Army Rumour Service

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Even the Unknown Warrior is Racist!

Whilst I agree with your sentiment, if the bodies still had ID discs then they wouldn't have been buried as 'unknowns' in the first place. Apologies in advance if I've misread your post, though: as a bit wound up about this currently!!

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk

No that was the point i was making - or rather was trying to make) with a dose of anti woke sarcasm perhaps ill edit
 

Chef

LE
There was a documentary on the choosing of the unknown warrior. Even a little bit of research would rather indicate that the soldier selected was unknown to the officer choosing the soldier and since by the time this was done the soldier would have been at least two years dead and was also placed in an unmarked coffin I'd have thought it would be nigh on impossible to know the ethnicity of the soldier. From wiki:

'Arrangements were placed in the hands of Lord Curzon of Kedleston who prepared in committee the service and location. Suitable remains were exhumed from various battlefields and brought to the chapel at Saint-Pol-sur-Ternoise near Arras, France on the night of 7 November 1920. The bodies were received by the Reverend George Kendall OBE. Brigadier L.J. Wyatt and Lieutenant Colonel E.A.S. Gell of the Directorate of Graves Registration and Enquiries went into the chapel alone. The remains were then placed in four plain coffins each covered by Union Flags: the two officers did not know from which battlefield any individual soldier had come. Brigadier Wyatt with closed eyes rested his hand on one of the coffins. The other soldiers were then taken away for reburial by Kendall.'

For a museum they really aren't very good at research.
 
The sooner Marxism triumphs the better. Then they can put me against a wall and I won't have to put up with this hand wringing apologist bollocks any more.
 

FORMER_FYRDMAN

LE
Book Reviewer
How culturally sensitive and ethically sound would it have been to bury a Sikh, Hindu or Muslim in Westminster Abbey, not to mention doing so without consent? :D
 
Suitable remains were exhumed from various battlefields

It looks to me that the angle were going for was - to those that did the digging suitable = white .

The facts regarding identity wont matter - In the same way that it doesnt matter that jet fuel isnt hot enough to melt steel** The narrative is set the psuedo science is in - and any contrary facts will be ignored or dismissed as coming from sheeple. Because clearly you could tell he was white as he wore a ring / held his rifle at 27.25 degrees not 31.08 or some such shite.

* The steel beams could not have been melted by jet fuel ergo 911 was thermite / lazers / nuclear missiles.
At this point everyone on Arrse is about to oint out
A) a fire can burn hotter than its source of ignition
B) It doesnt need to melt the steel just heat it to the point it loses structural integrity and ceases to support the load -
 

Tyk

LE
The march of the woke is unstoppable by anything short of a major war that slaps some sense into them.

The contents of the tomb of the unknown soldier being accused of being racist is an obscenity.
 

DarkBrig

Old-Salt
I suspect that those that are howling the loudest have never volunteered for anything in their lives, to actually get your hands dirty is too much, my works control center has recently shut down as 6 tested positive and everyone else has self isolated.
My suggestion that we get some camp beds and self isolate in situ whilst still carrying out our function was met with the same hysteria I would have got if I suggested we sacrifice Puppies or kittens .
I cant help thinking that if I was still in, the CO would have declared a training exercise in full NBC kit and let us get on with our day jobs.
 
The whole point of the Unknown Warrior and all the other Unknown Soldier tombs is that it commemorates everyone who died and whose resting place is not known (you might even say "unknown"). So it is meant to represent everyman.

Beneath this stone rests the body
Of a British warrior
Unknown by name or rank
Brought from France to lie among
The most illustrious of the land
And buried here on Armistice Day
11 Nov: 1920, in the presence of
His Majesty King George V
His Ministers of State
The Chiefs of his forces
And a vast concourse of the nation

Thus are commemorated the many
Multitudes who during the Great
War of 1914 – 1918 gave the most that
Man can give
life itself
For God
For King and country
For loved ones home and empire
For the sacred cause of justice and
The freedom of the world

They buried him among the kings because he
Had done good toward God and toward
His house
So he can be whoever/whatever anyone wants him to be; black, brown, yellow. If it wasn't for the final line he could even be a she (probably statistically unlikely though).
 
Agreed, but they also seem to be intent on misrepresenting the history of the very organisation whose history they are supposedly there to preserve, warts and all. I'm sure that they used to brand themselves as the museum of the British Army, that would appear to be no longer the case.

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk
Recent actions have shown how deep the march of the Marxists has been into the institutions - I thought it was 'only' Media, Civil Service, Education, Health, Police, Charities, and some elements of the Armed Forces - seems the museums, the actual keepers of our History, have been well and truly 'got'.
 
Much the same as the 'Swing Low' story from a few months ago.

It's better to ask the question yourself than it is to wait for the mob.

It turned out that nobody was bothered by the cultural appropriation (what even is that?) of Swing Low being used by the obviously racists England Rugby Team.
Bomb defused.
 

DarkBrig

Old-Salt
The whole point of the Unknown Warrior and all the other Unknown Soldier tombs is that it commemorates everyone who died and whose resting place is not known (you might even say "unknown"). So it is meant to represent everyman.

Beneath this stone rests the body
Of a British warrior
Unknown by name or rank
Brought from France to lie among
The most illustrious of the land
And buried here on Armistice Day
11 Nov: 1920, in the presence of
His Majesty King George V
His Ministers of State
The Chiefs of his forces
And a vast concourse of the nation

Thus are commemorated the many
Multitudes who during the Great
War of 1914 – 1918 gave the most that
Man can give
life itself
For God
For King and country
For loved ones home and empire
For the sacred cause of justice and
The freedom of the world

They buried him among the kings because he
Had done good toward God and toward
His house
So he can be whoever/whatever anyone wants him to be; black, brown, yellow. If it wasn't for the final line he could even be a she (probably statistically unlikely though).
Mate
your not dealing with logic here, they will hear what they want to hear and nothing you do will change that, every time you meet them look intensely at their ribcage and when they ask what you are doing, simply tell them that's where the knife will go when they turn.
 
The whole point of the Unknown Warrior and all the other Unknown Soldier tombs is that it commemorates everyone who died and whose resting place is not known (you might even say "unknown"). So it is meant to represent everyman.

Beneath this stone rests the body
Of a British warrior
Unknown by name or rank
Brought from France to lie among
The most illustrious of the land
And buried here on Armistice Day
11 Nov: 1920, in the presence of
His Majesty King George V
His Ministers of State
The Chiefs of his forces
And a vast concourse of the nation

Thus are commemorated the many
Multitudes who during the Great
War of 1914 – 1918 gave the most that
Man can give
life itself
For God
For King and country
For loved ones home and empire
For the sacred cause of justice and
The freedom of the world

They buried him among the kings because he
Had done good toward God and toward
His house
So he can be whoever/whatever anyone wants him to be; black, brown, yellow. If it wasn't for the final line he could even be a she (probably statistically unlikely though).
Comprehending that would require a level of intelligence and common sense that these creatures lack.
 

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
Comprehending that would require a level of intelligence and common sense that these creatures lack.
Yes, but I could understand if it was the hidebound Guardian and Mirror readers who only want to exist in an echo chamber and are wilfully ignorant of things that 'don't matter', such as this country and its history.

This has come from the National Army Museum. The NAM is supposed to be the centre of knowledge in terms of this country's terrestrial forces. The people who work there, like those who work at the IWM, more than arguably anyone else in the UK, should know why - precisely why - the Unknown Soldier exists.

The ignorance of the Guardian and Mirror-reading types is unforgivable enough. It is spiteful, skewed and divisive. That this has come from the NAM goes beyond that, in my mind.
 
Last edited:

AlienFTM

MIA
Book Reviewer
There was a documentary on the choosing of the unknown warrior. Even a little bit of research would rather indicate that the soldier selected was unknown to the officer choosing the soldier and since by the time this was done the soldier would have been at least two years dead and was also placed in an unmarked coffin I'd have thought it would be nigh on impossible to know the ethnicity of the soldier. From wiki:

'Arrangements were placed in the hands of Lord Curzon of Kedleston who prepared in committee the service and location. Suitable remains were exhumed from various battlefields and brought to the chapel at Saint-Pol-sur-Ternoise near Arras, France on the night of 7 November 1920. The bodies were received by the Reverend George Kendall OBE. Brigadier L.J. Wyatt and Lieutenant Colonel E.A.S. Gell of the Directorate of Graves Registration and Enquiries went into the chapel alone. The remains were then placed in four plain coffins each covered by Union Flags: the two officers did not know from which battlefield any individual soldier had come. Brigadier Wyatt with closed eyes rested his hand on one of the coffins. The other soldiers were then taken away for reburial by Kendall.'

For a museum they really aren't very good at research.
You can do better than them. Demand their job.
 
Yes, but I could understand if it was the hidebound Guardian and Mirror readers who only want to exist in an echo chamber and are wilfully ignorant of things that 'don't matter', such as this country and its history.

This has come from the National Army Museum. The NAM is supposed to be the country's centre of knowledge in terms of this country's terrestrial forces. The people who work there, like those who work at the IWM, more than arguably anyone else in the UK, should know why - precisely why - the Unknown Soldier exists.

The ignorance of the Guardian and Mirror-reading types is unforgivable enough. It is spiteful skewed and divisive. That this has come from the NAM goes beyond that, in my mind.
I may be recalling wrongly, but, quite a few museums, including military orientated ones, have come under the influence of highly social politics motivated curators and management in the last decade or two. Who increasingly have looked to 'account for the actions of the previous generations' or atone for colonialism.

Look at how the IWM has fallen from it's pedestal of quality: IWM North was awful when I last visited, a cringeworthy exhibit on refugees took up 1/3 of the floor space. Or the rubbish exhibition of 'art' HMS Belfast hosted.

And now, the NAM.
 

civvy

Old-Salt
I wanted to do some reading on what, if any, artilery was used in the Zulu wars. One link was to the National Army Museum. To say I was dissappointed was a big understatement. The whole site seemed to be aimed at 12 year olds. I'm please that they are educating youth but I tried in vain to find a grown up section. OK, my searching skills aren't up to much but a grown up section must be well hidden. They seem to have forgotten what they are there for; like many institutions.

And I still don't know the answer to my question.
 
I've just spent an interesting 20 minutes trawling through the NAM site, specifically those pages that deal with this subject.

At no point did I trip over anything that overtly suggested that the selection of the remains which were to become the Unknown Warrior was in anyway biased.

Indeed, it seems that the authorities of the day were keen to not leave themselves open to such an accusation.

The original intent was to select remains from one of the 1914 sites, thus acknowledging the sacrifices of the Old Contemptibles. That was quickly abandoned as it was realised that the ethos behind the idea of an Unknown Warrior would fail at the first hurdle where the remains were selected from a known grouping.

Ultimately, the 4 (or six, depending on whose source you accept) sets of remains selected were from various battlefields, the only criteria was that putrefaction must have completed to save having to re-inter an already decomposing corpse.

The remains of all 4 soldiers were already in identical coffins when the selection was made by one officer who had no knowledge of the contents.

Immediately that the selection had been made, that coffin was then further placed in a casket, the self-same casket in which he lies buried today.

Whilst not a great fan of the revamped NAM, I have to say that I can find nothing in this - it is very much a storm looking for a teacup.

Sadly, this has the smack of some Telegraph staffer trying to make mischief.
 

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top