Army document is only written statement detailing Hitler’s wish for systematic removal of Jews from Germany A document understood to be the only existing written statement by Adolf Hitler in which he set out his belief in a systematic removal of Jews from society has been acquired by the Simon Wiesenthal Centre in Los Angeles. The four-page letter, typewritten on faded brown paper and bearing Hitler’s signature, was shown in public for the first time in New York, in what is likely to be seen as a key artefact in the historical record of the Holocaust. It will go on display at the centre’s Tolerance Museum in Los Angeles. The centre’s founder, Rabbi Marvin Hier, said it was one of the most important documents of the period, showing the development of Hitler’s antisemitic thought, and proved he had in mind a governmental solution to the so-called “Jewish Question”. “This is the most important item we have in an archive of more than 50,000 objects,” Hier said, adding that it would be used to educate future generations and to counter Holocaust denial. Though Hitler alluded to his plans to exterminate Jewish people in speeches and indirectly through his closest henchmen, his thoughts on the subject can be found nowhere else committed to paper. Such is the prevalence of fraud in Hitler memorabilia that some experts remain to be convinced of the document’s authenticity. But the Wiesenthal Centre said it had authenticated the letter. Long known by historians of the Third Reich as “the Gemlich letter”, the original signed copy has never before been seen in public. An unsigned copy exists in the state archives in Munich. Hitler wrote the letter in Munich on 16 September 1919. Then aged 30, he was as yet unknown but was starting to show interest in politics. Shortly before writing the letter he attended a meeting of the German Workers’ party, which later he took over and converted into the National Socialist German Workers’ party. At the time he was in a propaganda unit of the German army that tried to counter Bolshevik influences among soldiers returning from the Russian front at the end of the first world war. His commanding officer, Captain Karl Mayr, told Hitler to respond to an inquiry from one Adolf Gemlich, who wanted to know the army’s position on the “Jewish Question”. In his reply, Hitler spouted an antisemitic diatribe, in which he said Jews were “pure materialists in thought and aspirations” and that their effect was “racial tuberculosis on the nation”. Crucially, he went on to set out his vision for a calculated antisemitism that would operate through strong governments rather than the emotion of the people. Emotional antisemitism, he wrote, merely ended in pogroms. “The antisemitism of reason must lead to a struggle for the legal battle to abrogate laws giving [Jews] favoured positions, differentiating the Jew from other foreigners. The final goal must be the uncompromising removal of Jews altogether. To accomplish these goals, only a government of national power is capable, and never a government of national weakness.” The signed letter was bought by the centre for $150,000 from a trader in historical artefacts. It was said to have been obtained by an American soldier in 1945 from a Nazi archive near Nuremberg and was held privately until now. The centre had a chance to buy it in 1988 but was doubtful about its provenance, particularly the fact that it was composed on a typewriter – a rare and expensive object Hitler could personally not have afforded in 1919. Hier said their doubts had been assuaged when they realised that Hitler was working for the army and would have had access to its typewriters. Adolf Hitler Holocaust Judaism Second world war Germany United States Ed Pilkington guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Army document is only written statement detailing Hitler’s wish for systematic removal of Jews from Germany A document understood to be the only existing written statement by Adolf Hitler in which he set out his belief in a systematic removal of Jews from society has been acquired by the Simon Wiesenthal Centre in Los Angeles. The four-page letter, typewritten on faded brown paper and bearing Hitler’s signature, was shown in public for the first time in New York, in what is likely to be seen as a key artefact in the historical record of the Holocaust. It will go on display at the centre’s Tolerance Museum in Los Angeles. The centre’s founder, Rabbi Marvin Hier, said it was one of the most important documents of the period, showing the development of Hitler’s antisemitic thought, and proved he had in mind a governmental solution to the so-called “Jewish Question”. “This is the most important item we have in an archive of more than 50,000 objects,” Hier said, adding that it would be used to educate future generations and to counter Holocaust denial. Though Hitler alluded to his plans to exterminate Jewish people in speeches and indirectly through his closest henchmen, his thoughts on the subject can be found nowhere else committed to paper. Such is the prevalence of fraud in Hitler memorabilia that some experts remain to be convinced of the document’s authenticity. But the Wiesenthal Centre said it had authenticated the letter. Long known by historians of the Third Reich as “the Gemlich letter”, the original signed copy has never before been seen in public. An unsigned copy exists in the state archives in Munich. Hitler wrote the letter in Munich on 16 September 1919. Then aged 30, he was as yet unknown but was starting to show interest in politics. Shortly before writing the letter he attended a meeting of the German Workers’ party, which later he took over and converted into the National Socialist German Workers’ party. At the time he was in a propaganda unit of the German army that tried to counter Bolshevik influences among soldiers returning from the Russian front at the end of the first world war. His commanding officer, Captain Karl Mayr, told Hitler to respond to an inquiry from one Adolf Gemlich, who wanted to know the army’s position on the “Jewish Question”. In his reply, Hitler spouted an antisemitic diatribe, in which he said Jews were “pure materialists in thought and aspirations” and that their effect was “racial tuberculosis on the nation”. Crucially, he went on to set out his vision for a calculated antisemitism that would operate through strong governments rather than the emotion of the people. Emotional antisemitism, he wrote, merely ended in pogroms. “The antisemitism of reason must lead to a struggle for the legal battle to abrogate laws giving [Jews] favoured positions, differentiating the Jew from other foreigners. The final goal must be the uncompromising removal of Jews altogether. To accomplish these goals, only a government of national power is capable, and never a government of national weakness.” The signed letter was bought by the centre for $150,000 from a trader in historical artefacts. It was said to have been obtained by an American soldier in 1945 from a Nazi archive near Nuremberg and was held privately until now. The centre had a chance to buy it in 1988 but was doubtful about its provenance, particularly the fact that it was composed on a typewriter – a rare and expensive object Hitler could personally not have afforded in 1919. Hier said their doubts had been assuaged when they realised that Hitler was working for the army and would have had access to its typewriters. Adolf Hitler Holocaust Judaism Second world war Germany United States Ed Pilkington guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Legislative body reaches near-unanimous vote of no confidence in policies of universities minister, David Willetts Oxford university has formally declared it has “no confidence” in the policies of the universities minister, David Willetts, the first sign of a concerted academic backlash against the government’s higher education reforms. Lecturers passed a motion opposing the coalition’s policies by 283 votes to five at a meeting of the Congregation, Oxford’s legislative body. The university is the first to take a public stand against the raising of tuition fees and slashing of the teaching grant, but the rebellion is spreading. Cambridge is expected to announce a date for a “no confidence” vote on Monday, while a petition against the government is gathering force at Warwick University. It is the first time a vote of no confidence in a minister has been passed by an English university, and follows a no- confidence vote by the Royal College of Nursing in the health secretary Andrew Lansley’s handling of NHS reforms. The message of “no confidence” will be transmitted to the government by Oxford University’s council, its governing body. Robert Gildea, the Oxford historian who proposed the motion, described the coalition’s reforms as “reckless, incoherent and incompetent”. He warned that proposals to introduce “off quota” student places, funded privately rather than through state-backed loans, and AC Grayling’s plan for a new private university heralded the arrival of a “two-track” admissions system. In a two and a half hour debate, he told fellow academics: “It’s a red carpet for the rich and even more competition for everyone else. We will be back to Brideshead.” The debate had added resonance on the day an influential committee of MPs published a report warning that student numbers might have to be cut to meet the soaring cost of student loans, after ministers underestimated how many universities would charge the maximum fee. Figures compiled by the Guardian show that 105 universities have declared their fee for next year, with an average of £8,765. Karma Nabulsi, a lecturer in international relations who seconded the motion, urged the academics not to consider the motion as a negative statement, “but as an affirmation of who we are and the traditions we wish to observe”. She said: “Oxford is committed above all to the pursuit of academic excellence in all its forms, a defence of academic disciplines without regard for market values, and the idea of education as a comprehensive, publicly funded activity accessible to the widest number of young people.” One of the few academics to lend support to the government was Susan Cooper, a physicist and fellow of St Catherine’s college, who argued that the market in tuition fees needed a few years to develop. She said: “The difference between [an average tuition fee of] £7,500 and £9,000 is not a financial disaster on the scale of the banking crisis. Having embarked on the experiment, I’d like to see it through.” After the vote, which was greeted with cheers from academics gathered in the university’s Sheldonian Theatre, Gildea said he hoped it would have a “rousing effect” on other universities and put pressure on the government to think again. He said: “This government comes across as ideologically driven, but actually it is weak and divided. They are weaker than they think they are and we are more powerful than we think we are. After all, they have to win the next election. If they restored the direct funding [for teaching arts and the humanities] that existed before the cuts, which would keep students fees where they were, about £3,000 a year, that would just solve a whole raft of problems.” David Barclay, president of the students’ union, who addressed the lecturers on behalf of students, said after the vote: “Whatever the pressure from the outside world, we are an institution living by our values. We are the first university to take public leadership in opposition to the government.” The government defended the new fees regime and the decision to cut direct state funding for teaching, saying the reforms “put students in the driving seat”. Acknowledging the public snub, a spokesman for the department for Business, Innovation and Skills said: “Universities have always been bastions of free speech and debate. However, our student and university finance reforms are fairer than the present system and affordable for the nation.”Gareth Thomas, Labour’s universities spokesman, said: “This is a devastating and unprecedented vote, with Oxford academics confirming what a series of independent experts and the Public Accounts Committee have already made clear; that 80% cuts, trebling tuition fees and cuts to research facilities are unfair, unnecessary and unsustainable. “David Cameron and George Osborne should not be surprised by this vote. It is their economic policy and the demand for cuts in higher education, far higher than in any other area of the public sector, which has caused this debacle.” University of Oxford Higher education Tuition fees David Willetts Education policy Conservatives Liberal-Conservative coalition Liberal Democrats Jeevan Vasagar guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Legislative body reaches near-unanimous vote of no confidence in policies of universities minister, David Willetts Oxford university has formally declared it has “no confidence” in the policies of the universities minister, David Willetts, the first sign of a concerted academic backlash against the government’s higher education reforms. Lecturers passed a motion opposing the coalition’s policies by 283 votes to five at a meeting of the Congregation, Oxford’s legislative body. The university is the first to take a public stand against the raising of tuition fees and slashing of the teaching grant, but the rebellion is spreading. Cambridge is expected to announce a date for a “no confidence” vote on Monday, while a petition against the government is gathering force at Warwick University. It is the first time a vote of no confidence in a minister has been passed by an English university, and follows a no- confidence vote by the Royal College of Nursing in the health secretary Andrew Lansley’s handling of NHS reforms. The message of “no confidence” will be transmitted to the government by Oxford University’s council, its governing body. Robert Gildea, the Oxford historian who proposed the motion, described the coalition’s reforms as “reckless, incoherent and incompetent”. He warned that proposals to introduce “off quota” student places, funded privately rather than through state-backed loans, and AC Grayling’s plan for a new private university heralded the arrival of a “two-track” admissions system. In a two and a half hour debate, he told fellow academics: “It’s a red carpet for the rich and even more competition for everyone else. We will be back to Brideshead.” The debate had added resonance on the day an influential committee of MPs published a report warning that student numbers might have to be cut to meet the soaring cost of student loans, after ministers underestimated how many universities would charge the maximum fee. Figures compiled by the Guardian show that 105 universities have declared their fee for next year, with an average of £8,765. Karma Nabulsi, a lecturer in international relations who seconded the motion, urged the academics not to consider the motion as a negative statement, “but as an affirmation of who we are and the traditions we wish to observe”. She said: “Oxford is committed above all to the pursuit of academic excellence in all its forms, a defence of academic disciplines without regard for market values, and the idea of education as a comprehensive, publicly funded activity accessible to the widest number of young people.” One of the few academics to lend support to the government was Susan Cooper, a physicist and fellow of St Catherine’s college, who argued that the market in tuition fees needed a few years to develop. She said: “The difference between [an average tuition fee of] £7,500 and £9,000 is not a financial disaster on the scale of the banking crisis. Having embarked on the experiment, I’d like to see it through.” After the vote, which was greeted with cheers from academics gathered in the university’s Sheldonian Theatre, Gildea said he hoped it would have a “rousing effect” on other universities and put pressure on the government to think again. He said: “This government comes across as ideologically driven, but actually it is weak and divided. They are weaker than they think they are and we are more powerful than we think we are. After all, they have to win the next election. If they restored the direct funding [for teaching arts and the humanities] that existed before the cuts, which would keep students fees where they were, about £3,000 a year, that would just solve a whole raft of problems.” David Barclay, president of the students’ union, who addressed the lecturers on behalf of students, said after the vote: “Whatever the pressure from the outside world, we are an institution living by our values. We are the first university to take public leadership in opposition to the government.” The government defended the new fees regime and the decision to cut direct state funding for teaching, saying the reforms “put students in the driving seat”. Acknowledging the public snub, a spokesman for the department for Business, Innovation and Skills said: “Universities have always been bastions of free speech and debate. However, our student and university finance reforms are fairer than the present system and affordable for the nation.”Gareth Thomas, Labour’s universities spokesman, said: “This is a devastating and unprecedented vote, with Oxford academics confirming what a series of independent experts and the Public Accounts Committee have already made clear; that 80% cuts, trebling tuition fees and cuts to research facilities are unfair, unnecessary and unsustainable. “David Cameron and George Osborne should not be surprised by this vote. It is their economic policy and the demand for cuts in higher education, far higher than in any other area of the public sector, which has caused this debacle.” University of Oxford Higher education Tuition fees David Willetts Education policy Conservatives Liberal-Conservative coalition Liberal Democrats Jeevan Vasagar guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Nathan Horton will miss the rest of the Stanley Cup finals with a severe concussion, and Canucks defenseman Aaron Rome also is finished after the NHL suspended him for four games Tuesday for his blindside hit on the Bruins forward during Game 3. (June 7)
Continue reading …
Nathan Horton will miss the rest of the Stanley Cup finals with a severe concussion, and Canucks defenseman Aaron Rome also is finished after the NHL suspended him for four games Tuesday for his blindside hit on the Bruins forward during Game 3. (June 7)
Continue reading …
NBC retained its hold on US Olympic television rights Tuesday in a four-games deal through 2020 worth nearly $4.4 billion, defeating rival bids from ESPN and Fox.
Continue reading …
NBC retained its hold on US Olympic television rights Tuesday in a four-games deal through 2020 worth nearly $4.4 billion, defeating rival bids from ESPN and Fox.
Continue reading …
So Michelle Rhee hired Hari Sevugan away from the DNC to join her right-wing-in-liberal-clothing organization known as StudentsFirst. Presumably, Hari will rehabilitate the StudentsFirst image which has become irrevocably tainted with the stench of right-wing public school destruction. Hmmm. This comes on the heels of Rhee’s huddle with Rick Scott before he gutted Florida’s public education system, her public support for Scott Walker’s plan to limit teachers’ bargaining rights (see video), lobbying on behalf of Ohio’s SB5 , a special appearance with Governor Kasich to screen Waiting for Superman , and her cozy support for Chris Christie’s school-gutting ways. Michelle Rhee claims to be all about teacher performance, but she’s really much, much more than that. She advocated for school vouchers in Indiana in concert with Governor Mitch Daniels. Oh, and I can’t forget her little dance with Bill Frist in Tennessee, where public school teachers are also in danger of losing their bargaining rights, thanks to her advocacy. And lest we forget, there’s always the Washington, DC cheating suspicions , and her special award from Betsy DeVos , where she once again appeared in lockstep with Governor Scott Walker. About those vouchers. Let’s see how many kinds of evil they truly are. Here is Florida’s voucher program in all its glory. For the low, low price of $399 and 8 days’ work, a diploma. enlarge Eight days and $399 in cash later, at the school’s Doral “campus” — a cramped third-floor office next door to US Lubricant LLC and across the hall from a hair extensions company — I was grinning widely, accepting a framed diploma and an official transcript sporting a 3.41 GPA. The degree is accepted at, among other local institutions of higher education, Miami Dade College. And it came blissfully free of that pesky annoyance suffered by thousands of local students graduating from high school this month: education. At InterAmerican Christian Academy , my new alma mater, to earn a diploma you need only to pass five very brief and easy take-home tests. Because I can’t be bothered with such things, I distributed them to local kids ages 8 to 13 to complete. Then I copied their answers. Interamerican Christian Academy is not subject to the NCLB requirements that public schools are. According to its about page, it’s a private correspondence school. They toss up a boilerplate “Christian ideals” page to keep it in the realm of religious schools, and then accept state vouchers to teach students absolutely nothing, but hand out diplomas like they’re candy. I did a podcast last week with the MOMocrats and Rachel Tabachnik where I learned that Christian schools even have their own custom-tailored Stanford Achievement Tests done which test students on “facts” as determined by Christian curriculum writers. Go read her whole post here. It’s footnoted and documented with actual facts, as opposed to the emotion-ridden pablum Rhee peddles about ‘failing schools and the like’. ThinkProgress : As Garcia-Roberts concludes, “ There’s no telling how many of Florida’s 1,713 private schools — which educate a third of a million students — are run like InterAmerican. Even as Gov. Rick Scott leads a charge to privatize education on a historic scale, our state’s private schools are among the least regulated in the nation. ” Indeed, Florida currently leads the country in “school choice” programs that include tax credits for private schools, voucher programs, and privately managed charter schools. The case of InterAmerican Christian Academy provides a cautionary tale about some of the pitfalls of the proliferation of lightly-regulated or unregulated private schools. Michelle Rhee has done more harm to teachers, public education, and students in the past two years than Republicans have in the last ten, largely because she claims to be “liberal” and “on the side of students.” Unfortunately, it doesn’t appear that she’s on the side of anyone but herself and for-profit education organizations, and it’s really too bad that anyone from the DNC would join up with her to try and fool even more people about her true mission.
Continue reading …
So Michelle Rhee hired Hari Sevugan away from the DNC to join her right-wing-in-liberal-clothing organization known as StudentsFirst. Presumably, Hari will rehabilitate the StudentsFirst image which has become irrevocably tainted with the stench of right-wing public school destruction. Hmmm. This comes on the heels of Rhee’s huddle with Rick Scott before he gutted Florida’s public education system, her public support for Scott Walker’s plan to limit teachers’ bargaining rights (see video), lobbying on behalf of Ohio’s SB5 , a special appearance with Governor Kasich to screen Waiting for Superman , and her cozy support for Chris Christie’s school-gutting ways. Michelle Rhee claims to be all about teacher performance, but she’s really much, much more than that. She advocated for school vouchers in Indiana in concert with Governor Mitch Daniels. Oh, and I can’t forget her little dance with Bill Frist in Tennessee, where public school teachers are also in danger of losing their bargaining rights, thanks to her advocacy. And lest we forget, there’s always the Washington, DC cheating suspicions , and her special award from Betsy DeVos , where she once again appeared in lockstep with Governor Scott Walker. About those vouchers. Let’s see how many kinds of evil they truly are. Here is Florida’s voucher program in all its glory. For the low, low price of $399 and 8 days’ work, a diploma. enlarge Eight days and $399 in cash later, at the school’s Doral “campus” — a cramped third-floor office next door to US Lubricant LLC and across the hall from a hair extensions company — I was grinning widely, accepting a framed diploma and an official transcript sporting a 3.41 GPA. The degree is accepted at, among other local institutions of higher education, Miami Dade College. And it came blissfully free of that pesky annoyance suffered by thousands of local students graduating from high school this month: education. At InterAmerican Christian Academy , my new alma mater, to earn a diploma you need only to pass five very brief and easy take-home tests. Because I can’t be bothered with such things, I distributed them to local kids ages 8 to 13 to complete. Then I copied their answers. Interamerican Christian Academy is not subject to the NCLB requirements that public schools are. According to its about page, it’s a private correspondence school. They toss up a boilerplate “Christian ideals” page to keep it in the realm of religious schools, and then accept state vouchers to teach students absolutely nothing, but hand out diplomas like they’re candy. I did a podcast last week with the MOMocrats and Rachel Tabachnik where I learned that Christian schools even have their own custom-tailored Stanford Achievement Tests done which test students on “facts” as determined by Christian curriculum writers. Go read her whole post here. It’s footnoted and documented with actual facts, as opposed to the emotion-ridden pablum Rhee peddles about ‘failing schools and the like’. ThinkProgress : As Garcia-Roberts concludes, “ There’s no telling how many of Florida’s 1,713 private schools — which educate a third of a million students — are run like InterAmerican. Even as Gov. Rick Scott leads a charge to privatize education on a historic scale, our state’s private schools are among the least regulated in the nation. ” Indeed, Florida currently leads the country in “school choice” programs that include tax credits for private schools, voucher programs, and privately managed charter schools. The case of InterAmerican Christian Academy provides a cautionary tale about some of the pitfalls of the proliferation of lightly-regulated or unregulated private schools. Michelle Rhee has done more harm to teachers, public education, and students in the past two years than Republicans have in the last ten, largely because she claims to be “liberal” and “on the side of students.” Unfortunately, it doesn’t appear that she’s on the side of anyone but herself and for-profit education organizations, and it’s really too bad that anyone from the DNC would join up with her to try and fool even more people about her true mission.
Continue reading …