'Forget' the Alamo ... ?!

[LanSite]

BILL O'REILLY, HOST: Now for the Top Story tonight, another apparent erosion in the teaching of American history. There are some educators in Texas who want a different academic slant on the Alamo.

Fox News correspondent Douglas Kennedy sets it up for us.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

DOUGLAS KENNEDY, FOX CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Remember the Alamo, the battle cry chiding Texans not to forget its war for independence with Mexico. Still, how Texans remember the Alamo, as well as Texas history, may be changing.

ANGELA MILLER, HOUSTON SCHOOL DISTRICT: We don't want our Hispanic kids, or any kids, to feel like we are teaching a biased approach.

KENNEDY: Teaching changes as the state's population changes. Over 40 percent of the students in Texas are now Hispanic, most tracing their heritage to Mexico. A new curriculum still teaches Texas independence, but, say administrators, without the traditional us-versus-them Texas perspective.

MILLER: We are all in this together, basically. And "we" includes those Hispanic kids who are now in our district, who have a heritage from Mexico.

KENNEDY (on camera): In war, they say, history is written by those who won. The question in today's multicultural Texas, can history be rewritten for those who lost?

At the Brady Middle School in Houston, Douglas Kennedy, Fox News.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

O'REILLY: Joining us now from Houston is Jose Fernandez, the president of the Mexican Cultural Institute in that city.

So I got a problem with this, Mr. Fernandez, and I'll tell you why. I always was taught in school that the Alamo was basically a battle between 189 Texans and 2,000 Mexican troops, and it showed the heroism of those Texans.

Now, my teachers didn't involved in the politics of what was going on between Mexico and the United States at that time, which was very complicated. It basically was a heroism lesson. And I see nothing wrong with that. Do you?

JOSE FERNANDEZ, HOUSTON MEXICAN CULTURAL INSTITUTE: No, it was a battle for independence.

O'REILLY: Yes, by the Texans. They wanted to -- they didn't want to be under the thumb of Mexico City. But it was also a battle of courage, because the Mexicans, quite frankly, didn't have to attack the Alamo. They could have starved them out or just, you know, surrounded them, and they weren't a threat to the 2,000 force of Santa Ana.

FERNANDEZ: Well, they could attack the Alamo. I'm not a historian, but they shouldn't have killed the prisoners. That was the problem.

O'REILLY: Which -- who shouldn't have killed the prisoners?

FERNANDEZ: The forces of Santa Ana.

O'REILLY: OK, right. So when we're teaching this, it's going to, they're -- Mexicans are get a black eye no matter what we do. So what's the beef?

FERNANDEZ: Well, but after the Alamo, there was the San Jacinto Battle, in which the Texans massacred the Mexicans who were giving up, who were trying to surrender...

O'REILLY: Payback, right.

FERNANDEZ: ... and they -- even some of them were fleeing in panic, and they were shot from the back. And some of them, at the cry of "Remember the Alamo!" they were shot.

O'REILLY: But as you know, as you know, in every war, in every battle, there are atrocities. So I'm not understanding what the Mexican community wants down in Houston and why you would deemphasize, which is what they're trying to do, the Alamo, because it is an example of courage, is it not?

FERNANDEZ: Yes, but I don't think that the Alamo is the problem. And I don't even think that the...

O'REILLY: The problem for the lady we just heard from, and it's a problem for some educators in Houston, maybe not for you.

FERNANDEZ: Yes, but you have to tell the whole story. And the whole story goes, the actual independence was won at the San Jacinto. And the problem for us, for -- from the cultural point of view is that there are about 600 Mexican soldiers who died in the line of duty, whose remains have never been buried. They are scattered in the marshes, and nobody has even remembered them. And I think it's time that we tell the whole story...

O'REILLY: Why?

FERNANDEZ: ... and that we honor, we honor those soldiers...

O'REILLY: But why, why would any American care about that?

FERNANDEZ: No, I'm talking about the Mexican perspective. Because there are half a million immigrants born in Mexico in Houston, and there are more than a million and a half Hispanics.

O'REILLY: But they're live, if they're living in America, see, I -- look, I'm going to draw a parallel. In, there was heroism in World War II on the German and Japanese side. We don't, we don't teach that here even though are millions of Japanese and German Americans here. We basically say, we won the war, we kicked your butt, and you deserved it to get kicked.

So, I mean, what are we supposed to do, in every war, we're supposed to glorify, you know, what happened on the other side? That doesn't make any sense.

FERNANDEZ: No, no, no. I'm not talking about that. I'm saying that in the Mexican culture, honoring the dead is very important. People near -- have to live near their dead ones. In Mexico it's part of a very important...

O'REILLY: All right. But this is the United States...

FERNANDEZ: ... part of the culture.

O'REILLY: ... Mr. Fernandez, it's not part of our culture here.

FERNANDEZ: I know, but...

O'REILLY: If you want to do it, that's fine with me, and you can have your celebrations. But I don't want it in the public school system.

FERNANDEZ: No, no, no. I think that the problem is that you have to tell the whole story, the bad and the right. I think the U.S. has -- since it's the only superpower, it has the obligation to tell the truth.

O'REILLY: But Mr. Fernandez, let's be realistic, now. In a Ph.D. college course, I'm with you all the way. But for high school students and grammar school students who, you know, just get the basics of this, it's the Alamo was heroism, 189 against 2,000, they didn't give up. That's what the lesson is there. There were very, very heroic people in Texas down there, whether they were crazy or right or wrong doesn't seem to matter to me, you know? I'm not getting why you want to fiddle around with the Alamo.

FERNANDEZ: No, but I...

O'REILLY: I'll give you the last word.

FERNANDEZ: I understand what you're saying...

O'REILLY: OK.

FERNANDEZ: ... and I don't think that this is what they want to change in the history. What they want to change in the history is the outcome, really, the outcome, how it happened. Because some of the stories are blown out of proportion, and you have to center in the -- on what happened, really, and then, from my point of view, we have to honor our dead, and...

O'REILLY: But they're not our dead, see, Mr. Fernandez? They may be your dead, but they're not the USA's dead.

FERNANDEZ: They are the dead of a lot of descendants who were living in Houston -- in Texas...

O'REILLY: All right, but this...

FERNANDEZ: ... those soldiers...

O'REILLY: Again, think about this. Get the Germans and the Japanese, the same thing, we're not honoring their dead.

Mr. Fernandez, we appreciate your point of view. Thanks for coming on.

FERNANDEZ: Okay.



http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,54152,00.html

[TrIzKuT]

dang, that was an important place!

forget the martyrs and the Alamo?!?!?!?!
they want us to forget a place that was used somewhat as inspiration to win the battle against the mexicans and gain calif, new mexico, etc.??!?!?!
That's crazy
I probably got my facts mixed up

heh, I just learned about this in school


BTW, lannie, are you for or against the flying of the Confederate Flag?

[david petley]

lannie,
seems pretty typical of how changing culture changes the way history is viewed.

What is your opinion of what you reported?

david p.

[dhawaltank]

where u watching the show and typing the whole thing the same time or something? because i dont know how you got the whole script from somewhere.

[gerbick]

hey 'tank the whole story is here.

Anyway, I don't agree with this at all. If you rewrite history, lessons will be lost and forgotten. If you forget history, not only are you doomed to repeat it, you also lose that sense of progression.

Confederate Flag? HA! Fly it... it's not recognized in any court, nor by the military, and definitely not by the government, and it's the flag of a group that lost. That flag is about as harmless as a dead snake. And the people that center their disputes around it, are overlooking the main concerns: education, among other socio-economic issues. The flag does nothing.

[TallGuyLittleCar]

Originally posted by gerbick


Confederate Flag? HA! Fly it... it's not recognized in any court, nor by the military, and definitely not by the government, and it's the flag of a group that lost. That flag is about as harmless as a dead snake. And the people that center their disputes around it, are overlooking the main concerns: education, among other socio-economic issues. The flag does nothing.

after a paragraph like that... well I can only say I have never felt this way about a man

[gerbick]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!

can u feel da' luv!?

[david petley]

Originally posted by gerbick
hey 'tank the whole story is here.

Anyway, I don't agree with this at all. If you rewrite history, lessons will be lost and forgotten. If you forget history, not only are you doomed to repeat it, you also lose that sense of progression.

history is constantly revised and rewritten all over the world.

When I went to primary school, Australia had never been attacked during the second world war, now we find that over 540 raids on Australian territory occurred.

History rewritten.

There are so many examples of this happening whether you agree with it or not. It will happen many times in the future, it has happened many times in the past.

And unless you are a citizen of the USA, this particular mooted change matters very little in terms of the impact it has on world affairs.

History is not set in stone, if you believe otherwise you will be fooled time and time again.

david p.

[gadawg]

This makes me very ill! You are talking about rewriting a very important part of AMERICAN history not just Texan history. I live in the southeastern U.S.and this would be like rewriting the events of the Civil War in southern history books and saying that the North (Union) really did not win the war because you did not want to offend southerners. Another more recent example is the famous picture of the firefighters raising the flag after 9-11. Some people wanted to make a statue of these firefighters and make each one of them a different race when in actuality they all were really all caucasians. We are talking about HISTORY here folks. Would it be right to teach future generations fiction rather than the facts.We all may not agree with every part of history, but history is history and in our day in age everything is documented and the facts are the facts.

[clifgriffin]

Gerb, I agree with you on the confederate flag thing.

I don't agree with the south for the most part, but the confederate flag is just a part of the south's heritage. There's no reason to be offended.

As for lanny's post...

History revision is terrible. . . It takes truth and skews it to fit current culture. As far as I'm concerned, the men that held the alamo were martyrs, heroes, and men to be respected.

But anyway, what am I doing here? I thought I was going to stay out of stuff like this.

[gerbick]

Originally posted by david petley
history is constantly revised and rewritten all over the world.

When I went to primary school, Australia had never been attacked during the second world war, now we find that over 540 raids on Australian territory occurred.

History rewritten.

I would classify that as history ignored.

However, you're right. History, in all forms, usually adapted to fit the times. However, this is almost a blatant disregard of even the already altered handed down facts to ignore it completely.

Heck, what's next? Slavery will be called the 'Vacation for our African Friends' or the Holocaust will be now known as 'Gentle Jewish Relocation' or the Romans known as 'Simple Tourists' or Idi Amin known as 'The man with peculiar appetite' or heck, how about Microsoft as 'A gentle giant'?

By no way am I condoning the actions of any of the aforementioned, nor am I belittling their effects/action. My regards to all those directly affected.

In otherwords, it happens all the time. I'm not foolish. But that... that's extreme. All in the name to satiate the few.

Guess it just gets me that in order to be "PC", you have to change so much and you forget so much.

There are so many examples of this happening whether you agree with it or not. It will happen many times in the future, it has happened many times in the past.

Read above.

And unless you are a citizen of the USA, this particular mooted change matters very little in terms of the impact it has on world affairs.

Indeed. However, it's funny even how in the states, the southern states call the Civil War, the "War of Northern Aggression".

Any other countries have any similar examples?

[david petley]

they (see first post) are talking about writing it with a different slant.

Winners are the ones who always control how history is viewed. In this case, a cultural change is obviusly taking place, with the large number of hispanic students enrolled in Texan schools, and the they will have an interest in seeing history from another point of view (there is always more than one).

david p.

[steven_h_2000]

*nods

[clifgriffin]

History is set in stone.

History interpretation changes from age to age. Some would try to manipulate the interpretation to fit a fantasy or dream they have about the past.

History is not a living story. It happened like it did. It can never change.

There are those who would change it though.

You see it all of the time here in the US.

You see museums getting sucked into the retoric. There is a movement in the US over the last few years to characterize all (American) Indians as having been brothers that repsected each other throughout past ages.

History tells a different story. History tells about the raids of the Blackfeet and the gruesome tortures they punished other tribes with. There are those that would say, "but they were still brothers" when confronted with this.

That's trying to change history which is always wrong, in my opion.

[david petley]

history is just a bunch of historians putting their own personalised slant on what happened in the past.

It is bound to be flexible and changing until only one person writes it and there are laws against changing it.

And who wants to live in a society like that eh? Be glad that you can see different history in the making, depending on which historians eyes you look through.

If you object to the changes, write to the govenor of Texas and tell him of your concerns, I'm sure that if enough people do that, these projected changes in historical viewpoint would be shelved. It is a democracy after all.
david

[TallGuyLittleCar]

Originally posted by gerbick

Indeed. However, it's funny even how in the states, the southern states call the Civil War, the "War of Northern Aggression".

"the late unpleasentness" is one I have heard.

I believe there is a truthfull history. A right history that is set in stone.

What a soceity accepts and believes can be up to the historians, politicians and film makers.

Think of all the people that believe jewish slaves built the pyramids, when most historians have disproved this theory over and over agian from a pure logistic stand point.

[clifgriffin]

Yeah, I've actually never heard the south refer to it that way. Only joke about it that way.

The Civil War is a great example of history revision. Most northeners (including my mom and her family) think the Civil War was started because of slavery. Stupid. Any historian will tell you the war revolved around state rights. Abraham Lincolon made a brilliant move by mixing his belief that slavery was wrong in to the war which not only freed the slaves, but kept Britain from helping the confederates.

Perfect example.