In fact, they were so interested they consented to publishing textbooks
from the Muslim perspective—for non-Muslim students in non-Muslim
schools. And even more, they decided to publish a textbook that would
challenge the separation of church and state doctrine. Houghton-Mifflin
had to be convinced that any potential challenges to Across the Centuries
in the United States Supreme Court would not be successful before risking
a financial loss that would result from printing a textbook that might
have to be withdrawn from the market if a successful challenge to its
use was launched by the Christian right.
Mansuri, who
describes himself as a “...K-12 resource organization” has been
able to do one thing that no Christian educational organization has ever
succeeded in doing. The offices for the Council on Islamic Education
are housed at Carden Hall Elementary School in Fountain Valley,
California. Clearly, since CIE promotes Islam—a religion—and
distributes copies of the Koran to California schools from that office,
there has never been a more clear violation of the 1st Amendment prohibition
of a “State-sponsored” religion—the State’s rhetoric
about merely teaching “ancient culture” notwithstanding. The
California school system—and thereby the California State government—has
legislated a State-sponsored religion by mandating that every student
in the California public school system be indoctrinated in that religion—and
that they be required to memorize scriptures from the Koran...and, that
in at least one instance, students were forced to role play as Islamic
“freedom fighters” [i.e., terrorists].
Mansuri was one of the editors hired
by Houghton-Mifflin to put together the textbook Across the
Centuries, 21st Century Edition. From that textbook, the Council
on Islamic Education created a handbook it now promotes through its
website. The spiral-bound book, The Crusaders from Medieval Europe
, like Across the Centuries, presents the Crusades from the
Muslim perspective with the Christians depicted as the blood-thirsty aggressors
and the Muslims as the peace-loving victims of Catholicism.
The Council on Islamic Education
employs scholars in history, religion, education, curriculum development—and
teachers. It works directly with textbook publishers like Houghton-Mifflin
and local and State school boards to promote their new Kindergarten to
grade 12 social-science teaching materials. With an annual payroll now
in the hundreds of thousands of dollars, the question—which has not
yet been answered—that should be raised is precisely where the Council
(which is a 501c3 foundation) gets its funds. Who are its contributors,
and how much has each contributor donated?
Clearly Houghton-Mifflin—which
wouldn’t speak to him when he formed CIE in 1990—is sold
on Mansuri today. “[The Council on Islamic Education
is] very professional,” Houghton Mifflin’s Editorial
Director, Abigail Jungreis, said. “[They are] very
informed and they have in their heart the same thing we do which is a
desire for good, accurate information to children. We’ve had a really
good relationship with them over the years.” Jungreis noted
that because of the Council on Islamic Education, Houghton-Mifflin
textbooks are now able “...to show what the Crusades were like for
the Muslims. We’ve been able to give several perspectives on an event
like that.” Justifying using an Islamic religious organization (posing
as an educational association) to edit textbooks that will be used predominantly
by Christian and Jewish students, Jungreis noted that “...the
American melting pot also necessitates including different perspectives
in textbooks.”
Unknown to the parents
of Christian and Jewish students in the California public school system
is the fact that after the school system formally voted on and accepted
the Islamic religious textbook, Across the Centuries, the 21st Century
Edition, the Council on Islamic Education was retained by the
State of California to re-educate 8,000 public school teachers on the
best methods to teach Islam in the public school system. In addition,
the Council has a speakers’ bureau which has held in-school
assemblies where they have promoted the peace-loving Islamic faith to
over 100,000 California Middle School students since the September 11
tragedy.
Interestingly, the Council on Islamic
Education attempts to reach American children at about the same age
that the Islamic madrassa (Muslim religious seminaries) draw them.
They catch them at the most impressionable age when it is easiest to manipulate
their minds.
The
Post-9.11 Spin on Islam
Once again, most Americans who stumbled
across what began as a cyber story on the Internet believed the California
program was developed by the PC Police in the California Assembly to paint
Islam as a user-friendly religion. America was likely more stunned by
the attack on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on
September 11, 2001 than it was by the “surprise” attack by the
Imperial Japanese Navy on Pearl Harbor, Hawaii on December 7, 1941. More
lives were lost—and the lives lost on 9.11 were almost all civilians,
where on the Hawaiian Islands in 1941, only a small percentage of the
dead were civilians. As far as most Americans were concerned on September
11, they wanted revenge—and they wanted it on September 12. Several
heads of States who emphatically declared that the Americans needed to
be able to prove Osama bin Laden was guilty before waging war on the nation
of Afghanistan which had offered bin Laden sanctuary. To those heads of
State, most Americans calmly suggested that if they wanted to protect
bin Laden that they take a hike—to Kabul or Kandahar where US bombs
would soon be falling.
America was divided...but it was not a 50-50
split. Over 81% wanted revenge...and they wanted it to happen on September
12. Traumatized, even the media liberals temporarily became conservatives.
The American flag flew everywhere—even on CNN.
However, after about ten days the shock
wore off and the liberal media realized, once again, they were liberal.
ABC and CNN almost simultaneously banned the display of
the American flag and even forbade all of their reporters and visiting
commentators from wearing the symbolic red, white and blue ribbon. (Interestingly
when CNN and ABC took up the “gay rights” banner
a couple years earlier, reporters and visiting commentators were all but
forced to don the gay rights ribbon even if they were opposed to enhanced
rights for people who practiced same sex sodomy.)
ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNBC and CNN,
like most American international corporations who, although they were
born and bred in the United States, see themselves as transnational media
companies. As such, the management of each earth station and satellite
network (except Fox News) decided that displaying the American
flag showed “American bias.” Even the constant 9.11 coverage
was suddenly viewed by the mainstream TV media as biased.
Every news item on the major networks that
depicted American casualties of 9.11 was accompanied by largely fictitious
reports of Afghanistan civilian casualties from the al Qaeda’s
television news network in Qatar and a Muslim wire service in Pakistan.
From that point on, both ABC and
CNN attempted to reeducate America on the peaceful nature of Islam
by broadcasting one program after another on the Muslim faith or culture,
and driving their audiences to the Fox News Network. America had
been watching the benevolent nature of the peace loving Islamic fundamentalists
in the Holy Lands for the past decade as one suicide bomber after another
drove their explosives-laden Mercedes into crowds of Israeli women and
children, attacked school buses filled with Israeli children with AK-47s
and randomly assassinated Israeli citizens simply for being Jews.
By the first of October, conservatives were
pretty much tired of the network news’ presentation not only of the
9.11 tragedy but the War on Terrorism which was being portrayed
by them as a war on the civilian population of Afghanistan.
And, even though the cheap plastic American
flags with the cheap plastic window mounts were now piling up in the markdown
bins at K-Mart and Wal-Mart, America’s sense of patriotism
was not diminished, nor had their zeal for vengeance been assuaged. The
American people still wanted Osama bin Laden served up on a platter—dead
and gutted. There was a fear in America that if he was taken alive that
bin Laden might somehow escape death. And, that was totally unacceptable
to America—at least, to conservative America.
On October 5, 2001, Lynne Cheney,
who like her husband Vice President Dick Cheney is a true
patriot, gave an address at the Dallas institute of Humanities and
Culture. Responding, in that speech, to an article that appeared in
the New York Times decrying America’s ignorance of the cultures
of the other nations of the world, Cheney rebutted the Times by
saying: “Let me suggest that if there is a failure here, it is lack
of commitment to this nation’s history.”
Taking Cheney’s remarks personal
as he struggled through the final phases of California’s new “ancient
cultures” indoctrination program, Shabbir Mansuri struck
back at the vice president’s wife. “What particularly bothered
me was that Cheney said, in effect, that we don’t need to
know anything about the Muslim world,” Mansuri told the media.
“The United States, like any other nation, is part of the global
community. We need to know about each other.” Mansuri added
that there are now seven million Muslims in the United States. Four million
of them are immigrants.
One is quite naturally
forced to wonder—of those four million— how many are “legal”
immigrants with valid, non-expired student visas, work visas, or citizenship
applications on file with the Immigration and Naturalization Service.
