Teachers drop the Holocaust to avoid offending Muslims

[Jerry Galinda]

Probably – my sentence it’s a kind of – “loan translation’”.

I tried to express briefly a “sophisticated” idea .

I see such a tendency to condemn Europeans for – almost everything – Crusaders, Slavery, Colonialism, Racism, Wars and so on.

Shortly speaking - it’s a childish and primitive.

It’s a theme for – a very long discussion or many Big books.

Enough for the moment

I must go to sleep.

[ScottSA]

Constantine made Christianity the state religion of the Roman Empire early in the 4th century

That means nothing.

Maybe not, but we both know Christianity predated Islam on the Iberian peninsula, so let's stop any nonsense about Islamic claims there in their tracks.

And to address Jerry's post, he's absolutely right that it has been open season on Europeans for a few decades. And let's call a...errrr...spade a spade, as it were: it's really open season on white folks in the climate of postcolonial revisionism that swept western academia in the 50s and 60s. It's quite alright for leftists to spew hatred and vituperation at anything Bwana has ever done or is every likely to do, and it terms that would have them frogmarched to the nearest "human rights tribunal" if the protagonists in their rant were anyone of a different hue.

All of which is fine and dandy, except that what is always left unsaid is what would have happened had Bwana NOT shown up to "subjugate" the land. Would India have suddenly discovered representative government and railways in the wake of a decayed Moghul empire and the ruins of already decayed previous empires? Would China have ever dragged itself out of warlordism after the demise of the Ching (oh, excuse me, "Qing" in postcolonial pinyin. Far by it for me to use the colonial "orientalist" Wade Giles, even though it's phonetically correct) dynasty? Would Japan have ever developed a navy capable of defeating Russia? It's almost certain that sub-saharan Africa would still be chasing each other and dinner all over the continent had it not been colonized...when the first Dutchmen showed up there, the entire lower half of the continent was almost empty of humans after the Mtabele and Zulus had ministered to the local populations in the time honored tradition of radical genocide. It's easy to point at the post-colonial problems, most of which have more to do with the resident populations than the former overlords, and blame Bwana, but what exactly would the alternative have been? It's time Europe started being proud of its achievements and stopped focussing on its failings.

[Canadian Blue]

All of which is fine and dandy, except that what is always left unsaid is what would have happened had Bwana NOT shown up to "subjugate" the land. Would India have suddenly discovered representative government and railways in the wake of a decayed Moghul empire and the ruins of already decayed previous empires? Would China have ever dragged itself out of warlordism after the demise of the Ching (oh, excuse me, "Qing" in postcolonial pinyin. Far by it for me to use the colonial "orientalist" Wade Giles, even though it's phonetically correct) dynasty? Would Japan have ever developed a navy capable of defeating Russia? It's almost certain that sub-saharan Africa would still be chasing each other and dinner all over the continent had it not been colonized...when the first Dutchmen showed up there, the entire lower half of the continent was almost empty of humans after the Mtabele and Zulus had ministered to the local populations in the time honored tradition of radical genocide. It's easy to point at the post-colonial problems, most of which have more to do with the resident populations than the former overlords, and blame Bwana, but what exactly would the alternative have been? It's time Europe started being proud of its achievements and stopped focussing on its failings.

What about those dictators that were put in power, or for that matter any crimes committed by colonial powers. To say that we civilized people is fairly ignorant, especially considering how brutal the west was with Aboriginals in the Americas and Australia. One only has to look at slavery to see that history isn't as rosy as some would like to think. Sure lets celebrate our achievements, but we shouldn't ignore the mistakes of the past because that would interfere with our idealistic notion of the past.

http://www.globalwebpost.com/farooqm/study...n/illusion.html

http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/43a/100.html

[Jerry Galinda]

“any crimes committed by colonial powers” – you ought to “crucify” all nations who are guilty :

- Germans for Holocaust of Jews

- ………….. for Holocaust of Ormians

- ………….. for 500 years long captivity of Bulgarians

- …………… for ethnic cleansing in Kaukas, Latvia, Litauen, Ukraine

- …………... for ethnic cleansing on Balkan,

- …………… for Civil war in Spain,

- …………….. for terrorist war in Algerie,

- ……………… for Civil war in Sudan

- ………………. for Civil war in Sri Lanka,

- ………………. for class cleaning in Russia,

- ………………. for class cleaning in China,

- ………………. for victims of regime in Korea,

- ……………… for war crimes in China,

- ………………. for war Hutu and Tutsi ,

- and so on

[buffycat]

“any crimes committed by colonial powers” – you ought to “crucify” all nations who are guilty :

- Germans for Holocaust of Jews

- ………….. for Holocaust of Ormians

- ………….. for 500 years long captivity of Bulgarians

- …………… for ethnic cleansing in Kaukas, Latvia, Litauen, Ukraine

- …………... for ethnic cleansing on Balkan,

- …………… for Civil war in Spain,

- …………….. for terrorist war in Algerie,

- ……………… for Civil war in Sudan

- ………………. for Civil war in Sri Lanka,

- ………………. for class cleaning in Russia,

- ………………. for class cleaning in China,

- ………………. for victims of regime in Korea,

- ……………… for war crimes in China,

- ………………. for war Hutu and Tutsi ,

- and so on

Why didn't you fill in the blanks for the rest of the genocides.. a few of which are missing btw? You seem to have no problem stating that Germans are responsible for the 'Holocaust' of the Jews (though it was the Nazis).

Who killed over 10,000,000 Ukranians? How about the North American Genocides of her Native Inhabitants?

How about the ongoing eradication of Iraqis and Palestinians?

[ScottSA]

How about the ongoing eradication of Iraqis and Palestinians?

I think it's pretty much the Iraqis who are eradicating the Iraqis, and the Palestinians are eradicating the bejesus out of the Palestinians too. Have you watched the news in the last two or three years? Oh, and btw, smallpox killed the Indians, not Bwana.

[Guthrie]

Madagascar is associated with two separate genocidal holocausts

[Canadian Blue]

Smallpox was brought to the Natives by Europeans. I seem to remember something about blankets with smallpox given out to Native American's in order to wipe them out.

[Guthrie]

Smallpox was brought to the Natives by Europeans. I seem to remember something about blankets with smallpox given out to Native American's in order to wipe them out.

yes, that was done --- there was also a famous feast in which the only ones who ate were indians --- the food was all poisoned

the worst single incident of all the genocidal acts against native Americans (so far) was the Trail of Tears

[Peter F]

...

All of which is fine and dandy, except that what is always left unsaid is what would have happened had Bwana NOT shown up to "subjugate" the land. Would India have suddenly discovered representative government and railways in the wake of a decayed Moghul empire and the ruins of already decayed previous empires?

My guess is they would have eventually. But then maybe not. Should they have?

Would China have ever dragged itself out of warlordism after the demise of the Ching (oh, excuse me, "Qing" in postcolonial pinyin. Far by it for me to use the colonial "orientalist" Wade Giles, even though it's phonetically correct) dynasty?

You mean the colonial powers dragged China out of warlordism? And here I thought the commies did it.

Would Japan have ever developed a navy capable of defeating Russia?

Japan was never colonialized so I don't think the example applys

It's almost certain that sub-saharan Africa would still be chasing each other and dinner all over the continent had it not been colonized...when the first Dutchmen showed up there, the entire lower half of the continent was almost empty of humans after the Mtabele and Zulus had ministered to the local populations in the time honored tradition of radical genocide.

seems the colonial powers were not very successfull in bringing enlightenment and industry and the ethics of good government.

It's easy to point at the post-colonial problems, most of which have more to do with the resident populations than the former overlords, and blame Bwana, but what exactly would the alternative have been? It's time Europe started being proud of its achievements and stopped focussing on its failings.

Tell it to the Belgians.

[ScottSA]

Peter, m'boy...where d'you spose communism originated? I always thought it was a product of western enlightenment thought, but perhaps it was a Confucian offshoot? Ever heard of Admiral Perry? Sun Yat Sen? Horns of the Bull? Ah yes, the Belgians. I assume you're talking about the Congo; the great shining example of the post-colonial revisionists. You are aware, perhaps, that the Congo is not the totality of Africa?

Need I point out that you didn't actually answer the question beyond a farcical flippant "perhaps"? That's not an answer. Nor is petty singular nitpicking (that happens to be wrong) an answer. Africa may have driven itself back to the iron age since colonialism left, but at least it's butchering itself from the comfort of automobiles instead of on foot by means of impi. I assume by all this that you have no real answer, and that you know, deep down, that colonialism ultimately did more good than hard. If for no other reason than that it accelerated technological and political diffusion.

[Canadian Blue]

Need I point out that you didn't actually answer the question beyond a farcical flippant "perhaps"? That's not an answer. Nor is petty singular nitpicking (that happens to be wrong) an answer. Africa may have driven itself back to the iron age since colonialism left, but at least it's butchering itself from the comfort of automobiles instead of on foot by means of impi. I assume by all this that you have no real answer, and that you know, deep down, that colonialism ultimately did more good than hard. If for no other reason than that it accelerated technological and political diffusion.

So what you're arguing is that the west didn't bring democracy and enlightenment to Africa, however we did make genocide much more efficient. Thats something to be proud of for sure.

As well I think the west had drained many of the resources of Africa, so perhaps the west had some negative effects on the African continent.

[Peter F]

Peter, m'boy...where d'you spose communism originated? I always thought it was a product of western enlightenment thought, but perhaps it was a Confucian offshoot? Ever heard of Admiral Perry? Sun Yat Sen? Horns of the Bull? Ah yes, the Belgians. I assume you're talking about the Congo; the great shining example of the post-colonial revisionists. You are aware, perhaps, that the Congo is not the totality of Africa?

Need I point out that you didn't actually answer the question beyond a farcical flippant "perhaps"? That's not an answer. Nor is petty singular nitpicking (that happens to be wrong) an answer. Africa may have driven itself back to the iron age since colonialism left, but at least it's butchering itself from the comfort of automobiles instead of on foot by means of impi. I assume by all this that you have no real answer, and that you know, deep down, that colonialism ultimately did more good than hard. If for no other reason than that it accelerated technological and political diffusion.

Your point about Commienism is a very good one. Western enlightened thought led to Chinese civil war and victory for the communists - which to many is one of the greatest disasters of the 20th century.

Admiral Perry...wasn't he the one who put a few rounds into Yokohama in order to open Japan up for trade? Or maybe that was the Russian guy. And you're correct again. The Great White Fleet did indeed force Japan

to seek western methods in order to become a great power; conquering Korea, battling China, siezing Manchuria and so on and so forth and a fat lot of good it did.

I wonder what the benefits of Japanese colonialism the colonized profited from? Must have been something that makes the Pacific war worth it for the Philipino's and chinese, and Indonesians.

They should be writing a letter of thanks to the Emperor.

Exploiting others by force of arms, wich is precisely what colonialism is, is not a good thing. Considering that

Ideas are usually transported around in books, do you suppose enlightened ideas would have gotten around even without the economic exploitation of the ignorant savages? True, the Maxim did a fine job of spreading ideas. But then, what do we care wether they do it our way or not?

[ScottSA]

Peter, m'boy...where d'you spose communism originated? I always thought it was a product of western enlightenment thought, but perhaps it was a Confucian offshoot? Ever heard of Admiral Perry? Sun Yat Sen? Horns of the Bull? Ah yes, the Belgians. I assume you're talking about the Congo; the great shining example of the post-colonial revisionists. You are aware, perhaps, that the Congo is not the totality of Africa?

Need I point out that you didn't actually answer the question beyond a farcical flippant "perhaps"? That's not an answer. Nor is petty singular nitpicking (that happens to be wrong) an answer. Africa may have driven itself back to the iron age since colonialism left, but at least it's butchering itself from the comfort of automobiles instead of on foot by means of impi. I assume by all this that you have no real answer, and that you know, deep down, that colonialism ultimately did more good than hard. If for no other reason than that it accelerated technological and political diffusion.

Your point about Commienism is a very good one. Western enlightened thought led to Chinese civil war and victory for the communists - which to many is one of the greatest disasters of the 20th century.

Admiral Perry...wasn't he the one who put a few rounds into Yokohama in order to open Japan up for trade? Or maybe that was the Russian guy. And you're correct again. The Great White Fleet did indeed force Japan

to seek western methods in order to become a great power; conquering Korea, battling China, siezing Manchuria and so on and so forth and a fat lot of good it did.

I wonder what the benefits of Japanese colonialism the colonized profited from? Must have been something that makes the Pacific war worth it for the Philipino's and chinese, and Indonesians.

They should be writing a letter of thanks to the Emperor.

Exploiting others by force of arms, wich is precisely what colonialism is, is not a good thing. Considering that

Ideas are usually transported around in books, do you suppose enlightened ideas would have gotten around even without the economic exploitation of the ignorant savages? True, the Maxim did a fine job of spreading ideas. But then, what do we care wether they do it our way or not?

You seem to be arguing that the west should have kept the Japanese and Chinese weak and ignorant so that they didn't get uppity and start warmongering and taking control of their environment and stuff. You know...keep all those quaint little customs and funny pigtails and harmless myths and such, and stay out of our faces. Is that what you'd prefer?

[Peter F]

You seem to be arguing that the west should have kept the Japanese and Chinese weak and ignorant so that they didn't get uppity and start warmongering and taking control of their environment and stuff. You know...keep all those quaint little customs and funny pigtails and harmless myths and such, and stay out of our faces. Is that what you'd prefer?

Uh, yeah. That's about the jist of it. Are you suggesting Adm Perry shelled Yokohama to make Japan stronger? Worked like a charm I must admit.

[Wilber]

QUOTE(ScottSA @ Apr 5 2007, 05:01 PM)

...

All of which is fine and dandy, except that what is always left unsaid is what would have happened had Bwana NOT shown up to "subjugate" the land. Would India have suddenly discovered representative government and railways in the wake of a decayed Moghul empire and the ruins of already decayed previous empires?

My guess is they would have eventually. But then maybe not. Should they have?

India was a mishmash of independent states before the British arrived. There is no reason to think there would even be a united India as we know it.

QUOTE

Would Japan have ever developed a navy capable of defeating Russia?

Japan was never colonialized so I don't think the example applys

It does. The Imperial Japanese Navy and its ships were modeled after and with the help of the Royal Navy. Many were built by the British.

QUOTE

It's almost certain that sub-saharan Africa would still be chasing each other and dinner all over the continent had it not been colonized...when the first Dutchmen showed up there, the entire lower half of the continent was almost empty of humans after the Mtabele and Zulus had ministered to the local populations in the time honored tradition of radical genocide.

seems the colonial powers were not very successfull in bringing enlightenment and industry and the ethics of good government.

For the most part colonial powers weren't in Africa that long. Not a lot more than half a century in most cases. The British were in India for over two hundred years building infrastructure and a bureaucracy in what had been a much older and more advanced society in the first place

[Jerry Galinda]

I have no problem to fill the blanks !

I wrote – “and so on” – it means that it’s a part of list which can be created !

My English isn’t fluent – but I see that you are dishonest opponent – using a word “eradication” towards problems of Iraqis and Palestinians is – a kind of propaganda.

I tried to “force” opponents to thinking but as I see it’s very hard..

[Jerry Galinda]

In this case – doesn’t matter what He wanted to achieve, why He done it !

The most important is – effect !

Happily for Japaneses – they have been able to change their socioeconomic structures.

[VJ2]

Teachers drop the Holocaust to avoid offending Muslims

By LAURA CLARK - More by this author »

Schools are dropping the Holocaust from history lessons to avoid offending Muslim pupils, a Governmentbacked study has revealed.

It found some teachers are reluctant to cover the atrocity for fear of upsetting students whose beliefs include Holocaust denial.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/arti...770&ito=newsnow

A Department of Education and Skills spokesman said there was scope for schools to make their own decision on what to teach within the national curriculum

But he added: "Teaching of the Holocaust is already compulsory in schools at KS3. It will remain so in the new KS3 curriculum from September 2008.

"As Alan Johnson made clear in January there are certain subjects which will be protected in the new curriculum and that includes the Holocaust

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/6517359.stm

forget the sensationalism

[Figleaf]

Yeah, God forbid that we actually take our own side in the interpretation of history.

Someone should forbid it. History where you 'take your own side' is really propaganda. Real history ought to be a search for truth.

No one else does...Islamic countries are well known for their objectivity in teaching opposing opinions in madrassas...

Are you endorsing the Islamic way of doing things?

[Figleaf]

As historians know, Islam didn't reach Byzantine Jerusalem until 636 AD...well after Mohammed's death...

You don't suppose Mohammed could have walked there, or ridden a horse or something?

[ScottSA]

As historians know, Islam didn't reach Byzantine Jerusalem until 636 AD...well after Mohammed's death...

You don't suppose Mohammed could have walked there, or ridden a horse or something?

Are you calling Mohammed a liar? If so, you'd better start wearing a neck guard. I know Islam is a religion of peace, but an awful lot of people seem to lose their heads, no doubt by accident, when they insult the Prophet.

[DogOnPorch]

You don't suppose Mohammed could have walked there, or ridden a horse or something?

The Koran never said the furthest mosque was located in Jerusalem. Mohammed was probably barely aware that it existed...if at all. Perhaps during his trip to Syria when he was a child. When I read the passage it seems more a spiritual journey rather than a physical one...winged beasts and angels generally not being part of This Mortal Coil. That was just Omar being opportune...as mentioned.

These days that appears to be an irrelevant point as few Muslims would admit to Jerusalem being anything else other than a Holy city of the Islamic faith.

-----------------------------------------

If anyone worships Muhammad, let them know that Muhammad is dead, but if anyone worships God, then let them know that God is living and does not die.

---Abū Bakr

[Figleaf]

As historians know, Islam didn't reach Byzantine Jerusalem until 636 AD...well after Mohammed's death...

You don't suppose Mohammed could have walked there, or ridden a horse or something?

Are you calling Mohammed a liar?

I've never met the man, nor read his books.

[ScottSA]

As historians know, Islam didn't reach Byzantine Jerusalem until 636 AD...well after Mohammed's death...

You don't suppose Mohammed could have walked there, or ridden a horse or something?

Are you calling Mohammed a liar?

I've never met the man, nor read his books.

Yet you certainly have no hesitation in holding forth as an expert on Islam. Tell me again how Islam is a religion of peace?