In the new national school curriculum there will be a module on Islamic history in order to meet the demands that history education ought to move away from British and European history to ‘world history’. The movement behind this are concerned that if British children are taught about their history then they may become patriotic. The idea is if they are taught that Britain retarded the development of everyone else to give ourselves an advantage (despite this not being true) then this tendency towards patriotism, which according to Leftist logic, would lead inevitably towards supremacism (despite there being no logical reason why this would necessarily happen), will be replaced by a fanatical devotion to Diversity and self-loathing.
Originally the Islamic module was not going to be included in the new curriculum but then Gove changed his mind. The reason that he changed his mind was that he was forced to by the Muslim lobby led by the Muslim Council of Britain. The Muslim lobby has significant power since their growing numbers means that they are growing electoral force, and the oil-wealth of the Gulf States can be used to influence our politicians.
Why Should There Be an Islamic Module on the National Curriculum?
There are various justifications for this foisting of Islamic propaganda onto British schoolchildren. Salim Mulla, of the Lancashire Council of Mosques argued that there is an ignorance of Islam amongst Christians (what about vice versa?). What does he mean by ignorance? It is typically thought that anybody who knows anything about Islam would necessarily be supportive of it; conversely opposition to it indicates ignorance regardless of how many violent passages that you can recall from the religious texts. Since it would be the case that he would want children to have a positive view of Islam the passages that support violence against non-Muslims and the takeover of societies would not be included. In other words, what would taught is propaganda.
http://dailycaller.com/2013/07/16/islamic-history-will-now-be-foisted-on-all-british-kids-in-school
Others argue that it would decrease ‘Muslim alienation’ but why should our own history be pushed aside to accommodate the sensibilities of a particular community who apparently reject any historical narrative that does not include them; it is often assumed that they do. The argument is based on the premise that Muslims will opt out of our society if they are not.given credit for the rise of Western civilisation, and is the historical equivalent of the argument that Muslims will only integrate into our society if it reflected them; as regards our relationship with our own society and history, we are expected to embrace anything even if it does not reflect us. This apparently vital contribution to Western civilisation includes the ‘Muslim’ discovery of the number zero which our civilisation would not have happened without – allegedly.
But Europeans had the concept of nothingness so would have invented a sign for it anyway as with other mathematical signs. Even if Muslims had invented ‘zero’ it was still Europeans who made the breakthroughs that created the modern world but there is a movement that aims to promote the idea that Europeans stole these breakthroughs and it was really non-Europeans that ought to be given the credit for them. That advancements amongst Europeans only happens through accident or theft, and true innovation can only happen amongst non-European civilisations is disseminated . This nothing to do with fact but with disparaging an entire race of people but this would only be considered wrong if it was non-Europeans being disparaged. Allegedly, if white self-esteem is not dismantled then we would inevitably become supremacist, since according to some pathologically-defective people, this is the only way that white people can be, and that if the self-esteem if other races is raised then, for whatever reason, they will develop notions of peace and equality between people. This the Politically Correct Marxist paradigm that has paved the way for Islamic history to get onto the curriculum.
Empires and Imperialism
But will children be taught about Islamic imperialism, including in Europe? It is unlikely since it is the Politically Correct narrative that imperialism is only a European disease led by an apparently innate drive to dominate everyone, but non-European empires bring civilisation. While European empires are considered necessarily bad it is often argued that the Islamic Moorish empire in the Iberian Peninsula (711-1492) was a beacon of tolerance within backward Europe because the Muslim rulers allowed other religions to exist. Islamic tolerance is measured by a much lower threshold than Europeans. It is not mentioned that the most tolerant rulers did allow other religions to exist but imposed a tax for that pleasure and deprived non-Muslims of the same political rights as Muslims. Islamic scripture says that Christians ought to be subdued, and if they resist, they must be fought until they are overcome (Bernard Lewis, in Islam and the West). Other Andalusian rulers persecuted non-Muslims completely.
There was of course the Ottomans in the East who, in 1529 and 1683 got as far as Vienna. The Ottomans were on a Jihadist mission to subject Europe to Islamic rule, and overthrow Christianity. If it is taught than it would be portrayed as a defensive mission because, according to Politically Correct narratives, in European and non-European relations it is necessarily Europeans who act aggressively and the non-Europeans in self-defence. But in fact, modernisation could have been stifled in Europe by Islam in the same way that scientific and medical advances (built on Greek, and therefore European, texts) was stifled in the Islamic world after its ‘golden age’ in the 10th and 11th centuries. These advances happened despite Islam, not because of it.
The Ottoman influence in Europe is often cited as one of the reasons that Europe modernised. But one aspect of European modernisation was the Reformation leading to Protestant work ethic, increase in secularism (in the sense that there was an increasing separation between the spiritual realm and temporal governance) and growing importance of empirical scientific methods. As to how an invading jihadist Empire can be cited as the reason for these developments is not clear. This argument would be based on the premise that they presence of anything non-European in Europe can only have good consequences despite the atrocities carried out by the Ottomans (based in modern Turkey), especially in the Balkans, and favouritism granted to Muslims and those Europeans who converted to Islam. These events influenced the Balkan wars in the 1990s (as well as previous ones) because the Balkan Muslims are a legacy of the occupation. Yet according to Politically Correct narratives, modern problems only come from European empires.
Multiculturalism
It has also been argued that the role of Muslims in creating a multicultural Europe should be taught since children, and the rest of us, are already told that multiculturalism is absolutely a good thing and that anyone who disagrees is deranged individual harbouring Nazi sympathies. So they will obviously be told that the demographic transformation happening is a positive thing; that indigenous Europeans would somehow benefit from becoming a minority in our own homeland while our cultural identity is dismantled due to the Marxist belief that our cultural identity is a burden that we need to be relieved from because of our ‘imperialistic’ history – yet this would not apparently hold true for Islamic culture despite its more extensive imperialist legacy. Again, one standard applies to Europeans and another to non-Europeans. Our ‘imperialist’ legacy amounts to a few hundred years over the millennia while Islamic imperialism has been non-stop process for 1300 years.
Children won’t be taught about the rape epidemic happening in Europe with the tacit approval of European authorities, riots in major cities and tensions resulting from the clash between incompatible cultures. Nor will they be taught about the grooming gangs in the wider context of multiculturalism. Instead they will be taught the Islam is contributing to a utopia.
europenews.dk/en/node/63520
Why Islam in Particular?
Our schools already accommodate Islam so this curriculum change would represent another step in an already existing trend. Schools are already offering halal only menus and, in some areas, pork is banned even though there are non-Muslim students. The dietary requirements of Muslims seem to represent another example of Islamic exceptionalism because halal meat would contravene the religious requirements of Sikhs because their religions would forbade eating ritually-slaughtered meat, and beef is not banned, for example, to accommodate Hindu students (not that it should be, of course!).
Islam is generally given an exceptional status in our society that is not given to other religions. In fact the number ‘zero’ originated in Hindu India which was conquered by the Mughal Empire which established Islamic rule, destroyed Hindu and Sikh temples an to the Islamic world, and those whom want to end any criticism of Islam wants to give the religion credit for anything they d enslaved and killed tens of millions between 1000 AD and 1575. The number ‘zero’ amongst other things were then taken back to the Islamic world and found its way to Europe through the trade routes between Europe and Asia. Islam is given a prominent place in history in order to match its prominent place in modern Britain. Maybe if other religions developed their own jihadi movements while creating a sense of victimhood then they may get the same exceptional treatment. According to Marxist logic, the more someone hates us the more therefore we have done wrong to them, rather than non-Europeans being capable of prejudice – an apparently European-only evil. This would therefore require greater favouritism towards their religion.
Conclusion
Questionable ‘history’ will be deployed since European achievements will ‘given’ to the world. The fact that the Greek texts were utilised indicated that it was knowledge gained in Europe that was used by the Muslim world. These texts were seized in military expeditions against Christian Empires in the East so were therefore taken away from Europeans in the first place, and rather than being given back by advanced Arabs to help backward and savage Europeans civilise as the Politically Correct narrative says, these were seized back during the Crusades to regain the Holy Land seized from Christians in the first place by the Islamic world. This led to Scholastic philosophy as theologians attempted to reconcile pagan Greek philosophers with Christian providence, amongst other things. As for medical advances, these were based on Greek texts and it cannot justifiably be argued that if these were not made then Western Civilisation (Classical civilisation seen as a precursor to Western civilization) would not have happened.
Because the Islamic lobby are powerful enough to get Islamic history put on the curriculum then it can be certain that they will influence the content; in fact the inclusion on the curriculum is based on hopes that it would end ‘Islamophobia’. In other words, British children would be open to the establishment of more mosques and the encroachment of Sharia into British public life through having their view of historical and contemporary events distorted. .
resistancetoantidemocraticleft 
Europe and other Western countries ought to ask themselves do Islamic stated teach Christianity or Judism ,or Buddhism.??In Saudia Arabia not even one church yet this radical Muslim country has build with oil money 5000 mosques in the Western and Christian countries. Enough blindness.