Well, I Can’t See This Going Wrong…

Half a million students studied GCSE or A-level history in the UK last year, but just 2,000 of them tackled the origins of the conflict raging in the Middle East. Why? According to one history teacher, Meredith Cann, schools often fear criticism from parents if they tackle sensitive topics.

Mainly because they do it wrong.  

Children are hungry for the chance to study contested and topical periods of history, says Cann, the programme manager at Parallel Histories, an education charity.

Are they? Is there any evidence of that? 

It’s not just Israel and Palestine; other contested subjects often avoided by schools include the impact of the British empire, and the conflict in Northern Ireland.

Really? I thought modern history in schools was 100% 'the British Empire is the root of all evil'..? 

Most schools, she says, restrict their history curriculum to periods that are distant in time or geography.

Well, it IS in the title, after all... 

Parallel Histories promotes new ways to study and understand conflict, helping teachers confidently explore the roots of contemporary wars from Ukraine to Gaza with students, and assess the legacy of leaders such as Winston Churchill. It seeks to reach across community divides and provide an antidote to populism and extremism.

Oooh, I bet it doesn't. I bet perpetuating conflict is its main goal. It is, after all, a fakecharity that gets most of its money from grants, almost certainly from government and other quangos...

“It’s really easy for children to think of history as a list of dead people and what they did. But history is the version of the stories which have shaped and are shaping so much of the modern world,” Cann says. “It’s about how things have been interpreted, and how people have used this history. And that’s where we link to current affairs without treading that line into politicising.”

Good luck trying to walk that line! But let's see an example of the stuff they want to churn out to the kiddies, shall we? 

Parallel Histories works with prominent historians and spends months sifting through sources to draw up the ebooks that are the basis of debates on each topic. For example: was Winston Churchill a racist warmonger who used inhumane forms of warfare? Or was he a visionary leader who saw the threat posed by nazism from the start and led Britain to help defeat Adolf Hitler?

I can pretty much guess the answer. 

The materials on Churchill include a chilling account from his memoir of a military campaign in Afghanistan. Acts that today would probably be considered war crimes are described in his own words. “We destroyed the houses, filled up the wells, blew down the towers, cut down the great shady trees, burned the crops and broke the reservoirs in punitive devastation,” Churchill wrote.

See? 

Another Pathetically Lenient Sentence & Authority Incompetence …

A mum-of-five whose dogs savaged a pensioner has been jailed after ignoring warnings about the “vicious” animals.

'Savaged' doesn't quite fully sum up the damage done here:

Vic Franklin had to have his arm and leg amputated after being attacked by Chloe Taylor’s two rottweilers in Lewes Close in Bognor.

This is the case reported last year, and it's another one replete with all the usual issues; totally innocent victim, filthy chav owners of the vicious mutts, idiot onlookers weeping because armed police shot the poor doggies... 

Taylor, 27, wept as she was taken down today after being jailed for 27 months and told she will spend at least half in custody.

But she's not the only person who should be in the dock, not by a long chalk:

Judge William Ashworth told Taylor she ignored repeated warnings about the dogs who she knew were getting out of her insecure garden.

"The dogs were left insecure outside in the garden,” he said.

"A garden they had escaped from many times before and a garden you were aware was not secure."

The judge said Taylor had been officially warned about neighbours’ concerns and advised she was in breach of the tenancy agreement by keeping them at the house.

All those warning, and yet, they were never followed up by action. What was the point? 

A series of warnings over the aggression shown by the dogs were issued and ignored by locals, council and police, the judge said. The last warning came two days before Mr Franklin was attacked.

If they had acted on that one, he might still have all four limbs. And in fact, he doesn't owe his survival to the police who finally turned up to end the threat permanently, but to a civilian - his neighbour: 

The rottweilers mauled Mr Franklin for 11 minutes before his neighbour appeared after hearing the dogs barking and shouting. His partner looked out at the horrific scene outside and shouted: "Oh God, there is a man being attacked by a dog."

Mr Jones armed himself with a large spirit level and went out to confront the dogs.

Hard not to agree with this commenter: