Lars Larson: Textbooks not telling truth about 9-11

by Lars Larson

Should American school textbooks tell the kids the truth about the 9-11 terrorist attacks?

I think that America’s textbooks should tell the truth about 9-11, and apparently they do not.

Brigitte Gabriel, who heads up ACT! for America Education, has spent the past two years looking at what’s in America’s textbooks. You know, more than a decade has gone by since the terrorist attacks on 9-11-2001. And what she’s found is disturbing.

She’s found that those textbooks tell that America was attacked, but they don’t tell why and they don’t tell who. They mention groups like al-Qaeda and the Taliban, but they don’t say what the religious motivation was. They don’t explain that America was attacked by Islamic radicals, who believed that they were acting in the name of their own religion.

They believed they were attacking America in the name of their religion. Not explaining that to kids leaves out the why, of why America was attacked ten years ago.

Post to Twitter Post to Facebook Post to LinkedIn Post to Reddit

Posted by at 08:06 | Posted in Education, Terrorism | 29 Comments |Email This Post Email This Post |Print This Post Print This Post
  • Rupert in Springfield

     Just read through the Executive Summary of the study. Its a little bit scary. If what the study says about the textbooks (I do not have them, thus could not verify) is true it is wildly at odds with what is stated in the Quran.

    Im not sure I can say this comes from a place of seeking to lie about the history and principles of Islam however.

    Rather I think it comes from a very PC practice of watering down any cultures transgressions other than those of the United states.

    I have a feeling if I looked into it I could complete the same study showing softball treatment of virtually any culture with far greater atrocities than the US.

    To be sure, Islam is an interesting case in that the Quran is specifically hateful or disparaging of non believers on a level not found in any other religious text that comes to mind.

    That perhaps makes the soft balling of the religion and its history a little less excusable, however I doubt it is unique.

    • Crabman34

      Ah yes, because the textbook writers of America (which sort of means Texas, because their standards influence the lot) are in on a giant conspiracy to excuse Islam as a whole. They probably have an entire chapter on the benefits of Shariah law!

      Textbooks in the U.S. today:  abstinence is good, evolution never happened, climate change is a joke, but Islam?  It’s great!

      Someone take away this guy’s license to write words that other people are able to read.

      • Rupert in Springfield

        >are in on a giant conspiracy to excuse Islam as a whole.

        Actually if you had taken the time to read what you are replying to, you would have seen I was saying the exact opposite of this.

        >Someone take away this guy’s license to write words that other people are able to read.

        OK, so put you down as a NO vote on the first amendment.

        • Crabman34

          You, sir, are a fool.  1st amendment applies to the government’s infringement in free speech.  If you had taken the time to read what you are replying to, you have would have seen I was not suggesting anything about the government taking away Lars’ right to be a moron.

          But, you’re (kind of) right, my point about Islam was mostly directed at Lars’ post.  I replied to your post because as usual you are blindly agreeing with people like Lars while claiming to know enough about the Quran to say that the textbooks are wildly at odds with it.

          • Crabman34

            infringement “of” free speech.

            an extra “have” there.

            There’s nothing wrong with individuals calling other individuals morally defective, intellectually dishonest (ugh I hate that term, bandied about by the smug to grant them the pretense of being smart), etc.  My issue with Lars is that he is PAID by many outlets to spew this nonsense.  That’s what I meant before.  And I stand by it.  

            It has NOTHING to do with the constitution.  And I suspect, using your pedantic parlance, that if I looked into it, you probably already know this.

  • Ramalama

    I bet they also omit the fact that a month prior to the attacks, the President received a warning that bin Laden was determined to strike in the U.S. The President continued on his vacation that month.

    • Rupert in Springfield

      Not exactly a revelatory warning given the attacks on the USS Cole, Khobar Towers, Dar es Salaam, Nairobi etc. (look em up). As well as the fact that the WTC had suffered an attempted terrorist attack prior to 9/11 (yep, look that one up as well).

      Of course Clinton vacationed as well in that time but obviously you are too intellectually dishonest to imply blame to him as you do Bush.

      Could you guys get better writers and move on from “it’s all Bush’s fault? You kind of make it too easy when this is all you got.

      • Ramalama

        I understand it’s not all Bush’s fault. 

        I don’t think the 9/11 attack’s success is all his fault, but he was President, and it happened on his watch, so he should bear some responsibility. 

        • Rupert in Springfield

          >but he was President, and it happened on his watch, so he should bear some responsibility.

          That’s about as ridiculous a statement as i have ever heard.

          Look, just take my word on this one ok?

          First, If Clinton were president for 9/11 and anyone suggested merely because he was president he bore some responsibility, you would call them looney and rightly so.

          Second, if you expect anyone but foaming at the mouth Bush haters will take your suggestion as anything but nuts, you are nuts.

          I know you wont take my advice, but believe me, the suggestion that Bush bears some responsibility for 9/11 merely because he was president at the time is insane.

          • Ardbeg

            What a fool, Rupert! So by your thinking….no one takes responsibility!  That must be a great world you live in.  How about Iran-contra? How about Panama? The Cuban missile crisis? Did the sitting presidents have no responsibility?  Great outlook, “the suggestion that Bush bears some responsibility for 9/11 merely because he was president at the time is insane”.  No DUDE, your insane!  You just smoked a big fat one, didn’t you? That’s maybe the STUPIDEST thing I’ve ever heard-read-or seen! That’s one for your all time hit list. Educate yourself, think before you reply, blah, blah, blah……………..

          • valley person

             According to Rupert, Bush had no responsibility for 9-11, that was Clinton’s fault. He had no responsibility for starting the Iraq war. That was the fault of Congress for letting him do it. And he had no responsibility for the housing bubble or economic meltdown. That was Barney Frank, never mind he was in the minority party. Oh, and Bush had no responsibility for turning a surplus into a deficit either. I’m not sure exactly who’s fault that was according to Rupert. Probably mine.

            What we have here is a case of living in Rupertville, surrounded by a bubble that is impervious to reality.

        • Mcdcrusaders

          The 9/11 plan was hatched during Clinton’s watch, he refused to accept Bin Laden when he was offered up by the Sudanese, and again by Saudi Arabia during the 90s.  Had Clinton taken custody of OBL, there would;t have been a 9/11, and most likely, no Iraq.

  • valley person

    There are 2-3 million Muslim people people living in the US. They include your neighbors and those who protect you. If their so-called hateful religion were telling them to kill you, wouldn’t we have had a few more incidents on our hands over the last number of years?

    We were attacked by al queda. Focus people.

  • Ramalama

    And what’s the religion of George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and the rest of the gang that lied us into a disastrous war in Iraq?

    What’s the religion of people like Lars, Bill O’Reilly, and Rush Limbaugh that lie to us on a daily basis on a variety of subjects, and were among the loudest cheerleaders for the war based on a series of lies?

    • Rupert in Springfield

       >And what’s the religion of George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld
      and the rest of the gang that lied us into a disastrous war in Iraq?

      I think they are Christian, same religion as Obama, who told us Afghanistan was the war we must then, and then promptly lost it.

      >and were among the loudest cheerleaders for the war based on a series of lies?

      I think the same religion as most of the Democrats in congress, who actually voted for the war. That’s a bit more than cheering on.

      Woopsie! Fail.

      • valley person

         No one in Congress voted “for” the Iraq war. They voted to authorize the president to go to war if and when he decided. At the time he sold it as stregnthening his negotiating position.

        As I recall, it was only Democrats in congress who voted against the authorization. Every Republican, except maybe Ron Paul, voted aye.

        And most importantly, had there been no Bush presidency there would have been no Iraq war. He drummed up the phony WMDs and the phony ties between Sadam and al queda. You can try to help Bush dodge responsibility, but the choice for that war is on him and always will be.

        As for Afghanistan, it isn’t “lost.” The whole point was to destroy al queda and get the Taliban out of power. Both are missions accomplished, especially since bin ladens demise. Whether we can keep the current government in power is another question.

        • Rupert in Springfield

          > No one in Congress voted “for” the Iraq war. They voted to authorize the president to go to war if and when he decided.

          Yawn….seriously? This is seriously all you can come up with to counter the fact that Democrat members of congress gave more actual support to the war than Rush? Wow, you really didn’t think things through that’s for sure. Please, try and think about how people will counter your argument before you make it next time. This one was ridiculous.

          >As for Afghanistan, it isn’t “lost.”

          You’ew kidding right?

          >The whole point was to destroy al
          queda and get the Taliban out of power. Both are missions accomplished

          Mission accomplished?

          I cannot believe you actually used that term, of all things, in your argument.

          Wow, epic fail.

          Yep….. I know what you are thinking…..”gee Rupert, how is that term an epic fail? I just don’t get it”

          Hold on to your cheese whiz a few minutes and think there for a while. Might take an hour or two, but it will come to you.

          Good god man, you are slipping!

          • valley person

             The president made the decision on war with Iraq Rupert. That is as factual as facts get. Congress did not declare war, nor did they direct the president to start a war. They authorized him to use force and let him choose. It was a big mistake to grant him that authority and the funds, but it was not a vote to go to war.

            Yes…if the Afghan mission was as I described it, it has been accomplished. If the mission is maintaining the current government forever, then it hasn’t been accomplished and never will be. What about that baffles you? That I used a phrase Bush misused? Does he have that phrase copyrighted or something?

            The only epic fail around here, is your reading comprehension.

          • Crabman34

            I think it’s really cute that Rupert recently discovered the “fail” internet meme.  

            I have these images of him wasting hours looking at FailBlog after his nephew emailed him a video.  And then a light goes off in his head that he can use this term in his other life as a troll on blogs.  

            Fail!  Awesome.  It’s like hearing my dad say cowabunga.

  • Chana Cox

    Why does this blog revert to name calling and ad hominem attacks as the default mode?  Shouldn’t we be trying to discuss the issues civilly?

    • Ramalama


      The original post is an ad hominem attack. Lars is trying to attack Muslims. He has repeated false claims on his radio show about Muslims. 

      Lars is an anti-Muslim bigot, or at least he plays one on the radio and internet.

      • Rupert in Springfield

        Please re read the article. It’s about school textbooks leaving out the religious component of an historical event. Neither the article nor the study cited (at least in the executive summary) is an attack on Muslims.

        Put down the ball peen hammer and stop riveting on the boiler plate. One can actually mention that there are problems with in the Muslim community without it being an attack on Muslims. Stop seeing people as monolithic blocks, and more as individuals.

        • Ardbeg

          “but they don’t say what the religious motivation was.” So there was a religious motivation? Sounds like an attack, looks like an attack and smells like an attack. But according to you there isn’t an implied attack against a non-christian religion?  Maybe you should re-read the article.  Today’s media (left and right) “Frames” everything. I can’t mention “Welfare”, “Conservative”, “Liberal” “environmental” without you forming an image and a conclusion about that word and what that person or group means.  So when Lars “frames” the quote “but they don’t say what the religious motivation was.” Maybe you don’t see that as an attack, but most literate people do.  Just like “Romney never worked a day in her life”.  You saw that as an attack? No?

  • Bob Clark

    Public schools give teachers some room to sell the liberal (and Ron Paul) dribble America had it coming. If spelled out in text books, public schools would not be able to steathly sell the America-is-no-good diatribe. 

    • Ardbeg

      OMG, now the worlds problems are because of schools. I just blew a snot bubble. Nice segway! Everything screwy with the world is because of teachers, unions and liberals.  That’s right “If us darn conservatives had our way Reagan would be in his 10th term and still be trading coke for guns.”  Or maybe you want H.W. back so we can invade Panama again. Panama? really, we had to “invade” Panama? When will you figure out BOTH sides are equally screwed up and not just “the teachers”.  I don’t know about you but I can find plenty of goofiness on both sides.

  • Chana Cox


    The failure of our K-12 public education system is indeed at the root of many of our economic problems.  We are not educating children to either go to college and/or to get a job, because we are not educating them to read and do basic math at grade level.  The failure is greater in the inner-city schools but even middle class schools are failing by any objective world standards.  That’s not a liberal issue or a conservative issue.  Among the most effective groups advancing that critique and providing real solutions are the Democrats for Educational Reform.  Think Michelle Rhee and Joel Kline.  They are funded by people who generally give to Democratic party groups.  They can challenge the unions at least in part because they are Democrats and, as we used to say, only Nixon could go to China. 

    Lars, is not talking here about the general failure of K-12.  He is talking about the history curriculum.  If we are talking K-12 curriculum, it is not the teachers unions that control that, is it?  It’s the various departments of education.  These curricular materials are government mandated not union mandated although I imagine union members may or may not agree with it.   

    • valley person

       5 states have no teachers unions, and they all rank near the bottom in test scores. I think you need to cast your blame in another direction.

    • Ramalama


      Should the curriculum also mention the Project for a New American Century, and their statement that “the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event––like a new Pearl Harbor.”

      Should the curriculum mention that many of those involved in the Project for a New American Century became members of the Bush administration?

    • Ardbeg

      China-my issue was with BC.  I’m tired of people shurking responsibility by blaming others. I do believe our public schools could be better.  The responsibility lays at everyone feet. Teachers, administrators, communities, AND PARENTS along with state and federal agencies. Unfortunately, Bob (and others) want to lay the blame on one group. Their single mindedness gets old and tiring. Plus I think their thinking is clouded by the fact teachers have a union and to some that is a four letter word.

Stay Tuned...

Stay up to date with the latest political news and commentary from Oregon Catalyst through daily email updates:

Prefer another subscription option? Subscribe to our RSS Feed, become a fan on Facebook, or follow us on Twitter.

Twitter Facebook

No Thanks (close this box)