The Holocaust and Hitler’s catholic inspiration

Many people, including theists are under the deluded logic that Adolf Hitler was an atheist. Atheism does not claim for any superior morality, it only defends it and proved that it is not a position of immorality.

Atheism is in correlation to Darwinism even though atheism predates evolution, or at least deism. Darwin’s work was not taught in Germany, all of the great modern atheists Einstein, Darwin, were appalled by the national socialist regime.

 If theology was to make the claim that Hitler’s inspiration was atheist based, then why is it that in the first chapter of Mein Kampf he says he’s doing God’s work by annihilating the Jews? To quote the book exactly he says “hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the almighty creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the lord.”

 Why is it that on that on the belt buckle of every Nazi soldier it stated ‘Gott Mitt Uns’ (God on Our Side)? Why is it that every officer had to take an oath, making Hitler into a minor God by swearing ‘In the name of almighty God, my loyalty to the Führer’?

 Hitler is depicted by many as a pagan polytheist at least – not exactly a conventional theist but still a theist. Atheist websites routinely claim that Hitler was a Christian because he was born Catholic, he never publicly renounced his Catholicism, and he wrote in Mein Kampf, “By defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord.” Atheist writer Sam Harris writes that “the Holocaust marked the culmination of…two hundred years of Christian fulminating against the Jews” and therefore “knowingly or not, the Nazis were agents of religion.”

 Every European country, even Germany, had those who did not believe in the Nazi ideology and who were willing to die for their beliefs. Perhaps no other group stood so firmly in their beliefs as the Jehovah’s Witnesses. Hitler felt particularly threatened by this strong group of Christians because they, from the very beginning, refused to recognize any God other than Jehovah. When asked to sign documents of loyalty to the Nazi ideology, they refused. Jehovah’s Witnesses were forced to wear purple armbands and thousands were imprisoned as “dangerous” traitors because they refused to take a pledge of loyalty to the Third Reich.

 In his rhetoric, Hitler also fed on the old accusation of Jewish Deicide. Because of this, it has been speculated that Christian anti-Semitism influenced Hitler’s ideas, especially such works as Martin Luther’s essay ‘On the Jews and Their Lies’. Luther, much quoted by Hitler, describes the Jews as “…a base, whoring people, that is, no people of God, and their boast of lineage, circumcision, and law must be accounted as filth…” Also, “They are full of the devil’s faeces … which they wallow in like swine…”. He states that their synagogues, schools and prayer books should be set on fire and destroyed, that Rabbis should be forbidden to preach, and that their property and money should be confiscated. He also seems to defend their murder, writing “We are at fault in not slaying them.” In fact, the Nazis scheduled the ‘Kristallnacht’ (‘Crystal Night’) in honor of Martin Luther’s birthday.

 Also the writings of Paul de Lagarde are said to have influenced Hitler. He insisted that the Jews were “pests and parasites who should be destroyed as speedily and as thoroughly as possible.”

 Also, in support of this view, John Toland opines that Hitler “carried within him its teaching that the Jew was the killer of God. The extermination, therefore, could be done without a twinge of conscience since he was merely acting as the avenging hand of God…” Nevertheless in Mein Kampf, Hitler writes of an upbringing in which no particular anti-Semitic prejudice prevailed.

 In 1936, a Roman Catholic cardinal named Michael von Faulhaber met Hitler at Berghof for a meeting. He left entirely convinced that Hitler was “deeply religious” and stated “The Reich Chancellor undoubtedly lives in belief in God. He recognises Christianity as the builder of Western culture.”

 If theists were to claim that Hitler had atheist beliefs, why is it that Hitler made several statements against atheism? For example, in a speech in Stuttgart on the 15^th of February 1933, Hitler stated: “Today they say that Christianity is in danger, that the Catholic faith is threatened. My reply to them is: for the time being, Christians and not international atheists are now standing at Germany’s fore. I am not merely talking about Christianity; I confess that I will never ally myself with the parties which aim to destroy Christianity. Fourteen years they have gone arm in arm with atheism. At no time was greater damage ever done to Christianity than in those years when the Christian parties ruled side by side with those who denied the very existence of God. Germany’s entire cultural life was shattered and contaminated in this period. It shall be our task to burn out these manifestations of degeneracy in literature, theater, schools, and the press—that is, in our entire culture—and to eliminate the poison which has been permeating every facet of our lives for these past fourteen years.”

 For a time Hitler advocated positive Christianity, a militant, non-denominational form of Christianity which emphasized Christ as an active preacher, organizer, and fighter who opposed the institutionalized Judaism of his day. Positive Christianity purged or deemphasized the Jewish aspects of Christianity and was infused with aspects of nationalism and racial anti-Semitism. Hitler never directed his attacks on Jesus himself, whom Hitler regarded as an Aryan opponent of the Jews. Hitler viewed traditional Christianity as a corruption of the original ideas of Jesus by the Apostle Paul. In Mein Kampf Hitler writes that Jesus “made no secret of his attitude toward the Jewish people, and when necessary he even took the whip to drive from the temple of the Lord this adversary of all humanity, who then as always saw in religion nothing but an instrument for his business existence. In return, Christ was nailed to the cross.” In a speech 26 June 1934, Hitler stated:

 “The National Socialist State professes its allegiance to positive Christianity. It will be its honest endeavour to protect both the great Christian Confessions in their rights, to secure them from interference with their doctrines (Lehren), and in their duties to constitute a harmony with the views and the exigencies of the State of today.”

 Hitler made various other statements attacking atheism such as in a radio address in 1933, he stated: “For eight months we have been waging a heroic battle against the Communist threat to our Volk, the decomposition of our culture, the subversion of our art, and the poisoning of our public morality. We have put an end to denial of God and abuse of religion. We owe Providence humble gratitude for not allowing us to lose our battle against the misery of unemployment and for the salvation of the German peasant.”

 Furthermore, Hitler made a statement during a speech made, during negotiations leading to the Nazi-Vatican Concordant on April 26^th 1933, against secular schools. He stated: “Secular schools can never be tolerated because such schools have no religious instruction, and a general moral instruction without a religious foundation is built on air; consequently, all character training and religion must be derived from faith …we need believing people.”

Hitler also supported the consent of the Catholic Church for a Croatian death camp, also known as the Jasenovac concentration camp, during World War II. Although the camp was not directly operated by Germans, their influence led to Jasenovac being ran similarly to all other extermination camps in Europe – With the aim to contribute to the Nazi “final solution” to the “Jewish problem”, the killing of Roma people and the elimination of political opponents, but the most significant purpose for Jasenovac was to achieve the destruction of the Serbian population of the new independent Croatia, NDH (Nezavisna Država Hrvatska).

Within months of creating their “independent state” of Croatia, the leaders made clear what this new Catholic nation was all about. On the 2^nd of June 1941, in Nova Grarfiska, Dr. Milovan Zanitch, Minister of Justice, stated: ‘This State, our country, is only for the Croats, and not for anyone else.  There are no ways and means which we Croats will not use to make our country truly ours, and to clean it of all Orthodox Serbs.  All those who came into our country 300 years ago must disappear.  We do not hide (that) this (is) our intention.  It is the policy of our State, and during its promotion we shall do nothing else but follow the principles of the Ustashi.”

In a speech given in Gospic on June 6, 1941, Mile Budak, the Ustasha Minister of Education and Cults, revealed and explained the policy of genocide against the Orthodox Serbs as follows: “One-third of the Serbs we shall kill, another we shall deport, and the last we shall force to embrace the Roman Catholic religion and thus melt them into Croats.”

The deniers of the Catholic Church’s input in the holocaust are so numerous that there is hardly a Roman Catholic in a million, no matter how educated, who is even aware of the atrocities within the Roman Catholic country of Croatia in the name and under the leadership of their own Catholic commanders.

 The Catholic Church ever since the holocaust, as well as the German public, almost live in shame at the Roman Catholic based atrocity. A lot of Christians are holocaust deniers due to the regime that their religion allowed Hitler to do wicked things because Gods’ word was on the page suggesting so. Holocaust denial is explicitly or implicitly illegal in 17 countries: Austria, Belgium, Canada, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Hungary, Israel, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, and Switzerland. The European Union’s Framework decision on Racism and Xenophobia states that denying or grossly trivializing “crimes of genocide” should be made “punishable in all EU Member States”. Many people have been imprisoned for the denial of this genocide such as David Irving who came to prominence in the media as a holocaust denier although he refers to his work as ‘Historical Revisionism’ which is merely an interpretation based view of history rather than actuality. David Irving is regarded as “the most skillful preacher of Holocaust denial in the world today”. He has written many books about the subject and was sentenced to three years imprisonment in Vienna.

A lot of people, like the late Christopher Hitchens and Peter Singer, Noam Chomsky think that his is an immoral act. The reason for this is because they do not want to censorship ‘free speech’ unlike said laws. The misinterpretation of the statements and news features that Christopher, Peter and Noam have appeared in is that they too have been accused for holocaust denial for defending the free speech act that David Irving embraced on. All of them do not agree with Mr. Irving’s views on holocaust denial in any way, but they highly discredit the totalitarian law which says you cannot think of such a thing because it offends so many people, mainly survivors.

So the main controversy in conclusion to that is; even in the most extremely offensive cases, should someone be held in contempt for thinking something and writing words on paper? Like the fatwa that was issued on Salman Rushdie for example.

Author: Faye Mestre

 

No Sex Please, we’re British

The Great British Monarchy

Good day friends,

 Prime Ministers come and go, land, alliances, industry. Great Britain is constantly evolving into something new and radical. It is nice to know though, that the British monarchy is a shining constant in an otherwise tumultuous sea. Whether you love them or not, you cannot deny that the strong, caring, sometimes insane Kings and Queens of our isles have guided us through some of our darkest hours.

 Now, considering that this is a brief look at our British monarchy, we must first outline the start of Great Britain.

Officially, Great Britain was born on the 1st of May 1707 with the merger of the Kingdom of England and the Kingdom of Scotland. Let us not forget, that the two kingdoms were in a monarchical relationship since the reign of King James I of England in 1603. However, this was never a political union and so cannot be considered the official creation of Great Britain.

With this in mind, we generally take Queen Anne to be the first Monarch of Great Britain as she assumed power on the 1st of May 1707.

From the 1st of January 1801, Ireland was also merged into this union and so it became the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland with poor little Wales still being left out of the party.

 So what will follow, is a timeline list of our Great British monarchs which will be utilised in part 2 of this topic (to come latter) to outline the positives (and possibly negatives, no promises) of our Kings and Queens.

House of Stuart

 Queen Anne          1702-1714

House of Brunswick, Hanover Line

King George I        1714-1727

King George II       1727-1760

King George III      1760-1820

King George IV      1820-1830

King William IV      1830-1837

Queen Victoria       1837-1901

House of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha

 King Edward VII     1901-1910

 House of Windsor

 King George V       1910-1936

King Edward VIII    1936

King George VI      1936-1952

Queen Elizabeth II 1952-Incumbent

So there we are, our British heritage there for your viewing pleasure. As I said, next time we will look at the timeline in more depth. Until then,

Good day.

Author: Andrew C Davies

 

Where did Wonderland come from? Alice and the Author.

You’ve fallen down a rabbit hole, only this time you’re not in a room full of doors, no, you’re on a rowing boat on your way to a picnic with you two sisters and two close friends. It’s July 4^th 1862 and you want Charles to tell you one of his strange whimsical story’s for the journey. You hear him talking of rabbit holes and white rabbits in waistcoats, doors, talking animals, a red queen with an enormous head, you hear him talk of Wonderland.

The story teller, Charles Lutwidge Dodgson better known as Lewis Carroll was close friends with the Liddell family. Dodgson was the eldest of eight siblings. The Liddell family became friends with him after their father was appointed church dean at the church were Charles worked as a mathematician. The Liddell’s had three daughters Edith, Lorina and Alice. The girls got on well with Dodgson as they liked the strange, exotic and engagingly whimsical stories that he told them. 

 

Wonderland came alive on July 4^th 1862, when the three girls, Dodgson and one of his friends Robert Duckworth set out on a rowing boat from Folly Bridge to Godstow to have a picnic. The three daughters wanted Charles to tell them one of his fascinating stories. Charles told them a tale of a girl named Alice who fell down a rabbit hole and found herself in a bizarre new world. The real Alice, Alice Liddell, was so taken with the story that she asked Charles to write it down for her, which, of course he did. Late he added a few more chapters and illustrations so the story, and named the tale Alice’s adventures underground. A friend of Dodgson, an author George McDonald read the story to his children and they were taken with the story to, he highly encouraged Charles to get the tale published. In 1865 Dodgson changed his name to Lewis Carroll and had his book published by Macmillan.

 

There are some rumours that Dodgson favoured Alice Liddell, and that there are connections with her and fantasy Alice. For example the poem through the looking glass every letter at the start of each line spells out Alice Liddell’s full name, Alice Pleasance Liddell. Also the two Alice’s are the same age although both Alice’s are the complete opposite, Alice Liddell has short dark hair were as fantasy Alice has long blonde hair and is short in size. Both Alice’s even had the same birthdays, May 4^th. Incidentally, it also seems that the character of the Red Queen in Through the Looking Glass owed something to the Liddell children’s alarming governess. Dodgson denied that he intended to portray Alice Liddell in this whimsical tale.

 

In 1963 the friendship between the Liddell’s and Dodgson broke down for unclear reasons, it might have been that Alice’s mother was uncomfortable with Alice’s and Dodgson friendship. A part of his diary that explains this was torn out by one of Dodgson’s descendants. After a few months polite relations were returned but none of the earlier warmth of the friendship. Dodgson died in 1898, he remained a bachelor until his death, and Dodgson revealed the nature of his feelings for Alice Liddell in his diary but poured ink over it a few days before he passed. Alice Liddell died at the age of 82 in 1934, Alice married Reginald Hargreaves who died in 1926, and Alice’s was so short of money that she sold the original manuscript of Alice’s adventures underground for £15,400. In her last years she said that she was “tired of being Alice in wonderland.”

 

In through the looking glass

 

A boat, beneath a sunny sky

Lingeringonward dreamily,

In an evening in July

 

Children three that nestle near

Eager eye and willing ear

Please a simple tale to hear,

Long had paled that sunny sky
Echoes fade and memories die

Autumn frosts have slain July

 

Still she haunts me, phantom wise
Alice moving under skies

Never seen by waking eyes

 

Children yet, the tale to hear
Eager eye and willing ear

Lovingly shall nestle near

 

In a wonderland they lie,
Dreaming as the day goes by
Dreaming as the summers die

Ever drifting down the stream

Lingering in the golden gleam
Life, what is it but a dream?

Author: Sophie Johnson

 

The Boat that Rocked

Pirate Radio!

To many the idea of ‘pirate radio’ and broadcasting 60s pop music illegally to teens with wireless radios seems really interesting. But other than having watched ‘The Boat That Rocked’ and having a vague idea of what it could have been like, I really don’t know much about it. So, first of all I did a bit of research, my starting point being Radio Caroline.

 Radio Caroline was the first British pirate radio station and began broadcasting in 1964, just outside of British waters. The original Radio Caroline ship was formerly called the Fredericia and she broadcast until the 3rd March 1968. Yes, they broadcast from an actual boat. To most people that’s no surprise but I think it’s difficult to appreciate just how hard that must have been. Pirate Radio paints a really great picture in my imagination; there are people so passionate about music that they live out at sea and break the law. Radio Caroline and the people who broadcasted from the ship became a great symbol of the swinging sixties.

 ‘Another timeless day has begun on Radio Caroline South. Another 24 hours of brisk pop music and ruthless happiness.’ This is a quote I found from one of the DJ’s journals. When I came across it I realised it had what I felt was true importance. ‘Ruthless happiness’ was the part that really got me. It says that there will be happiness whether or not it feels right. They broadcast this to countless people who will hear the music and have their day changed by it. Hearing a good song in the morning can mean the difference between a bad day and a good day.

 Pirate radio was highly successful, offshore stations had an audience of around 24.5 million listeners. Travis Lee Davies, chief DJ at only 21 said ‘They like us because they recognise us as normal, human, fallible people like them and not remote, anonymous impersonal voices’ when he tried to explain a little about why Radio Caroline was so popular. The general sale of transistor radios meant that people could now listen on their own, away from the family radio. This meant that the teenagers could listen to Radio Caroline upstairs in their rooms without their parents knowing.

DJs spent two weeks on board and a week off. In theory this lifestyle sounds very appealing. You do your time slot and the rest of the time you can sleep or read or lounge around. It seems very relaxed and a friendly environment. However their lives onboard were set by schedules; it was very routine and even dull. You couldn’t leave; all you could do was shut yourself away. I can imagine it being a very unhealthy way to live. As well as dangerous, if somebody had an emergency the hospital would be too far away for them to get the treatment they may need in order to save their lives. Pirate radio shows paid no taxes and were essentially stealing from the everyday taxpayer, you would expect a symbol for sixties youth and change would be on the public’s side completely.

 I love the concept of pirate radio and I hope you do too. It makes me wish that there was a radio station that played alternative music, which had engaging hosts and no adverts. I will leave you with some 60s music so that you can reminisce about an age that you probably didn’t experience, I suggest ‘Elenore’ by The Turtles’ or ‘Dancing in the street’ by Martha Reeves and The Vandella.

 

Author – Rowan Thorp

 

Historical reality or Hollywood fantasy

Has anyone seen the bridge?

Braveheart is famously known to be riddled with several historical inaccuracies which lead me to question the impact that simplified and fictionalised History has upon its audience. The absence of the “Bridge” at the Battle of Stirling is an unmistakable error to which Gibson admits was done to make the battle more cinematically appealing. The Battle of Stirling was indeed a turning point for Scottish independence however the movie portrays their victory very differently. Wallace’s troops in fact waited for the English to cross the bridge and brutally murdered them one by one. In the movie however the Scots used man made spears to remove the English cavalry before following Wallace’s cunning and deceitful plan to eradicate the English archers from behind. Not only was the Battle of Stirling grossly inaccurate, Gibson also failed to portray the real happenings at the Battle of Falkirk. Although the movie rightly depicts it was in fact their first significant military disaster, it fails to illustrate how and why the Scots were defeated. The movie dramatically emphasises the betrayal of the nobles of Scotland and Robert the Bruce. This is exceedingly inaccurate as the nobles played very little part in this and Robert the Bruce was in fact very supportive of Wallace. The Scots were defeated due to the highly trained Welsh archers who had high-tech weaponry and therefore could shoot from a long distance.

Gibson falls in love with a 4 year old?

Another distinctive yet intentional error made by Gibson is the far-fetched romance between himself and Murron. In the movie William and Murron secretly married beneath a canopy of trees in the dead of night. Although there is no solid evidence that Murron did not exist, Gibson admitted to accentuating the romance between them for screening purposes. He didn’t want to portray Wallace as a mindless barbarian although this wasn’t far from the truth. Instead he wanted people to sympathise with Wallace and therefore he played on the idea he was hopelessly in love. Gibson used this as a motive for Wallace to fight claiming he was desperately trying to avenge his beloved wife who was wretchedly torn from him (she was killed by an English soldier after assaulting one). Furthermore, towards the end of the movie Wallace has an encounter with Isabelle of France. As the movie progresses the princess begins to inform Wallace and his troops of danger and soon enough she falls in love with him. However, at the time of Wallace’s military escapades Isabelle of France was merely four years old which picks a huge hole in Gibson’s plot.

Scott’s in skirts?

There are two major wardrobe related errors within the movie. The most well-known is the portrayal of the Scots wearing kilts in the 13^th century as they didn’t become a popular form of men’s wear until the 17^th century. Another inaccuracy is that English soldiers are seen to be wearing “uniforms” when in actuality soldiers in this era would wear anything they could get their hands on. Gibson will have done this for the audience’s convenience so it’s easy to distinguish the English from the Scottish throughout the duration of the movie. Not only was there wardrobe malfunctions but the Scottish no longer painted their faces during battle in the 13^th century. This originated from the Scottish tradition of painting their faces blue to scare away Roman’s from their lands. Gibson did this for cinematic purposes as the blue face paint is so iconic you couldn’t imagine Braveheart without it.

The wrong kind of torture

The last scene in the movie although is not inaccurate is noticeably tamed. It is understandable as realistically traitors endured the five stage punishment: a person was hanged, cut open to expose his intestines, castrated, chopped into pieces and finally beheaded. However in the movie Wallace is seen to be stretched and hanged before finally being beheaded. The film also fails to touch on how before the execution Wallace was stripped naked and dragged around by a rope tied to his ankle. The movie does on the other hand note that Wallace’s arms and legs were sent to the four corners of Britain and his head was set on London Bridge. This is historically accurate as King Edward did this as a warning to others.

The conclusion

Very few History films can be historically accurate throughout. You have to applaud Gibson on his remarkable attempt at recreating the events during this period. If you overlook the inaccuracies, the movie was visually stunning and the story was faultless. Although a student shouldn’t refer to a historical movie as a factual source they do indeed capture audiences and recreate a certain intrigue in history which occasionally gets lost beneath the increase of modern technology.

Author- Beth Manning

 

Penny for the Guy?

Remember, remember the fifth of November,
Gunpowder treason and plot.
We see no reason
Why gunpowder treason
Should ever be forgot!

The famous children’s nursery rhyme that echoes around primary school assemblies during this time of year! But putting all the firework safety lectures aside for a minute, Bonfire night actually proves to be an interesting time of year.

But just as a slight digression, a survey says that roughly one in fifteen people that buy fireworks will spend on average more than they would on a Christmas present for their partner… A bit odd don’t you think on a bunch of explosives? But if you’re like me then you will probably either head to the local firework hotspot (even if that is the back garden) to watch other people’s hard earned cash just blow up in a kaleidoscope of colour in the sky!

The words of “Remember Remember” refers to Guy Fawkes who as we all know on the 5^th November 1605, was caught with several dozen barrels of gunpowder in the cellars of Parliament, ready to blow it up! Unfortunately for Mr Fawkes he was found guilty of treason and hung, drawn and quartered. Still, ten for effort Guy!

The following year in 1606 it became an annual custom for the King (James I) to commission a sermon to commemorate Fawkes’ failure. An Act was also passed referred to as the “Observance of 5^th November Act” to legally enforce public acknowledgement. It makes sense as a bit of British History that the UK makes more of an effort on Bonfire night. We commemorate this event each year with fireworks and bonfires, culminating in burning an effigy (or “Guy”) of Guy Fawkes himself.

Although our celebrations on the 5^th November are associated with Guy Fawkes and the Gunpowder plot, it has more ancient roots than most realise. The beginning of November marked the start of the Pagan year and the first day of winter. Bonfires were lit and torches carried in processions. Sacrifices of animals were also made as it was believed to drive away evil spirits.

The concept of fireworks can actually be dated back 2000 years. Chinese firecrackers were used to celebrate a wedding, christening, birth or any other religious festival. This is a custom that is still used today. Fireworks were used for centuries in ancient Indian and Siamese religious ceremonies. Some of the rockets were 8-10 feet long and were attached to bamboo canes which were 40 feet high! Fireworks were certainly used in Europe by the 14th Century they were probably brought back from the East by the Crusaders and used for entertainment.

Author – Fiona Gray

 

A bit of History… In Runcorn?

Yes that’s right folks! Runcorn has produced a little snippet of genuinely interesting history!  A 750 year old murder secret has been uncovered. A researcher at the University of Liverpool found that a 13^th century knight buried at Norton Priory was killed by a sword cut to his upper back.

The Knight is believed to have been Sir Geoffrey Dutton, son of a nobleman and born around 1170 AD.  From the evidence gathered from his remains, he was said to have been around 48 years old when he died, a surprising age for the time. A large majority of Knights would have died during battle or through illness and injury. The likelihood is Dutton spent the majority of his time protecting the fortified Motte and Bailey castle on the top of Halton hill built in the 1070s.

The Knight comes with his own story of murder. Instead of a more “honourable” death in battle, curators at Norton priory say that the knight may have been murdered by any number of individuals; from those he had disputes with, to burglars in the night. Medieval weapons expert and TV presenter Mike Loades said “It seems almost inconceivable that a wound of this nature could be caused to anyone wearing armour. The slice would have had to cut through the armour for the entire length of the wound.” Shirley Curtis-Summers Ph.D. said that the knight sustained a mortal wound that would have left him alive for several hours, yet unable to walk.

Dutton was found buried in the grounds of Norton Priory in a stone coffin with a lid bearing two carved shields that once would have represented his nobility; he took pride of place in the nave of the priory church. The skeleton is now on display in the priory museum.

Author – Fiona Gray

 

The Mystery of the Military Pigeon…

Skeleton of World War two carrier pigeon, discovered transporting a secret coded message, found in a chimney in Surrey!

 Recently, David Martin, 74, an inhabitant of Bletchingley, Surrey, was renovating his chimney within the comfort of his home, when suddenly he came across the skeleton of a veteran carrier pigeon, with a mysterious top secret coded message attached to its leg.

The bird had the cigarette-thin paper message, rolled up within a small red capsule, and was thought to have been carrying top secret war information back home to the UK from Nazi Germany, in which it was believed that the bird was making its way to Bletchley Park.

During the war, there was a mass squadron of birds –known as the “National Pigeon Service”, whose duties were to help pass information behind enemy lines, and it was due to this that they have been used as military messengers throughout history. This was specifically due to the way in which they are able to reach speeds of 80mph, cover distances of 700 miles, and are also extremely efficient navigators. These birds were deemed so precious to the war effort that they were even awarded with royal protection. This meant that anyone who was found to ‘wound or molest’ a bird during WWII faced as much as six months within prison, or a £100 fine.

However there was one thing about this particular bird which was special, the coded message which it was transporting, has not been recognised.

As Colin Hill, a volunteer for the Royal Pigeon Racing Association and the curator of Bletchley Park’s permanent ‘Pigeons at war’ exhibition states;

“We have more than 30 messages from WWII carrier pigeons in our exhibition, but not one is in code. The message Mr. Martin found must be highly top secret.”

“The Royal Pigeon Racing Association” believe the bird had either lost its route, got disorientated by the bad weather at the time, or just simply stopped off after being exhausted by the long trip over the channel.

All that is known at this present moment in time, is that code breakers at GCHQ in Cheltenham, are desperately trying to decipher  the message, to uncover what the secret message that cost this pigeon it’s life, could possibly be saying. As David Martin states
“Who knows; maybe it’ll tell us something really shocking like, god forbid, Churchill was actually working undercover for the Nazis!”

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20164591 – BBC News report on the find.

Author – Samantha Filkins

 

Happy Halloween everyone!!

Well it’s that time of year again, Halloween! An excuse to knock at strangers doors asking for sweets and getting away with it without getting in trouble… Well as long as it is someone under the age of 12. I don’t think next door took it too kindly when their 15 year old knocked at my door dressed as a dead schoolgirl and I refused to give up the goods. What do you expect me to do, give up my collection of Haribos to someone who insists on waking me up at 6 every morning?

Here is a brief history of the ancient festival.

Halloween’s origins date back to the ancient Celtic festival of Samhain (pronounced sow-in). The Celts, who lived 2,000 years ago in the area that is now Ireland, the United Kingdom and northern France, celebrated their new year on 1^st November. This day marked the end of summer harvest and the beginning of the dark, cold winter, a time of year that was often associated with human death. Celts believed that on the night before the New Year, the boundary between the worlds of the living and the dead became blurred. On the night of October 31 they celebrated Samhain, when it was believed that the ghosts of the dead returned to earth. In addition to causing trouble and damaging crops, Celts thought that the presence of the otherworldly spirits made it easier for the Druids, or Celtic priests, to make predictions about the future. For a people entirely dependent on the volatile natural world, these prophecies were an important source of comfort and direction during the long, dark winter.

To commemorate the event, Druids built huge sacred bonfires, where the people gathered to burn crops and animals as sacrifices to the Celtic deities. During the celebration, the Celts wore costumes, typically consisting of animal heads and skins, and attempted to tell each other’s fortunes. When the celebration was over, they re-lit their hearth fires, which they had extinguished earlier that evening, from the sacred bonfire to help protect them during the coming winter.

So there it is, one day a year we celebrate the rising of the dead by eating sweets or getting drunk at parties!

Author – Fiona Gray

 

The Music In Me

Whether it is mind, body or soul music can bring people together and can connect to the deep emotions, relieving stress, fear and anger. For me music is the one thing I can utterly rely on, it gives me a sense of freedom from the day to day stresses of this world and its people. Connecting with music is different for everybody, for example I prefer the carefully selected meaningful words of a story lived and told, written by the talented musicians of the punk rock world, where as someone else is keen on the relentless repetition of Rihanna’s “we found love in a hopeless place.”
I guess it all depends on the person, what they have been though and what connects them to it and draws their attention most.

Music can be traced right back to the stone age as archaeological digs are still discovering signs of musical instruments dating back to this age of half monkey and man, just beginning to become slightly civilized and adapt. Perhaps the songs they made from these instruments helped their development in some way, perhaps it brought to light feelings they have never felt and helped find themselves in some way, perhaps they danced around blazing fires, chanting like the cavemen they were, or maybe the magical tunes danced through their bodies connecting mind to soul and surrounding them with peace and belonging.

From the Stone Age to the Victorians. Music to the people then was vitally important, from the high society to the working class and across the nation. In a world that was just constructing the music box, hearing live music performed was a precious thing to be cherished forever. People didn’t just want to listen to the music they wanted to create it for themselves and others to hear as well. Whether it was the professionals or the armatures, choirs and duos where springing up all over the place bringing their local communities closer together through the power of their voices and instruments in musical harmony. Music didn’t just bring people together during the Victorian times it travels on up to early 1900’s when both wars broke out; the songs then provided the people with hope and spirit to get through the hard times. Just as the music produced then and the music being produced now brings people through their struggles in life, or if those people just want to escape to a peaceful place with the sound of beautiful voices inside their heads it gives them hope and a sense of belonging in world full of misfits.

Author – Sophie Johnson