Houghton Mifflin's Fabricated Defense
Houghton Mifflin has greatly revised their defense after our post,
Shocking denials by Houghton Mifflin.
Houghton Mifflin's Question and Answer format,
to which they posed both question and answer:
Q: The textbooks were used widely in California. Is it possible
that this textbook influenced John Walker Lindh to become Muslim and
join the Taliban?
A: No. The Marin School District, where John Walker Lindh
attended middle school, did not purchase A Message of Ancient Days
and Across the Centuries until 1997. Because John Walker Lindh
is twenty-one years old, he would have been in seventh grade in 1994,
three years before the school bought the textbook.
BlessedCause: There is no "Marin School District." There is Marin
County Office of Education with 20 different school districts, but
there is no "Marin School District." Which
one refused to buy the ONLY California adopted and funded
textbooks since 1991? (California did not have a choice.)
John Walker nor his family nor his attorney will tell you where John
Walker went to school. There is an explicit gag order on all of them
negotiated at Walker's sentencing. Walker's elementary school
difficult information to come by.
IF Houghton Mifflin was able to ascertain which school John Walker attended, then they
would know that John did not attend ANY school in 1994. (HM's
conclusion). Walker's parents
pulled him out in 1993 and homeschooled him for two years (source: Time Magazine,
others). If you closely research his age, he was 13 (7th
grade) in 1993.
Why would Houghton Mifflin name a fictitious school district during
the wrong school year and state that John did not use the textbook? If
HM can't research the present and report facts, how do they research
history for the textbooks?
Did Walker begin praying to Allah in public school as
children do today? Maybe his mother
bought the ONLY California adopted textbook herself and asked John to
"Assume you are a Muslim soldier" as the textbook instructs. But I
doubt it. We moms may not have a credential, but we are not that
stupid. It takes a "Houghton Mifflin historian" to ask our
children to pretend they are Muslim soldiers in public school. It
takes Gov. Davis and his cohorts to enforce the dictates of the
Q: Did the CIE
[Council on Islamic Education]
or any other religious group contribute to the
writing of either A Message of Ancient Days or Across the
A: No, the scope of their involvement was limited to reviewing
the textbook material and, in some cases, providing primary source
song and dance)
It is important to understand that although these groups may
provide source to be considered for inclusion in the textbooks,
none of the reviewers were involved in writing actual content for the
textbooks. While our reviewers play a crucial role in helping us
present accurate information, none of our reviewers served as authors
in either of the textbooks.
Oh, so the reviewers didn't pick up the pen and write the
The question was
the CIE or any other religious group contribute to the writing of either A
Message of Ancient Days or Across the Centuries?"
The reason there is so much dancing here is because originally HM denied it
completely. When we proved that to be a lie by posting quotes from their
editorial director, Abigail Jungreis, HM came up with this answer. HM had to
rewrite it to include all the phrases quoted by
Jungreis at a Muslim site, applauding the Muslims for supplying their version of
the Crusades. "The Crusades" was originally counted as what little there is of a
"Christian" section from both books, and the Muslim perspective was not kind to Christians. What a surprise to find it was a Muslim "non-contribution." The article states:
textbooks have been able to show what Crusades were like for the Muslims.
"It is also with the help of the CIE that
Jungreis says Houghton
Now that's a whopper of a non-contribution. (see full
able to give several perspectives on an event like that,” she says.
I believe it. Christian beliefs in both books sound more like
Islam's beliefs about Christianity rather than
Q: Does the text imply acceptance of Muhammad’s
mission by occasionally referring to him as "the prophet Muhammad?"
BlessedCause: they have got to be
kidding. I counted FORTY-TWO times they named him as prophet! 998 words
dedicated to establishing that idea!
A: No, the text does not imply acceptance of
Q: Does the textbook repeatedly refer to Islam as "A
way of life?"
BlessedCause: What about page 58, under THINKING FOCUS: Find details to support the statement, "Islam, like other religions, is not only
a system of beliefs but also a way of life."
A: No. The statement is made only once, in an exercise in chapter 3
(Across the Centuries, page 64).
What about the page 63 header, "An Islamic Way of Life" The whole
section is used to draw it to "a way of life."
I could spend HOURS putting their spin into context, showing blatant
fabrication of HM, but I am so weary of this. (See it at
textbook pages in context!) It literally makes me sick to look
at their book. After so many pages of
blatant lies from Houghton Mifflin, is it any doubt that Houghton Mifflin has resorted to
more of the same? But I would like to make crystal clear a tactic that Houghton
Mifflin continues to use throughout.
Below is a chart showing a word count of faith descriptives
supporting Jesus and a word count of faith descriptives supporting Muhammad in
the Houghton Mifflin textbook. Next to each count is a count of disclaimers,
i.e., "Christians believe...," "Muslims believe..." As you can see, there
are LESS disclaimers for Muhammad, even though Islam's belief statements as fact
FAR surpass beliefs of Christians. (Click on graph to see closeup)