Holocaust Dropped From Some UK Schools 1286
dteichman2 writes "It appears that some UK schools are ignoring the Holocaust. A government-backed study, funded by the Department for Education and Skills, found that some teachers are reluctant to teach history lessons on the Holocaust for fear of offending Muslim students whose beliefs include Holocaust denial. Additionally, similar problems are being encountered with lessons on the Crusades because these lessons contradict teachings from local mosques."
urgh (Score:4, Informative)
LOOK AT THE DATE OF THE ARTICLE (Score:5, Informative)
It's a pretty notorious one. Cmon editors.
Re:urgh (Score:5, Informative)
Not true, according to the government (Score:5, Informative)
It's a faaaaake (Score:5, Informative)
good one kdawg (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Well (Score:3, Informative)
The importance of the memory (Score:2, Informative)
I've recently been in Mauthausen [andreabondi.it] , for an international meeting. The worst thing have been to see the castle of Harteim (where nazism made his experiments for the "selection of the specie") restructured as a Disney's castle. Nothing of what who lived and died there have seen has been maintained.
We can't forget what happened and the cruelty human can express. We must remember and study the story not to hate but to see what hate can do.
Re:LOOK AT THE DATE OF THE ARTICLE (Score:3, Informative)
If you have evidence of this, could you please share it with the class?
Re:LOOK AT THE DATE OF THE ARTICLE (Score:5, Informative)
This is Bullshit (Score:5, Informative)
Quoting: 'There are no plans to stop teaching the Holocaust. Indeed, the education department's plan seems to be ensuring that it is taught everywhere. A spokesman for the Department of Education and Skills (DES) maintained that "The Adjegbo report on citizenship [a different report authored by Sir Keith Adjegbo and released in January 2007] said key British historical events must be taught" and that while "the national curriculum is a broad framework and there is scope for schools to make their own decisions, teaching elements including the Holocaust and key British events will be compulsory."'
Re:urgh (Score:5, Informative)
So it's being made compulsory:
It's the Daily Mail (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Denying holocaust? (Score:0, Informative)
No we don't. The Jews and the Christians believe in Yahweh. Allah was the moon god in ancient Arabic culture, and happened to be the god worshiped by Mohammed's family. Naturally enough they'll deny that left, right and centre, but like the holocaust, there are some thing which are indisputable.
Re:Well (Score:2, Informative)
I don't ever recall teachers and educators telling us that there was no holocaust. If there were some that denied it, chances are they were uneducated, or illiterate.
As a muslim, I would urge the schools in the UK to reconsider their decisions.
Re:That Is Pathetic. (Score:4, Informative)
Or at least thay would be if it were true.
Here's a hint for you left-ponders -- the Daily Mail is the UK
equivalent of Fox: a racist rag which will print anything which puts
muslims, women, gays, trades-unionists or the working class in a
bad light. Check snopes before posting a story from them.
Re:Old news. (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Accomodating religion (Score:4, Informative)
With one exception, none of the other leaders of Germany at the time said anything about Christian belief. They used the language in speeches now and then, but they overwhelmingly fell into one of three categories: A cult-ish series of beliefs around the divinity of nature (strangely not all that different from more modern new age beliefs), or "German Christian" basically Christianity with Christ replaced with German figures including Hitler himself or in science and in particular, Social Darwinism.
Re:Not true, according to the government (Score:4, Informative)
http://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/holocaust. asp [snopes.com]
Re:Denying holocaust? (Score:4, Informative)
Really? Could you show us all the extermination camps? Where the victims were tossed into ovens, or babies tossed into the air and impaled upon bayonettes, or the poison gas showers?
Reading your post, that line came straight out of the arab narrative. They love to claim genocide, holocaust, war crimes, and so forth. In the process, they denigrate those terms, the real victims of those actions, and impede progress at a resolution. This also presumes the objective truth of the arab narrative, which, history has not been kind to. It appears that numerous fictions were invented purely to continue and prolong this conflict. One of those fictions are the `palestinian' people. They were invented in the 1964 time line. Not in 1948.
What happened in 1948 was the founding of one country and the immediate launching of a war to eradicate said country by angry arabs that didn't get their way. The arabs were given over 80% of the region that was supposed be divided, Jordan or Trans-Jordan was part of what the Balfour declaration had provided as part of the Jewish national homeland. Churchill wanted to provide a place for his hashemite buddies to hole up after being kicked out of the arabian peninsula by the wahabbis, who we know as the `modern' house of Saud. So Churchill sliced off everything west of the Jordan river and created Jordan. The Jews were supposed to live with the rest. All during this time, from 1900 onwards, well, 1880 if you read other histories, the arabs behaved there about the same as they behave today. Killings, bombings, kidnappings, property destruction. You should note that in 1948 a new arab state was proposed, along side of, and slightly larger than Israel. Israelis accepted this. The arabs didn't. The arabs had demanded that arabs in Israel leave right before the 48 war started, this is well documented, and only revisionists for whom this is an inconvenient reality complain otherwise. After Israel was founded and survived, jews in the arab states were expelled forcefully, without possessions, compensation, usually at the point of a gun. A population transfer, not unlike the pakistan india transfer occurred. But the arabs could never accept this. So the UNRWA was formed to perpetuate the crisis (this is what they have done, they have solved nothing). Compare this to *every* other conflict mediated by the UN where the high commissioner for refugees handles this. The other conflicts get settled within about a decade. UNRWA has been perpetuating this conflict for about 6 decades.
Most of what existed prior to 1967 was a construction entirely of the arabs own making. Jordan annexed the west bank, and no one apart from the UK acknowledged and accepted this. Egypt annexed Gaza. Both Jordan and Egypt avoided all out war, but largely failed to comply with terms of the armistice. In 67, with Pan-Arabist Nassar in charge in Egypt, things were brought to a head again. Straights of Tiran and other cassus belli against Israel. Left it with no choice. After the smoke cleared, Israel had gaza and the west bank.
Notice how there are no execution camps in this story. None existed in Israel.
There has not been a genocide against the arabs. The arabs have launched or at least tried to launch genocides against the jews, many times. In Hebron in 1929, every jew who lived there (several thousand, with a multi-thousand year history there) was killed by arab mobs after friday prayers. Now why would that be? There were no "occupied territories"? In 1936-1939 the arabs rioted thoughout the area, killing jews left and right. Again why was this? In WWII the arabs mufti in Israel was directly and overtly allied with Hitler (yeah, invoke Godwin's law).
The jews did not line up the arabs against walls and machine gun them. They did not gas them. They did not spear them, experiment on th
Re:So what about the Jewish people? (Score:3, Informative)
so, despite being a small minority in europe they made up over half those killed in Hitler's death camps.
Re:Denying holocaust? (Score:5, Informative)
I found a rebuttal [mostmerciful.com] of that theory in one of the first google links for "allah moon god"
Last paragraph
The God is the same as you can find in the Islam [wikipedia.org] article
Re:Well (Score:5, Informative)
And it predates the Holocaust. Actually, Hitler likely viewed it as a successful proof-of-concept.
Re:Interesting (Score:5, Informative)
Almost all of the survivors, verbally or in their written memoirs, remember a dream which frequently recurred during the nights of imprisonment, varied in its detail but uniform in its substance: they had returned home, and with passion and relief were describing their past sufferings, addressing themselves to a loved person, and were not believed, indeed were not even listened to. In the most typical (and most cruel) form, they interlocutor turned and left in silence. [Primo Levi: The Drowned and the Saved]
And the diatribe issued by a member of the SS to camp inmates upon arrival:
However this war may end, we have won the war against you; none of you will be left to bear witness, but even if someone were to survive, the world would not believe him. There will perhaps be suspicions, discussions, research by historians, but there will be no certainties, because we will destroy the evidence together with you. And even if some proof should remain and some of you survive, people will say that the events you describe are too monstrous to be believed: they will say that they are the exaggerations of Allied propoganda and will believe us, who will deny everything, and not you. We will be the ones to dictate the history of the [camps] [Simon Wiesenthal: The murderers are amongst us]
The nazis had such an effective shredding campaign, we only know the death toll is between 4 and 8 million. Inmates themselves were responsible for furnace operation and ash disposal, teams being regularly disposed of to prevent information leaks. The retreat at the end of the war was accompanied by systematic recall/slaughter of prisoners, and was given more importance than millitary strategy. Holocaust sympathisers are making the holocaust perpetrators win from beyond the noose. And yes, you may invoke godwin's law.
Mail's founder admitted formula is "Daily Hate" (Score:5, Informative)
To quote one article [guardian.co.uk]
More here. [google.co.uk] Can't say whether they're as bad as Fox News or not, because I haven't seen a significant amount of its output (due to living in the UK). However, I personally wouldn't trust the Daily Mail as far as I could throw it.
Anyway, there is probably some truth in the story, but I expect it's been exaggerated, distorted and "enhanced" by selective reporting. For example, I remember reading a story about ecstasy in New Scientist a few years back. It was all about a study which claimed that there were serious effects of the drug on the brain. However, the story also included plausible-sounding criticism and rebuttal of the study by other equally reputable scientists.
I saw the same story in the Daily Mail later that day. It also included the details about the study and the possibly dangerous effects of the drug, and was written in a moderately "reputable" manner. However, unlike NS's report, they didn't hint that there was *any* scepticism about the findings, let alone print those views. Result was that the effect of the story was very different, more one-sided and scaremongering. Fact-by-fact, the Daily Mail story was correct, but it lied by omission.
Mind you, the Daily Mail is full of scaremongering health stories; that's a staple of the front page for them. Along with reports on how something the government has done is going to affect the value of your house, and right-wing political half-truths.
Holocaust denial not part of any 'beliefs' (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Interesting (Score:5, Informative)
Oddly enough, JW's were the only group given the opportunity to sign a paper denouncing their faith and walk away. Very few of them did it.
Re:Well (Score:2, Informative)
Re:That Is Pathetic. (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Interesting (Score:5, Informative)
Gypsies were also the target of systematic extermination.
Re:That Is Pathetic. (Score:5, Informative)
I wouldn't dismiss this issue altogether simply because it came from the Daily Mail; if their slant on it could be taken at face value I would consider it cause for serious concern. Unfortunately, the Mail in itself is not trustworthy; I prefer to read these things via a less potentially biased source before passing judgement.
Re:Well (Score:2, Informative)
Indeed, apparently he did [wikipedia.org].
Re:Well (Score:4, Informative)
The Iroquois were slavers, and had a policy of killing anyone they regarded as surplus. Most of what we think of as "plains Indians" were originally refugees from Iroquois slaughter, dating from shortly before whites made a significant push past the Appalachians. My friend's grandmother (born about 1810) told him tales about the westward migration and its causes, as told to her by *her* grandmother, who was one of the refugees who fled the Iroquois.
Re:That Is Pathetic. (Score:3, Informative)
I have relatives that have seen those camps firsthand.
So yes I would expect schools in my country (who participated in the spat) to be aware of this not trivial aspect of the whole conflict.
I would expect to hear about Stalin's escapades for similar reasons.
Re:That Is Pathetic. (Score:2, Informative)
It found some teachers are dropping courses covering the Holocaust at the earliest opportunity over fears Muslim pupils might express anti-Semitic and anti-Israel reactions in class.
The researchers gave the example of a secondary school in an unnamed northern city, which dropped the Holocaust as a subject for GCSE coursework.
Re:You have *got* to be sh!tt!ng me. (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Your Fox post was flamebait. (Score:5, Informative)
You are aware that they do things like assessing reporters politcal loyalties during the interview process and giving regular memos directing their newscasters to do things to support Republicans [wonkette.com], right? You aware that even the CEO admits using it as a propaganda mouthpiece to sell the Iraq War [wikipedia.org], right?
If you can't tell that sort of stuff by watching them, then they're succeeding.
Re:Are you aware of the situation in Israel? (Score:3, Informative)
Kneejerk leftist trolling. (Score:2, Informative)
Oh! Okay, I got something [mediamatters.org].
Translation: "Oh no, the brown people are coming!"
And this is from last week.
Re:Zionist Propaganda (Score:5, Informative)
You see the opposite thing in the Middle East. Some of the world's oldest Jewish populations exist in the Middle East, where they, while being a minority and occasionally suffered for it, but only rarely got the same sort of persecution that middle ages, European Jews had to suffer. It remained this way largely up until the 1930s, when the influx of foreign Jews into Palestine and the spawning of Jewish terror groups and militias, culminating in al-Nakhba, led to a violent level of antisemitism in the Middle East. This, in turn, led to most Arab countries likewise pressuring their Jewish populations out, turning a slow Zionist trickle into a major exodus. Many of these Jews migrated to Israel, which increased the strains with Israel's neighbors, and so forth.
I can go into more detail with more modern history if you'd like, but you're probably well aware of the world (outside America)'s increasing dissatisfaction with Israel's foreign policy.
Re:Are you aware of the situation in Israel? (Score:3, Informative)
Agreed, with one exception. A kahen (cohen) may not marry a woman who is a convert. That is the only way in which a convert is different from someone born Jewish.
Re:Well (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Accomodating religion (Score:4, Informative)
The Party, as such, stands for positive Christianity, but does not commit itself to any particular denomination
You are aware that "Positive Christianity" was a code word for German Christian yes? And you do know what exactly the German Christians believed yes? If the answers to either of those questions was no, you need to go do some more homework. If the answers to the two questions were yes, you clearly have no interest in factual discussion just a misguided sense of personal hatred and vitriol that apparently supersedes your knowledge of Historical fact.
And again, your post fails to address some points that were raised. Namely that Hitler forced the Church to allow him to directly appoint bishops, ended the political party that was affiliated with the church, tried to destroy the confessing church, and threw in jail the leadership of both the catholic and the protest church. Moreover they forced as many churches as possible into the German Church movement (which created the confessing church in the first place), forced a pact onto Rome, etc.
You can dig up a single speech, and completely miss the context of it to make your point. I can dig up a lifetime of animosity towards the Church, Hitler putting to death it's leaders, and his statement that he would destroy the Protestent Church because it would not support him.
For anyone else interested in honest research:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_Christianit
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_Mysticism [wikipedia.org]
Private statements
Hitler's private statements are more mixed. There are negative statements about Christianity reported by Hitler's intimates, Goebbels, Speer, and Bormann.[10] Joseph Goebbels, for example, notes in a diary entry in 1939: "The Führer is deeply religious, but deeply anti-Christian. He regards Christianity as a symptom of decay." Albert Speer reports a similar statement: "You see, it's been our misfortune to have the wrong religion. Why didn't we have the religion of the Japanese, who regard sacrifice for the Fatherland as the highest good? The Mohammedan religion too would have been much more compatible to us than Christianity. Why did it have to be Christianity with its meekness and flabbiness?"[11] In the Hossbach Memorandum Hitler is recorded as saying that "only the disintegrating effect of Christianity, and the symptoms of age" were responsible for the demise of the Roman empire.[12]
Re:That Is Pathetic. (Score:4, Informative)
This is old new already (Score:2, Informative)