posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 11:50 AM
reply to post by tothetenthpower
The mods have spoken. If it's got personal, I'll only say that's because of an inability to get on-topic responses. Statements on my part retracted
Originally posted by ignorant_ape
reply to post by HamrHeed
precisley what " history classes " do you alledge it is avoided in ?
thehistory of wwii cannot be fully addressed by a 3 year batchelors degree - never mind high school history classes
come now ad substance to your allegation
PS - ommission is not avoidance - as i say it is impossible to spoon every facet of every event of world history into a " history class "
but the topic is not taboo - as i and others have shown
unless the public activly ignore the topic - it is covered in print books , e-books , websites , tv documentaries , ardio documentaries - etc etc etc
I can attest to two aspects of this post:
1) You're exactly right about how not everything can go into just one three-year course. There were things I knew about XYZ topic that weren't
included in lectures/syllabus, but on the other hand there were things you wouldn't think were 'important' enough to go into a relatively short
time-frame. There is no comprehensive course on WW2, so there's certainly not a comprehensive History course - however, information's there (before,
during and after) all around and accessible if only you're willing to read it.
2) As for Muslims and Nazism, I have to add to your display that it's nowhere near a hidden topic: The Handschar unit - who were distinctive for
having a red fez as part of their uniform - were/are an obvious novelty in WW2 history/trivia, to the point where (not just when I was 'coming up')
they're almost one of the first oddities you hear about when starting to really go into the history of the war. I know a WW2 re-enactor of over 30
years who actually had a Handschar set-up as early as the 1980s, purely because they were so unusual and striking (it was a 'fun' set-up, more for
collection purposes than him actually re-enacting a Muslim volunteer; I have no idea if this is covered en masse in re-enactment elsewhere in Europe
perhaps). I have a Cassell picture-book on the German ground forces from the 1970s that has a Handschar fez (among other paraphanalia) on the
chapter-heading page on the Waffen-SS.
BUT... And this is where - important to know the above may be - all of that almost becomes a needless paragraph to have typed: it serves no relevance
in the long-term of this thread's topic because, no matter who he'd let on his team, Hitler's was definitely a team that might have SAID it was for
Christendom but one shouldn't believe it in the same way you'd not believe a talking dog that told you it was a cat... Is Hitler used to vilify
Christianity? Sometimes, by a minority, but I see that as being irrelevant too since the brand of Christianity that Hitler is supposedly associated
with is - by the OP's own frothing admission - the Evil Catholic Church "so it doesn't matter anyway".
It's not often I get to chat WW2 on ATS so it's a shame the thread set a low standard it failed to live up to. If anything can be salvaged, count
me in - otherwise I guess it's run its course by now.