# War Museum Controversy and Follow-up Thread [merged]



## McG

Those intrested can check out the progress on the new War Museum and give an opinion on the three buildings being considered.

War Museum Online Consultation


----------



## sdimock

Of the three proposed my preferance was for option 3.

I didn‘t care for option 1 and wasn‘t big on 2.

I e-mailed them my opinion.

What does everyone else think?


----------



## KibbyCC

I‘d have to say the 2nd option followed closely by the 3rd were my favourites.

I have no love for Option 1.. it almost seems like with that option that the CWM would be hidden, away from public eyes under the landscape.  hah.. there‘s the Liberal Party‘s choice right there.


----------



## rceme_rat

I liked Option 1 because it seemed to blend nicely into the terrain - a pseudo-battlefield setting.


----------



## rceme_rat

Architects asked to review designs - no one design had enough support 

Article concerning status of designs - essentially says that the committee liked various elements in each design, but no one design was a hit.


----------



## Jonny Boy

hey i just thought i would share for those of you who don't know yet that the new Canadian war museum in Ottawa will be completed  and open to the public May 7-8 2005 the 7th is a open house and on the 8th there will be a opening ceremony in celebration of the 60th anniversary of VE day. here check it out.
http://www.warmuseum.ca/cwm/opening/celebrate_e.html


----------



## Michael Dorosh

There will also be a living history display on the Friday before hand for Ottawa and area schoolchildiren, with the displays open to the public on the Saturday, to include re-created battles, running period vehicles and tanks, etc. in honour of VE Day - theme for his year's WE STAND ON GUARD will be "Operation PLUNDER."


From the event organizer:

The site is on the Ottawa River, 1.7 kilometers West of the New Canadian
War Museum. The site is opposite Rivenue Canada called Tunney's Pasture. It
is on National Capital Commission property at the Remic Rapids lookout on
the Ottawa River Parkway. It has woods, cover, picnic tables, paved access
road and the parliment buildings can be sen in the distance. While in this
location we will be treated to a light show every night which consists of 2
battreies of search lights. We will also be in the flight path of the
Lancaster bomber and the Spitfire. You will really love this site. It is on
high ground, great access to the public and yet you feel that you are in
the country. There is a paved bicycle path wide enough for a platoon of
troops 3 ranks deep and in walking distance of the new Canadian War Museum.


----------



## larry Strong

I saw the construction going on back in Oct of 03, it looked like it will be a nice museum, long overdue. It will definitely be on my list of things to see when I go to Ottawa this summer sometime.


----------



## MdB

Michael Dorosh said:
			
		

> There will also be a living history display on the Friday before hand for Ottawa and area schoolchildiren, with the displays open to the public on the Saturday, to include re-created battles, running period vehicles and tanks, etc. in honour of VE Day - theme for his year's WE STAND ON GUARD will be "Operation PLUNDER."
> 
> 
> From the event organizer:
> 
> The site is on the Ottawa River, 1.7 kilometers West of the New Canadian
> War Museum. The site is opposite Rivenue Canada called Tunney's Pasture. It
> is on National Capital Commission property at the Remic Rapids lookout on
> the Ottawa River Parkway. It has woods, cover, picnic tables, paved access
> road and the parliment buildings can be sen in the distance. While in this
> location we will be treated to a light show every night which consists of 2
> battreies of search lights. We will also be in the flight path of the
> Lancaster bomber and the Spitfire. You will really love this site. It is on
> high ground, great access to the public and yet you feel that you are in
> the country. There is a paved bicycle path wide enough for a platoon of
> troops 3 ranks deep and in walking distance of the new Canadian War Museum.



Do you have access to some sort of schedule? I'd like to be there, don't know if I can. I'm in Montreal and don't own a car, so I'd be of interest to make the decision to go. Maybe there are others going in Ottawa from Montreal area? Please PM me.


----------



## jmacleod

There is an article in today's edition of the Ottawa Citizen (front page) about the themes and certain
displays in the new National War Museum, planning for which commenced decades ago. It seems to
me that the concept being promoted to the visiting public may not be totally acceptable to many
Canadian veterans and members of the Canadian Forces - we will watch and see the the response,
if there is indeed, any. MacLeod 1 May 2005


----------



## jmacleod

The response to the new National War Museum which I mentioned in my last post, came today
from Journalist Peter Worthington Sun Newspapers, and is not a surprise. Unfortunately for Canada
and Canadian veterans and military, the new facility is under the aegis of the Canadian Museum
of Civilization, which is focused on essentially "left wing" issues in what they preceive to be 
Canada's history - jeez I expected to hear "Solidarity Forever" being played on their sound system
- and many exhibits are, what you might call, "motivated". For instance, the bureaucrats in Heritage
Canada do not want to hear, that the Port of Halifax NS was founded by Royal Warrant, and focused
on providing a support base/port/drydocks, etc. for the Royal Navy. In 1749 the RN was charged
to protect British commercial shipping; their principal cargo, slaves - an historic fact, not subject to
dispute or debate. But the Ottawa crowd will not accept that unsavory fact - this attitude will be
reflected in the New War Museum, particulary their preception of Canada's role in the Korean War.
Worthington of course served in Korea with PPCLI. Clifford Chadderton OC, refused to attend the
official opening; again, no surprise. MacLeod


----------



## the 48th regulator

It appears that our beloved war Museum would like to highlight all aspects of the CF...



> New museum to offer a diverse picture of war
> CTV.ca News Staff
> Housed in a striking new building, the Canadian War Museum in Ottawa hopes to tell both the glorious and shameful stories of the nation's military past when it officially opens this weekend.
> "Our task is to show how Canadians have conducted themselves in war," says Laura Brandon, the museum's curator. "To show how it has brutalized some and how it has produced heroes in other respects... and how it reflects the complexity of the human condition in military times."
> The complexity is evident in an abstract portrait of Kyle Brown, a private who was convicted of manslaughter in the torture and killing of a Somali teenager in 1993. That incident remains a stain on Canada's peacekeeping record.
> "If you look at his hands, he's got a black cube in one hand and a white cube in the other hand, which symbolize the choices he could have made," Brandon says.
> There are 24 such portraits. Brown's is in the first gallery visitors will enter at the museum.
> Such attempts to challenge visitors and provoke discussion are found throughout the museum. But there are also scenes that simply touch the heart.
> During the First World War, a young girl gave her daddy a teddy bear to help him stay safe overseas.
> But the good wishes accompanying the bear weren't enough. The man died in 1917. His grave's location is unknown.
> "He was a medic. He was on the field of battle, caring for a soldier. He was killed by shrapnel," says Tim Cook, a museum employee.
> "When his body was found, they pulled the teddy bear off his body and sent it back to his family."
> That bear is on display at the museum.
> Historically, the museum covers the bow-and-arrow wars fought before Europeans arrive to the possibility of a missile-delivered thermonuclear apocalypse.
> "This is your museum, your story, your legacy. This is about Canada," says Joe Geurts, the museum's director.
> Upon leaving one gallery, visitors are encouraged to send a comment on pre-addressed postcards to political leaders, activists and even soldiers.
> "It's a way to make people realize that their history is something that's not over; that history continues," Geurts says. "And if you want to contribute in your own way, a postcard is a very simple way to do that."
> The museum cost $135 million, which experts say is a relative bargain compared to other museums around the world of its size and importance.
> One example of the care paid to the design was one small room, empty except for the gravestone that marked where Canada's Unknown Soldier was buried in France during the First World War. There is one small window on the opposite wall.
> On November 11, the light will shine through the window and directly illuminate that gravestone.
> The opening ceremonies take place this coming weekend. Sunday marks the day the museum is officially opened. That date coincides with the 60th anniversary of V-E Day, the end of the Second World War in Europe.
> With reports from CTV's David Akin and CJOH's Norman Fetterley



I find it hard to understand why those particular paintings were included in the museum.   I guess the incident is significant to our military history; it helped to bring a regiment to its knees. But, are there no other themes out there that better exemplified our commitment in Somalia?

And to think, my mannequin was pulled out, guess I wasn't Purdy enough hehehe

dileas

tess


----------



## aesop081

i guess they were afraid you would scare little children tess.....you've had your 15 minutes !!  ;D


----------



## Infanteer

Is it really necessary to make Somalia a centerpiece?  Does America choose to focus on My Lai when they discuss the problems with Vietnam?


----------



## 48Highlander

Well, they wanted to show the things did well, but also something we did that was bad, right?  So they probably figured it was either the Somalia incident, or that time the Minister of Defence forgot to pay his parking ticket.


----------



## the 48th regulator

Infanteer said:
			
		

> Is it really necessary to make Somalia a centerpiece?   Does America choose to focus on My Lai when they discuss the problems with Vietnam?



summed it up right thre,

exactly what i wanted to convey

dileas 

tess


----------



## winchable

I didn't really get the sense that the Museum is making somalia a centerpiece, I think the article makes it seems like it is however.

As I understand it, the Somalia portrait is in the first gallery and I assume amongst other paintings.
I think it's important we don't whitewash our history and present the good with the bad, I think the writer of the article is the culprit here for making the Somalia thing look like the central exhibit.

About time we got a proper war Museum, I visited the Imperial War Museum in London and it was absolutely amazing, free too if you're ever in the vicinity of Crystal Palace.


----------



## Haggis

Infanteer said:
			
		

> Does America choose to focus on My Lai when they discuss the problems with Vietnam?



US military museums can be quite selective in their presentation of US military history. I've visited several US museums, most recently the Patton Museum at Ft. Knox and the US Infantry Museum in Ft. Benning.

What struck me about the Infantry Museum is the lack of any mention at all of the War of 1812.  It never happened??  Maybe as this was one for the "loss" column, it isn't spoken about.  Similarly there is no mention (that I can recall) of My Lai.

I believe that if a museum purports to present history objectively, it's important that the good and bad be given their place on display, with neither overshadowing the other.  Like it or not, Somalia IS a part of our military history.

Sorry to hear you were yanked, Tess.  Maybe Mel Gibson will play you in the movie.  ;D


----------



## seirra

I forget who said it but, We learn more from the things we do wrong then those we do right.  Even our failures should be remembered.  But at the same time it is also important that things like the war museum highlight the success that we have had as a nation at war.  Those are the sorts of stories that bring pride to be a Canadian and a even more as a Canadian in the military.  

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" George Santayana

[Rant]
Now before I start I am and American citizen and have been since birth but I am a proud Canadian.  As for the Americans  they boost of a great military, true they have one the strongest force today.  But always seem to forget that every major war wasn't fought by them alone but by a collation of countries, including both Gulf wars and both World Wars.  My favoured  this Americans say is "Well if wasn't for us you would be speaking German."  While the inclusion of the US in WW2 did help turn the war for the Allies they weren't their alone in WW2.  But what I always say, "Well if it wasn't for the British you would all be speaking French."  This confuses them but what the hell, its easy but fun.
[Rant/]


----------



## Roger

What is hapenning is an outrage, there are 2 paintings depicting Clayton Matchee and Kyle Brown beating and torturing and killing that Somalian that will be in the new museum of Cliff Chadderton is livid. He is well known in the veteran community as well as head of War Amps Canada.

http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2005/05/03/war-musuem050503.html

This is just an awful shame, Joe Geurts and Gertrude Kears should be ashamed. for even thinking of putting such a painting in the museum, I will never step foot in that building ever in my life, some 10,000 Canadian Airborne Regiment men have been put to shame because of the disbandment because of the action of two men, it was all political due the fact they had to shrink the budget at the time, but it looks like the shame will continue.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse

I agree with the Legion stand, it happened and attempts to gloss over the "un nice" stuff does no justice to those who we honour.

I find the statement "some 10,000 Canadian Airborne Regiment men have been put to shame" is unwarrented.
The shame belongs to the people involved in the original scenario and to the back-stabbing polititions of the day.


----------



## Roger

Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> I find the statement "some 10,000 Canadian Airborne Regiment men have been put to shame" is unwarrented.



The shame I refer to is the shame of disbandment.... It is a pain I suffer everyday, I was with the CAR a short time in the 70's but the disbandment hust as much as the members that where on parade....


----------



## Marty

Shameful as is might be , its still part on our history . We don't get to pick and choose . You have to take the good with the bad ..........there must be hundreds of cliches


----------



## KevinB

Makes me want to puke.

 I mean WTF maybe we should have a painting of WWII Germans getting machine gunned as POW's ?

Or some FYR mental patients being "serviced" by CANBAT pers...

Or maybe a Afghan kid getting run down by a CF vehicle?


Why the need to memorialize a shameful event?  Yeah it happened but deal with it, and soldier on.


----------



## Roger

Marty said:
			
		

> Shameful as is might be , its still part on our history . We don't get to pick and choose . You have to take the good with the bad ..........there must be hundreds of cliches



Yes well how would you feel if it was your Regiment, I feel like a dog who has to get my nose shoved in the S**t.


----------



## 2 Cdo

KevinB, good post. There is no need for that picture to be in the museum when there was plenty of good that the Airborne Regiment did over it's life that could be displayed! How does a museum that purports to honour those who served/serving with this piece of inflammatory crap! Sorry but this museum will NEVER see a nickel of mine due to this disgusting slap in the face!

Once again time to honour that Canadian tradition of finding fault with anything remotely associated with real soldiering! The Airborne was our premiere fighting force for many years and due to the actions of a few arseholes and politicians this is how they will be remembered!


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse

Hey to be truthful I don't want it there either, however, what I HOPE the curators are trying to do is not give the anti-military types any ammo to say that "we are covering up atrocities/etc" : You know this is Canada and heaven forbid the press would let us worship Canadian heroes.
We can say, with our heads held high, here is our history.....deal with it or #$%& #@&*.
I, personally, would rather be pro-active than re-active.
.......not to mention I would like to see the context of how it is presented BEFORE I make a judgement.


----------



## BruceR

I haven't seen the work in question, but I spent the better part of a week in a command post last year with Ms. Kearns, who is a CF-commissioned war artist. I found her to be an empathetic and intelligent individual, with a natural affinity for soldiers and soldiering, and a sincere determination to capture their stories truthfully. For what it's worth.


----------



## BruceR

I haven't seen the Somalia images, but you can see some of artist Gertrude Kearns' Dallaire-Rwanda images here, in case you're curious: http://www.carleton.ca/jmc/mediagenocide/background/kearns.html.


----------



## Canadian Sig

This just makes me wish I was allowed to stand out front on opening day with a sign to tell all why this troop will not go in. I was looking quite forward to seeing the new museum and now I'm not sure I ever will. I know a whole lot of troops who's pictures deserve a place of prominence rather than these two. Just my $.02


----------



## Canadian Sig

Just sent a letter off to the following address and I would encourage those who disagree with these paintings inclusion to do likewise. 

grandopening@warmuseum.ca


----------



## Zartan

While I think it important for a country to admit the mistakes that has occured in its past, (lest they become self-righteous), did anyone really have to get a person to paint a painting commemorating this? "I know, let's commission  someone to immortalize one of the biggest disasters we (Canada) have ever been responsible for. That should win the hearts and minds of Canadians." 
This is probably going to be a PR nightmare. Some elementary class is going to take a tour of the museum, and when they go home, all they are going to ask is "why were they mean to the Somali?" They won't remember any of the great things the Armed Forces are responsible for that they would have learned in the museum. Civilians will complain about revisiting this. 
I expect that picture to be removed within the year. How typical.


----------



## Michael Dorosh

2 Cdo said:
			
		

> How does a museum that purports to honour those who served/serving



I'm sorry, is THAT what a museum does?  I thought it was about preserving history - true and unvarnished...

How can anyone refuse to set foot in a building because of a display they've never seen?  ???  Judge it in context.  It does sound ill-advised, but if anyone can point to a bigger "Army" story of the 1990s, feel free.  Medak Pocket?  Sure, but it was unpublicized at the time.  Good or bad, the Somalia affair is the first thing anyone thinks about when you mention the CF in the 90s.


----------



## Canadian Sig

Michael Dorosh said:
			
		

> Good or bad, the Somalia affair is the first thing anyone thinks about when you mention the CF in the 90s.



 Agreed, and as long as we stay quiet that is all they will think of. 

 Sorry, not me.


----------



## Roger

Michael Dorosh said:
			
		

> How can anyone refuse to set foot in a building because of a display they've never seen?   ???   Judge it in context.



The point is the Liberal government of the time used the press of what happened to disband an expensive unit when they where looking everywhere to cut spending. I would have no problem with the painting if the Canadian Airborne Regiment who at the time had between 700 and 1,000 men serving at the time, who have had some 10,000 serve from WWII till disbandment had not used the issue to forward their position. What about a painting of the troopers who where killed on ex in Petewawa, or the troopers killed in Cyprus in the 70's. No, use a painting that served a Liberal cause to disband the CAR, where was all the press in all of the good things the CAR had done. The Canadian Airborne Regiment will always be remembered for that incident because it was in all of the papers and television for 2 years over and over and over and over. I am sure if it was a reservist from the Calgary Highlanders that was involved in the incident and the Calgary Highlanders where disbanded you would have a different view.


----------



## Canadian Sig

Seems to me that this is just a very sad legacy to remind the public of considering it is a "fallen Jumper" parade in Pet this Sunday and those are CAR pers who deserve a painting in prominence at "our" (Canada's) museum.


----------



## Michael Dorosh

Chop said:
			
		

> The point is the Liberal government of the time used the press of what happened to disband an expensive unit when they where looking everywhere to cut spending. I would have no problem with the painting if the Canadian Airborne Regiment who at the time had between 700 and 1,000 men serving at the time, who have had some 10,000 serve from WWII till disbandment had not used the issue to forward their position. What about a painting of the troopers who where killed on ex in Petewawa, or the troopers killed in Cyprus in the 70's. No, use a painting that served a Liberal cause to disband the CAR, where was all the press in all of the good things the CAR had done. The Canadian Airborne Regiment will always be remembered for that incident because it was in all of the papers and television for 2 years over and over and over and over. I am sure if it was a reservist from the Calgary Highlanders that was involved in the incident and the Calgary Highlanders where disbanded you would have a different view.



If the Calgary Highlanders brutally murdered a teenage civilian detainee, performed hazing rituals on new soldiers, and exceeded their rules of engagement, they would deserve to be disbanded, but that's another argument I won't go into again here.

The painting itself - out of context as it is on the link provided - doesn't seem to fit in with what I would anticipate a museum display is supposed to do.  If it is part of a larger display about the Airborne Regiment, it might be different.  I will hopefully see the entire museum one of these days and be able to make a more informed judgement then.


----------



## Canadian Sig

Still think I will save my money to visit the Museum of the Regiments next time I'm near home.


----------



## KevinB

Michael Dorosh said:
			
		

> If the Calgary Highlanders brutally murdered a teenage civilian detainee, performed hazing rituals on new soldiers, and exceeded their rules of engagement, they would deserve to be disbanded, but that's another argument I won't go into again here.


 :
WTF dude,

 I cant really comprehend where your pulling that from - other than taking ISOLATED instances and using a BROAD brush to paint people and a unit unfairly with.   Do you have any idea WHAT the ROE where for Somalia?   Do you know that many troops where cited by the US for heroism and bravery.   

edit:
 Michael I am extremely disappoint with your point of view, since your are a soldier and articulate and reasonably intelligent, I just can't follow your point of view as you have explained it here.


----------



## Britney Spears

And I thought the tacvest thread would never die.......


----------



## Blakey

Until those paintings are taken off those walls, i will not step one foot into that place, and it will get no monetary support from me *Period*


----------



## Michael Dorosh

Britney Spears said:
			
		

> And I thought the tacvest thread would never die.......



Didn't KevinB have a starring role there, too....?

I think this is going nowhere fast....

I understand your point, KevinB, and hopefully, the context of the display WHICH NO ONE HAS SEEN YET will provide some clue as to the good deeds performed by the Airborne in Somalia.  Let's wait and see instead of acting hysterical.


----------



## Canadian Sig

Is it just me or does this country have an undying need to beat itself up and punish itself forever for it's mistakes instead of honouring it's triumphs and great deeds? I do believe in the phase "lest we forget" but this still rings badly for my ears.


----------



## Strike

So, we sit here and rave that the whole CAR was tainted by the act of a few and now you are going to condemn a whole museum because of two paintings?  Seems you are doing the same thing you say you disagree with.

I am not saying I agree with the paintings.  I have seen them both and strongly disagree with the Matchee one due to its graphic nature and the negative light it puts the CAR in.  The Brown one is a different story.  The whole point of these two paintings was to show how a high stress environment can affect a soldier.  The Brown one (he is holding both a black and white die in each hand) does this quite well.  The other one just stirs up bad feelings.


----------



## Bill22108131

Certainly a lot of emotions at play over this thread.  Just to clarify a couple points, the CAR was established in 1968.  I understand that the thousands of members of the CAR are proud, but please explain to me your accomplishments.  I know I am waving a red flag in front of a bull, but honestly other than the 1974 mission to Cypress, what did the CAR do before 1974 and until Somalia, what did they do in between.  I was in 2PPCLI in the mid 80s, IMHO two kinds of soldiers went to the airborne, the extremely good and the very weak (again the red flag).  The disbandment was a stupid political decision and was only a repetition of many such stupid decisions for decades prior.  The guilty bas***ds who murdered a hungry teen and the equally guilty who ignored the screams are the real failures.  Subsequent releases of video tape of hazing and leaders (WOs & officers) ducking for cover to save their as*es again lent no faith to the Canadian public.  I visited the old war museum.  I have also visited concentration camps in Europe.  Atrocities occur.  They are part of our history and should not be pushed aside because they piss us off or shame us.  As Canadians we own part of the museum, as warriors we contribute to its content.  Don't visit - go take a look, do one or the other as a tax paying Canadian.  Next time you take a prisoner or are the leader of someone who does, make sure you know WTF is going on and keep your new charges safe.  Only my two pennies but that seems to be the vent of the thread.  

Bill


----------



## camochick

It's art. Art doesnt have to be nice, or smart or pretty. It is what it is. You can make the choice not to go to the museum, or you can make the choice to go. It's pretty simple. In wwII the germans were responsible for the deaths of millions, yet they have memorials to those atrocities. These paintings show a part of our history. It's not something we are proud of but it is something that has happened.


----------



## 2 Cdo

No way, not a chance will I grace the foyer of this place! As an ex-member of the Airborne I don't think I could justify spending my hard earned money to be reminded of why the regiment was disbanded. For those of you who have a problem with that, you probably never served with the Airborne.

Have a good one!


----------



## Jungle

Bill22108131 said:
			
		

> I understand that the thousands of members of the CAR are proud, but please explain to me your accomplishments.   I know I am waving a red flag in front of a bull, but honestly other than the 1974 mission to Cypress, what did the CAR do before 1974 and until Somalia, what did they do in between.


Did anyone in our Army do anything serious between 1975 and 1992 ?? The CAR did like the rest of the Army: train. That is what we did back then, because apart from the occasional roto to Cyprus, we were not involved in ops during that period. 



> Next time you take a prisoner or are the leader of someone who does, make sure you know WTF is going on and *keep your new charges safe.*   Only my two pennies but that seems to be the vent of the thread.


WTF is that supposed to mean ?? I'm a former member of the CAR, served there for 7 years. I have been in ops after the disbandment and handled detainees and refugees. I have taken bad guys away from local lynch mobs, and given them water and food, then pushed them up the PW chain. No problems there, so what's your point ??
Loyalty is a two-way thing; I will not visit the museum either...


----------



## George Wallace

First thing that is nagging me is the guys who are saying that they are not going to pay to visit the CWM.   Don't!    It is free for all Vets and Serving Members of the CF.

Next.   I was enraged to see the painting of Kyle Brown on the wall behind a Museum Worker in an interview on TV.   I didn't think it appropriate.   However, they moved on and explained the "Artsy Fartsy" portrait of him holding a black cube in one hand and a white cube in the other and the symbolism that the artist was trying to get across and it made more sense.   I never saw the Machee painting, but that isn't going to stop me from visiting.

The CWM has an extensive collection of War Art.   They will have to rotate it through the displays over a long period of time to ever be able to display the large portion of it.   As such and with the changes in the bureaucracy there, I am sure that both paintings will eventually move.


----------



## Bill22108131

Respectfully to 2 Cdo and all his ilk, I don't believe anyone is trying to convince you to go the the War Museum.  Perhaps given the raw emotion displayed, and the great number of young and inexperienced readers who partake in army.ca, we are just offering dissenting opinions.  We all make our own decisions (thankfully) and you and I have made ours.

Cheers,

Bill


----------



## Roger

Well shame on you guy's for going to the museum, you are no friend of mine. Even Cliff Chadderton the head of the War Amps and a WWII veteran is livid.

This is an issue that should have the suport of all members of the forces and veterans, and the CAR was first established in WWII, and also thank you for briging up the hazing rituals.

And just for all of your information, it was one person that killed the individual, not the Canadian Airborne Regiment.


----------



## Big Foot

Chop, I really don't agree with your last statement. Why should you shame me for being in the Guard of Honour for the opening of the museum? I will be damned proud to go on parade for an event like this. I think we're missing the whole point that this museum will be providing a history of war in Canada. This means it will illustrate the high and low points. I'm not saying that I agree or disagree with the portrait of that particular soldier being in the entrance, but there is much more to the museum than that. I am quite sure that the CAR will have its highlights illustrated in the museum. Look at the big picture, not the one or two paintings that are being so highly publicized.


----------



## aesop081

Chop said:
			
		

> Well shame on you guy's for going to the museum, you are no friend of mine. Even Cliff Chadderton the head of the War Amps and a WWII veteran is livid.
> 
> This is an issue that should have the suport of all members of the forces and veterans, and the CAR was first established in WWII, and also thank you for briging up the hazing rituals.



NO...the 1st Canadian Parachute battallion was   established in WWII...not the CAR


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse

I will be going and if I find the paintings offensive and insulting to ANY regt. ,I will be more than happy to vent my distaste to the appropriate people and very rudely if necessary,
...those of you who huff and puff and say you won't visit are just burying your head in the sand.

Want to change it?....., go and make your complaint in person.

*** or we could make our own little plague to put under it*** >


----------



## Infanteer

> If the Calgary Highlanders brutally murdered a teenage civilian detainee, performed hazing rituals on new soldiers, and exceeded their rules of engagement, they would deserve to be disbanded, but that's another argument I won't go into again here.



Well Michael - I'm sure that lies in the closet of the Cal Highs - I've heard a few of first-hand accounts of executing POW's, looting, and what-not from a few vets who were overseas 60 some-odd years ago; shit happens (like a few retards and trouble in the C-of-C) but when you walk into the Cal High Museum you don't see this front and center.

The troubles in Somalia are well worth reflecting on and do have a place in a survey of Military history - however, sticking it front and center in a museum dealing with a few hundred years of Canadian military history reeks of self-flagellation.

If I'm in the area, I plan on doing the same thing Bruce does (this is why I like Bruce, he has a head on his shoulders....).


----------



## vangemeren

> *** or we could make our own little plague to put under it***



Like the bubonic plague? I like the idea of starting the plague at the War Museum. :blotto:


.... Or we could put a *Plaque*, Bruce What ever floats your boat I guess.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse

Gee, where would we find the room?.......... We would have to move your spelling degree over to one side....... :-[


----------



## Kat Stevens

Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> Gee, where would we find the room?.......... We would have to move your spelling degree over to one side....... :-[


BWAHAHAHAH!! Just poured coffee all over myself! ;D

CHIMO,  Kat


----------



## Infanteer

This is why I like Bruce, he's got a head on his shoulders AND he's got a sense of humour.


----------



## vangemeren

I'm prood ove mee speeling daagree.  ;D I should be the last one to bother people about spelling.
If you were to put a plaque, what would it say? (A plague would get the message across better I think.) :blotto:


----------



## jmacleod

There has in fact been controversy about control of the famed Canadian War Museum's new facility
for some time - placing the War Museum under the mandate of the Canadian Museum of Civilization
was objected to many times from a varity of sources, including many veteran's organizations. The
Museum of Civilization has an agenda, which is focused on their interpretation of "Canadian Values"
which are the values of Ottawa based bureaucrats, with very limited input from Canadians who
actually fought the wars, served in Peace Keeping and Peace Enforcement operations, and the
rejection of a great deal of pertinent, real military history. The Canadian Airborne Regiment should
not be subject to negative comment in a national museum. The Regiment, like many in Canada's
military history had a disciplinary problem which could have been resolved in the field, and through
the military justice system. What the CWM Is doing is perpetuating a badly flawed political decision
from a government which gave Canada the Gomery Enquiry. Eventually, ongoing political focus in
perhaps a new Canadian goverment will change the Trustees and much of the staff in the CWM.
MacLeod


----------



## KevinB

I just got sick and tired of this diatribe for the last 12 years!.  I was in Cyrpus with the Para Bty when the Somalia incidents (good and bad) went down - and I was in Pet when we got to watch the US TF Ranger pers being pulled thru the streets of Mogadishu and torn apart by the crowds, at the same time our public, gov't and military was edging the CAR, Airborne Battle Group and SSF towards the shredder.  

The fact that some in our military have bought into the "public" face the gov't and to the shame of the Army and CF what we as a corporate entity did as well is sickening.  Unfortunately Somalia from the CF mission was a resounding sucess that was drown in a series of convolute and undesipherable incidents.  Why not a painting of two guys in R&R attempting to rescue a french chick from a shark attack - want to talk balls going into the water to try and rescue someone from that?  Why not highlight the good that happend - why becase the Gov't and the Army was in a Track toad heavy mind set and wanted to stamp out the jumper and light forces for good - it was politically expedient to paint a unit as rogue and sell out.  

Every unit / mission has skeletons - why because we are human are not perfect, sometimes loyalty is misplaced, and sometimes you just did not know what was going on even when you where there.

I've seen highs and lows in the Army - from Oka and Gulf1 where the CF where hero's and how we went to zero after Somalia.  Then back to good guys after the Red River Flood gong show.  Then back to dirt with the CANBAT allegation of rape and other sexual escapades with the Mental health Nurses and Inmates in Crotia.  You think anything changed with disbandment - other than losing a great capability?  The same pers that some enjoy to decry as still around today...
I wonder when the next disaster will beset us?  I KNOW several here know of incidents worse that what I mentioned, that the Gov't/Army did not find politically expedient to investigate or prosecute at that time (or at least make public).

The reason why I have a short fuse on some issues (this is not the only one) is I EXPECT that serving members of the military can acheive some common ground regardless of what element they are in or what capbadge and colour of hat they wear.  Face it we are dirt to 99.9% of the civilian world - they either elevate or lower our status in their opinion based on perceive need for our skills.  Maybe that cynical but thats been my experience ever since I originaly signed up April 27th 1987.  

The fact that some chose to place paintings of an incident that has been a wound in the Army that has not healed is worse to me than spitting in my face.  The fact that Brown get air time to breathe let alone be a poster child make me ill.  I won't go - I won't take my son, nor my parents and I will ask them to avoid it as a favour to me.  Why? because I dont want them seeing that (and I've seen both pics) and thinking of me or the CF - cause that is NOT what we do.  I'm not saying not to make up your own mind, I'm just saying WTF are you thinking.  I fail to see any honour in that sort of "statement" they have made - I view it as another sacred bound that has been broken, by the CF, the Gov't and the Canadian Public.

-Kevin


----------



## chriscalow

E-mail sent, boycott commenced.. Although I do like Bruce's idea about raising a stink in person, I might just do that.  Kevin, Good post.


----------



## George Wallace

jmacleod said:
			
		

> There has in fact been controversy about control of the famed Canadian War Museum's new facility
> for some time - placing the War Museum under the mandate of the Canadian Museum of Civilization
> was objected to many times from a varity of sources, including many veteran's organizations. The
> Museum of Civilization has an agenda, which is focused on their interpretation of "Canadian Values"
> which are the values of Ottawa based bureaucrats, with very limited input from Canadians who
> actually fought the wars, served in Peace Keeping and Peace Enforcement operations, and the
> rejection of a great deal of pertinent, real military history. The Canadian Airborne Regiment should
> not be subject to negative comment in a national museum. The Regiment, like many in Canada's
> military history had a disciplinary problem which could have been resolved in the field, and through
> the military justice system. What the CWM Is doing is perpetuating a badly flawed political decision
> from a government which gave Canada the Gomery Enquiry. Eventually, ongoing political focus in
> perhaps a new Canadian goverment will change the Trustees and much of the staff in the CWM.
> MacLeod



I hope that many of you pay close attention to this post.   It is very relevant in what is happening here.

I seriously don't agree with the comments from those of you who want to boycott the CWM.   I think it would be better to go see for yourself how they (Museum of Civilization) have presented the 'artifacts' and then make you feelings known to the Staff and more importantly to the "Directors" of the Canadian War Museum and the "Master" Museum of Civilization.   That would be more effective, I believe, than boycotting simply on the word of a friend, who heard from a friend, who heard a news reporter state "blah, blah, blah!".

Gw


----------



## Michael Dorosh

KevinB said:
			
		

> I just got sick and tired of this diatribe for the last 12 years!.  I was in Cyrpus with the Para Bty when the Somalia incidents (good and bad) went down - and I was in Pet when we got to watch the US TF Ranger pers being pulled thru the streets of Mogadishu and torn apart by the crowds, at the same time our public, gov't and military was edging the CAR, Airborne Battle Group and SSF towards the shredder.
> 
> The fact that some in our military have bought into the "public" face the gov't and to the shame of the Army and CF what we as a corporate entity did as well is sickening.  Unfortunately Somalia from the CF mission was a resounding sucess that was drown in a series of convolute and undesipherable incidents.  Why not a painting of two guys in R&R attempting to rescue a french chick from a shark attack - want to talk balls going into the water to try and rescue someone from that?  Why not highlight the good that happend - why becase the Gov't and the Army was in a Track toad heavy mind set and wanted to stamp out the jumper and light forces for good - it was politically expedient to paint a unit as rogue and sell out.
> 
> Every unit / mission has skeletons - why because we are human are not perfect, sometimes loyalty is misplaced, and sometimes you just did not know what was going on even when you where there.
> 
> I've seen highs and lows in the Army - from Oka and Gulf1 where the CF where hero's and how we went to zero after Somalia.  Then back to good guys after the Red River Flood gong show.  Then back to dirt with the CANBAT allegation of rape and other sexual escapades with the Mental health Nurses and Inmates in Crotia.  You think anything changed with disbandment - other than losing a great capability?  The same pers that some enjoy to decry as still around today...
> I wonder when the next disaster will beset us?  I KNOW several here know of incidents worse that what I mentioned, that the Gov't/Army did not find politically expedient to investigate or prosecute at that time (or at least make public).
> 
> The reason why I have a short fuse on some issues (this is not the only one) is I EXPECT that serving members of the military can acheive some common ground regardless of what element they are in or what capbadge and colour of hat they wear.  Face it we are dirt to 99.9% of the civilian world - they either elevate or lower our status in their opinion based on perceive need for our skills.  Maybe that cynical but thats been my experience ever since I originaly signed up April 27th 1987.
> 
> The fact that some chose to place paintings of an incident that has been a wound in the Army that has not healed is worse to me than spitting in my face.  The fact that Brown get air time to breathe let alone be a poster child make me ill.  I won't go - I won't take my son, nor my parents and I will ask them to avoid it as a favour to me.  Why? because I dont want them seeing that (and I've seen both pics) and thinking of me or the CF - cause that is NOT what we do.  I'm not saying not to make up your own mind, I'm just saying WTF are you thinking.  I fail to see any honour in that sort of "statement" they have made - I view it as another sacred bound that has been broken, by the CF, the Gov't and the Canadian Public.
> 
> -Kevin



I'll copy my post from the other thread here also.

 Well stated, Kevin B.

We have a display in our own Regimental museum, devoted to Japanese-Canadians.  We had several serve in our predecessor unit, the 10th Battalion CEF, in the trenches.  Some won valour awards, many were praised for bravery.

The Canadian government interned many of these veterans during the Second World War. 

Some say not a proud moment in Canadian history.  Others say "you know what?  There was a war on."  Certainly another hot button issue.  Can't say I'm proud of the fact we had concentration camps, and imprisoned MM and DCM winners based on their race.  Also hard to judge what they were thinking 60 years ago.

It happened. 

The Somalia affair had a huge impact on the CF and even, I daresay, Canadian history.  Is it something to be proud of?  Not on your life.  Should it be given attention out of proportion to the other missions that the Airborne successfully prosecuted?  I don't know.  I wasn't there, but bear in mind that the museum is in fact for the 99% of the population that wasn't there - and in 100 years, it will be 100 percent of the population, just as 100 percent of the museum visitors right NOW have never served in the Boer War. They've all joined the ranks of the white battalions.  The history of the Airborne is there for the rest of us to interpret - the museum can't just cater to the 0.001% of the population that lived it.

What is in the best interest of the public?  I would like to see - if it is really necessary to showcase this event - a fair and even treatment.  We don't know, based on the rantings of some media types, if that has been done.  I think we all have some pretty deep suspicions, rightly so.  Calling for a boycott of an insitution (whomever did this) so vital to the continued good health of the military community in Canada seems a little premature at this point.

I don't think the event should be exaggerated, though nor do I think it should be trivialized.  Why do we have SHARP now?  Why do we watch the X's and O's?  The entire culture of the CF changed as a result of this event, with it the way we do business, even the way we think.  The disbandment of the Airborne is irrelevant, and shouldn't even be part of the discussion.  That was my mistake.  I should have avoided the same, tired old political hacks on this site who see liberal conspiracies in everything that happens.  I say again - the disbandment is irrelevant to the issue of the painting.

If we can seperate the two - and that, again, was my fault - then we can discuss the matter a little more calmly I think.


----------



## Roger

Michael Dorosh said:
			
		

> I say again - the disbandment is irrelevant to the issue of the painting.
> 
> If we can seperate the two - and that, again, was my fault - then we can discuss the matter a little more calmly I think.



Actually we see things quite differently, this has all to do with the disbandment. The reason the Regiment was disbanded was totally do to this individual. The disbandment was a political decision; therefore if they put up the painting they are going forth with that political position. End of story.

Also going back to how long the Canadian Airborne Regiment has been around, go to a veteran's hospital and look around for some old WWII veterans, I go every Christmas. They where the Canadian Airborne Regiment badge and the colors of the Canadian Airborne Regiment had the WWII battle honours, hence we where considered the same Regiment.

We can trace the history of almost all of the Regiments in Canada and most had different names at one time or another but still consider themselves the same Regiment, case in point the Sherbrooke Hussars.


----------



## George Wallace

Chop said:
			
		

> Also going back to how long the Canadian Airborne Regiment has been around, go to a veteranâÃ‚ Ã‚â„¢s hospital and look around for some old WWII veterans, I go every Christmas. They where the Canadian Airborne Regiment badge and the colors of the Canadian Airborne Regiment had the WWII battle honours, hence we where considered the same Regiment.



I'll have to call you on that.   1 Can Paras Cap Badge is very similar to that of the CAR, but it is not the same badge.   The CAR Colours perpetuate the Battle Honours of 1 Can Para and 1 SSF.   That does not mean that they are 1 SSF or 1 Can Para.   The CAR were born in 1968, after some attempts were made at organizations such as a Canadian SAS, and other organizations, who trained in Rivers Manitoba.   

As for the boycott......again, don't go on heresay.   If you really want to let them know, go and see them in person.   If you want to compare the Museum of Civilizations justification to hanging those paintings to the hanging of a portrait of Mark Lapine in a Woman's Museum or a Museum in l'Ecole de Polytechnique, go ahead.   Boycotting the CWM will accomplish little.   Go and see it, and perhaps voice your opinions in the presence of other visitors.   Expand your "Fire Base" and perhaps enlighten the 'unknowing Public'.


----------



## Britney Spears

News of the boycott has been making the rounds here, and for what it's worth, none of my civvie friends who are familiar with the situation think very highly of the boycott or the attitude that spawned it. The pictures in question have not slandered or defamed the repuation of the CAR or it's former members, since it contains nothing factually incorrect or intentionally misleading.  You can prattle on about the details(and what "REALLY" happened) all you want, but in the eyes of the Canadian public, the boycott is making us all look like cowards who are afraid to look back, and we'd be much better off just accepting the facts and moving on. Such is the nature of public relations in a liberal democracy.  It seems the legion understands the game a bit better than the other fellow.


----------



## Roger

George Wallace said:
			
		

> I'll have to call you on that.   1 Can Paras Cap Badge is very similar to that of the CAR, but it is not the same badge.



My god, George, you really want to make your point here I see. I did not say they wore the same badge, I said go to a Veterans hospital and see what badge they are wearing now, today, at this time. They all or should I say 99% of them where the Canadian Airborne Regiment badge, that was formed in 1968 as you keep bringing up.

Please read my post.


----------



## Jarnhamar

So is it just a painting in the museum or is ti a centerpiece for the exhibit??

If it's just a painting i would chalk it up to bad taste. If it's a type of center piece, well thats retarded.

Canadians refuse to put the somalia incident in proper perspective.   I'm always amazed at how ingrained this thing is into everything that is military.


----------



## camochick

I think, in Canada there is a tendancy to sweep bad things under the rug and pretend they never happened. But what makes this country so great, like many other countries is our history. Good or bad, it's ours and it has shaped us and our country. I agree with others that perhaps everyone should go see the exhibit first before making snap judgements. Does anyone know what will be said in the museum about the paintings. There will most certainly be some sort of history posted about the signifigance of the paintings. Why not wait and see what is actually in the exhibit before deciding that you don't like it? 
 This whole thing is making a huge deal out of something so small and the media is feeding on it, so now the military is looking bad again and the whole incident is being brought up again, so what the boycott is trying to achieve isnt really working.


----------



## combat_medic

Having seen the pictures of the paintings, I do agree that they are definitely in poor taste, particularly the one of Matchee. I think, however, that seeing them in context will determine whether or not the museum directors or curators were trying to be deliberately inflammatory and insulting to the CAR vets.

That being said, and I know this is not to the same degree, but there are Holocaust museums and memorials throughout Germany and Europe. These are deliberately memorializing extremely bleak events in Germany's history. The majority of German soldiers in WWII were probably not participants in these atrocities, nor were most even aware of the extent of what was going on, but I think everyone can agree that there is a still need for such memorials to exist, no matter how it may look for those who were not involved. 

As for the Canadian museum, I'm not sure what to think. If they have, indeed, tried to paint the entire CAR with the brush of being violent neanderthals, then I feel that a boycott, and more pro-actively, a letter-writing campaign would definitely be in order, but I think that finding out how the information and material is being presented should happen first. Like Bruce and others, I think that registering your complaints and concerns in person to one of the museum directors would go a lot further. An even better gesture, in my opinion, would be for the CAR vets to get together and prepare their own pieces, writings, and materials to present to the museum to either counter the current exhibit(s), or to replace them with something that they feel is more fitting. I hear all the time from former Airborne soldiers about all the unsung heroes, like the whole shark incident. Why not tell those stories? If the media continues to try to paint the CAR with the same brush, then maybe these stories of heroism should be getting out there. Right now the media are the only ones doing the talking, so who else are people going to listen to? Perhaps using the museum as a vehicle would be the way to go about things. 

/my two cents.


----------



## Danjanou

I remember a long time a go some art teacher telling me the main purpose of art was to â Å“stir debate and incite passionâ ? or â Å“incite debate and stir passionâ ? or some metaphysical babble like that. Based on what I've read here I guess I was wrong when I thought she was once more spewing out of her fifth point of contact.

I seem the validity in the arguments from both sides here. I also see it as ironic  considering the topic that the fact we are allowed to hold and express so passionately  such diverse opinions at all today is due to the those men who scarified their youth and innocence and in many cases so much some 60 years ago  and that we are now honouring.

As a former soldier, a military historian and just for the hell of it a taxpayer and Canadian I have some concerns re the inclusion of this painting in the new war museum.  I agree we should not hide any aspects of our history including those shameful aspects of it. However we should look at them in the context that they really happened. What happened in that bunker in Somalia back then we all agree was an aberration and not in any way condoned or representative of our military heritage as a whole.

I've been wondering ever since the announcement we were to get a new War Museum and saw under whose auspices it would fall and their well known and already discussed here agenda just what would be the result. Maybe it's the inherent cynicism of middle age but I was afraid we'd end up with a bigger shinier domestic version of the Juno Beach museum after the Feds belatedly got involved with that project.

For those not sure of what I'm talking about, check out the posts on the site by one of the members here on that travesty. Bare mention in passing of our contributions during the entire Second World War let alone June 6, 1944 like one would expect there. Instead we ended up with an homage to our happy sappy singing and dancing great multicultural ,political correct, ignore the issues they'll go away, vote Liberal for life society.

That said and done I'll reserve comment and/or criticism of the new museum until I actually go and see the place.  If it (the paintng) is one piece among many there, controversial or not, I will give it the attention it deserves (minimal I would think) and move on. If it appears, as some here suggest, it is part of some politically correct anti military stance or agenda by the 'intelligentsiaâ ? then I will make my disgust for this perversion of our shared history known.

I fully respect those that choose to boycott it, which is their choice. I tend to think that their honourable and passionate stance though will be misinterpreted by the general populace. Concepts like honour and integrity and standing for principles which we hold as real truths are really not as well practiced by our society at large anymore sadly.

Mind I also doubt that formal or informal complaints will also meet with any success if that is indeed the case. They after all no better than us poor peons right. Including what is good for us or not. ( smiking, criminal rights, how to spend our tax dollars etc etc)

Finally, passionate debate is one thing.  We do need to remember most if not all of us on this site (regular, reserve, serving and/or retired) share many things in common including our sense of right and wrong and mutual respect for our chosen profession. Things have been said here and alluded to that perhaps should not have been. Lets try and chalk it up to the heat of the moment  and hopefully not allow it to afffect future actions/discussions. This place, and we deserve better.


----------



## PatricianSailor

$10,000 bucks to Commission those paintings!!!!    Christ..................Im surprised they didnt have that guy who got a sex change in the New War Museum somewhere. God damn bleeding hearts are taking over everything!!!!! Its supposed to be a place where people can go to gain inspiration from those who have fought and died for this country.........NOTE TO ALL THE BLEEDING HEARTS------------------------>  If you want Artsy fartsy stuff put that shit in an Art Gallery, dont pollute a first rate military heritage with the shit you call 'Art'

PS- This post is not a slag on War Artists........theyve done a fine job.


----------



## Michael OLeary

Paradoxically, that sacrifice by those soldiers was to ensure such 'artsy fartsy' types would have such freedom of expression within our society and those of our friends and allies, to the extent possible by their political and societal natures.


----------



## squealiox

i have another suggestion for "artwork" the museum can use to illustrate the whole CAR saga.

how about a big photo of the airborne troops being marched off the parade square for the last time, for the crimes of a few ... and right beside that, a big photo of the part in the SHARP syllabus that forbids the collective punishment of troops.


----------



## Art Johnson

Michael re your Artsy Fartsy comments. I think you and others are missing the point. If you say this is part of our Military History then why is there not a picture of a Naval Lieutenant doing a strip dance in a Gay Bar in Halifax displayed, or maybe a portrait of a young officer delivering pizza in Pettawawa displayed, these are certainly part of the Canadian Military life. There have been troubles at the Canadian War Museum for years. Those in power wanted a Holocaust section   in the War Museum the only person of note on the staff at that time to fight it was Jewish and it cost him his job. 
What individual display do you think will stand out to visitors of the Museum? Do you think that a picture of Canadian Soldiers pulling Dutch children on a sled will be uppermost in their minds? Not likely, they will remember the horrifying ten foot tall picture of a Canadian Soldier killing a Somali Civilian.
We should be putting our best foot forward and as far as Somalia is concerned show the good work that 3 Commando did.


----------



## Fishbone Jones

Tess,

Am I to understand that the display of you and your compadre, shot up Iltis and all, was removed from the current displays? While Matchee and Brown were given prominent spots as a patron enters the museum?

If this is the case, I see it as nothing less than the sitting governments attempt to defile and decrease the perception of the "Warrior Ethic" we try and strive, to uphold in our degraded and demeaned Canadian Armed Forces. They have tried, and succeded, through years of cohersion, with the Canadian press and the like, to show us as the "Boy Scouts of the World". They cannot abide a "Warrior Class" within their Utopian Society (until they need us). 

I can only imagine the curators (how many of them have actually served) dancing with glee at the outrage they have produced within the "vile, uncouth, plebien groups of Servicemen".  They will justify their actions by saying "Look at the dialog we have caused!".

Nobody but Veterans should be in charge of such a sancroscinct establishment as the War Museum.

Let *US* tell our story, not some paid off, political hack, appointed by our corrupt government, with an agenda to quell, or enrage, the agenda of the Leftist assholles who've taken hold of the pioneer spirit of our great country.

OK, I'm better now. I'll put away the gas, rags and bottles. Probably would've spilled most of it by the time I got to Ottawa anyway


----------



## pbi

I received an e-mail yesterday from the President of the PPCLI Asso in the Wpg area. In it he asks to mobilize support to protest the inclusion of the images of Brown and Matchee that are prominently displayed in the Museum. Apparently these images are very large (I heard "ten feet high"). What the hell is up with that? Is that how we honour the Canadians who have served this country, and who are serving it now? As an institution and as a profession we have already paid a huge price for the actions of these two criminal aberrants: how much more do we have to pay? Are we the Germans, to have our past sins constantly brought to our attention? I have not seen these images but I have no difficulty believing in the existence of the lefty, guilt-mongering, apologetic attitude that would equate all us soldiers with these two miscreants. After all, we're all just a bunch of psychopathic high school drop outs, right? Anybody who would accept the duty to kill must be a sicko, right?

I circulated the e-mail amongst all of our Bde Honoraries. Those of us still serving in the RegF may be in a difficult spot in opposing the Govt on this, but there are lots of Canadians who are not. I urge everybody here who has similar feelings to express them in whatever effective way you can. 

In my opinion this is an unwarranted slur on all of us, veteran and serving. Take the pictures down.

Cheers.


----------



## mover1

Bad taste.

 Does the 1945 riot in Halifax get equal coverage. Why did they get a Toronto Artist to paint these pictures. Were the originals not hideous enough. Is there an online petition being started up? I am writing my MP right now.


----------



## Danjanou

recceguy said:
			
		

> Nobody but Veterans should be in charge of such a sancroscinct establishment as the War Museum.



Now that is an idea worth fighting for. I can think of several regular posters here more than qualified for the job.


----------



## Kat Stevens

Just a curiosity question.  Would it not have made sense to put a Canadian WAR museum under the control of the Royal Canadian Legion?  As I understand it, the Legion has a few members that know a thing or two about war?  Plus, it would take the party political influence out of the equation.... Am I off course here?


----------



## Edward Campbell

Yes, Kat Stevens, I believe you are.

The purpose â â€œ the sole purpose â â€œ of a museum, any museum, is to educate.  In the case of a museum, artifacts are used to promote understanding and to aid research.

Arguably, in the Canadian War Museum, as in all *great*_ museums_ the true strength of the place will be found in its reading rooms and, in a peculiarly Canadian twist, in its art galleries â â€œ because Canada pioneered _official_ war art and, perhaps, still leads the way in this peculiar discipline.  (The unseen (by the Canadian public) Canadian War Art collection includes some of the finest water colours (Charles Comfort) and oils (Alex Coleville, Mary Lamb, and many, many others) painted anywhere in the world in any time in the 20th century.  Some are very moving and present unique _statements_ about Canada and Canadians at war.  Sometimes art can be just as _authoritative_ and much more comprehensible than dusty pages of letters and diaries by 'great' commanders.)

I, too, object to the Canadian War Museum being subordinate to the Canadian Museum of Civilization, but every museum should belong to someone or other and my suggestion that one of Ottawa's universities should have been given formal _oversight_ responsibility was not accepted by the group with which I am associated.

I am afraid that soldiers and veterans might be less pleased if a board of real, solid, internationally known Canadian historians were in charge â â€œ some sacred cows might get butchered.


----------



## Kat Stevens

I hear what you're saying. However, every other military style museum in Canada is administered by Regimental Associations, or other militarily linked organizations.  They do a fine job, IMHO, of presenting our military history.  Why national war museum would not be under the umbrella of the very people who fought those wars mystifies me. Not that I'm implying there shouldn't be a balance of pro and con.  As for the paintings, I feel the only purpose they will serve is to give the unenlightened a negative view of us before they've even seen the rest of the museum.....If they want shock value, how about a painting of Canadian troops excavating and recording mass graves....

CHIMO,  Kat


----------



## Roger

Michael O'Leary said:
			
		

> Paradoxically, that sacrifice by those soldiers was to ensure such 'artsy fartsy' types would have such freedom of expression within our society and those of our friends and allies, to the extent possible by their political and societal natures.



First off I am just going to say that this will be my last post on this issue, the pain of reading the posts are just too much for me at this time.

As I said, I think that the CAR was disbanded do too political and financial reasons and the press was used to have the news of what had happened for four years to give someone the ammo to disband the Canadian Airborne Regiment.

You do not hear any press of the dead bodies of Canadian soldiers hidden in a warehouse for several days in Bosnia, or of the soldiers that where defrauding the people they where supposed to help in country's like Cambodia.

Instead I will go in a museum that was built for all Canadian veterans and see the painting of a Canadian soldier torturing a young man. What do you think peoples memories will be when they leave that museum, what do you all think they will think of Canadian soldiers, I lived the experience of the 70's getting spit on and being called a baby killer because I was a soldier, spit on by Canadians who did not know where I had been but assumed I was in Vietnam when Canada was not there. Most of you where not there Somalia and most of you only know what you saw and read in the papers, where was all the press released from? Why was it front news for 4 years but we never heard one thing about the Medak pocket. I have no problem bringing up the good with the bad, we as Canadians fought and join the Canadian Armed forces because we believe in freedom. 

But for me, it is more of an issue that should have been dealt with immediately and should have not as gone as far as disbanding a unit of men who just wanted to do there duty for Canada and be the best they could be.


----------



## Jonny Boy

pbi said:
			
		

> I received an e-mail yesterday from the President of the PPCLI Asso in the Wpg area. In it he asks to mobilize support to protest the inclusion of the images of Brown and Matchee that are prominently displayed in the Museum. Apparently these images are very large (I heard "ten feet high"). What the heck is up with that? Is that how we honour the Canadians who have served this country, and who are serving it now? As an institution and as a profession we have already paid a huge price for the actions of these two criminal aberrants: how much more do we have to pay? Are we the Germans, to have our past sins constantly brought to our attention? I have not seen these images but I have no difficulty believing in the existence of the lefty, guilt-mongering, apologetic attitude that would equate all us soldiers with these two miscreants. After all, we're all just a bunch of psychopathic high school drop outs, right? Anybody who would accept the duty to kill must be a sicko, right?
> 
> I circulated the e-mail amongst all of our Bde Honoraries. Those of us still serving in the RegF may be in a difficult spot in opposing the Govt on this, but there are lots of Canadians who are not. I urge everybody here who has similar feelings to express them in whatever effective way you can.
> 
> In my opinion this is an unwarranted slur on all of us, veteran and serving. Take the pictures down.
> 
> Cheers.



are those the pictures of the airborne regiment   M/cpl with that Prisoner that they killed? i heard about those being put in the museum it made me sick, thats our goverment for you.


----------



## -rb

-Hutch- said:
			
		

> are those the pictures of the airborne regiment    M/cpl with that Prisoner that they killed?



Hutch, read this thread - http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/30345.0.html .You will find some of the details and hopefully gain some perspective as to why it is so controversial for members of the CF both serving and retired.

cheers.


----------



## a_majoor

It seems very clear that the "official" war museum is a forum to "educate" the public towards a view of the Armed Forces which is pleasing to the "elite" and obviously accepted by the masses (since they don't see fit to throw out a passive and seemingly corrupt political establishment, nor make any more than a token gesture of support to the likes of us.)

We do have the means to reply, both directly to the War Museum by voicing our opinions to the Museum, the media and our elected representatives, and indirectly by promoting *OUR OWN* regimental museums. I organized a visit to the RCR museum by my daughters school to coincide with Remembrance Day last year, and not only was it a resounding success, but it also sparked subsequent visits by the school. Many of these museums are operated by regimental associations, so there is a strong possibility that the visitors to your museums will have a chance to speak to veterens and serving members of your units, as well as see the history.

Everyone, we are soldiers, and joined because we are the people who want to do things and take action. Here is our chance; lets go!


----------



## 2 Cdo

a_majoor, that sounds like an amazing idea. Maybe that's something that Regimental Museum curators and members can look into.


----------



## George Wallace

Kat Stevens said:
			
		

> I hear what you're saying. However, every other military style museum in Canada is administered by Regimental Associations, or other militarily linked organizations.   They do a fine job, IMHO, of presenting our military history.   Why national war museum would not be under the umbrella of the very people who fought those wars mystifies me. Not that I'm implying there shouldn't be a balance of pro and con.   As for the paintings, I feel the only purpose they will serve is to give the unenlightened a negative view of us before they've even seen the rest of the museum.....If they want shock value, how about a painting of Canadian troops excavating and recording mass graves....
> 
> CHIMO,   Kat



DND through DHH certifies and 'supports' all CF Museums, Reg and Reserve.   There are the odd one, that is outside of DND, but still belongs to the OMMC (Organization of Military Museums of Canada), which in turn has a relationship with DHH.   The Canadian War Museum is not officially supported by DND.   What you will find is that it falls under the Museum of Civilization, and at times butts heads with Parks Canada's Museums and Historians.   

The problem is that some of the people who have created this controversy haven't thought the matter through enough.   Had they put some serious thought into it, may have tried a little experiment:   They could have tried to substitute the name of the CWM with "Canadian Woman's History Museum"; substitute any Woman's Human Rights organization for " members of the CAR"; and then substituted "Portrait of Mark Lapine" for "Painting of Kyle Brown", and from there determined if a controversy would be raised or not.   I think they would have left the painting of 'Mark Lapine" out of their display.


----------



## Jonny Boy

ya i just realized i really worded that badly. don't take any offence to it please. it want meant in that kind of way.

i understand why it is controversial, even though i was like 6 or so when it happend i like to watch the documentary's about it to learn more. but man do i hate the liberals


----------



## Canadian Sig

pbi said:
			
		

> Those of us still serving in the RegF may be in a difficult spot in opposing the Govt on this, but there are lots of Canadians who are not. I urge everybody here who has similar feelings to express them in whatever effective way you can.
> 
> In my opinion this is an unwarranted slur on all of us, veteran and serving. Take the pictures down.
> 
> Cheers.




   I am more than happy to oppose my " bosses" on this one. I do have to admit though that after reading some of the posts here that I find myself torn. On one hand I have already sent off an e-mail and I feel like I need to withdraw any support I had for this museum, on the other hand I feel sometimes like I should go and see the paintings and give my opinion in person.

  In the end I think we need to remember that this museum doesn't define who we are.... our service does that.


----------



## condor888000

One thing, I am not a soldier, I do not have the same viewpoint as the majority of you do. However, I disagree with the majority of the posters in this thread. The museum is not just meant to honour those who have served in the military. It is meant to inspire remembrance. To show those who go there Canada's military history. All of it. The good. The bad. And the ugly. That is what this painting is meant to show. That our soldiers aren't supermen. That they are regular human beings that occasionally slip. Occasionally do something that they should not. Occasionally they are criminals. But more more often they are heroes. Has this country's military suffered too much as a result of this horrible action? Yes in my mind. Yet that leads to an interesting argument, for me at least. If we remember what these men did then, it can be stopped from happening again. And that is more than enough reason to have the painting hanging there in my mind. To remind us what happened, in order that it may never happen again.

I'm sure many will disagree, some forcefully, and that is your right, however, that is my point of view, and it will not change.


----------



## KevinB

condor888000 said:
			
		

> I'm sure many will disagree, some forcefully, and that is your right, however, that is my point of view, and it will not change.



It will change once you get a clue.


I cut and pasted my little rant here to the CBC's email on the War Museum. 

I received a email from three sources WRT the PPCLI and Airborne Associations interpretation of this matter.



> Fellow Airborne Soldiers
> Tonight on the CBC news I was appalled to see that the new war museum has commissioned and displayed paintings depicting Matchee and Brown torturing the Somali teenager Shidane Arone during the Canadian Airborne Regiment's tour in Somalia.  I am angry and insulted at the way this incident is being so prominently portrayed within the whole context of Canadian military history by the Canadian War Museum.  Canadians it seems never tire of insulting their soldiers.( Does anyone think that the US will commission any paintings of the Abu Ghraib prison abuse for its military museums.)
> 
> I was pleased to see that Clifford Chatterton as Chair of the Council of Veterans Association has spoken out strongly against these paintings.  I intend to send him a letter of support.  (CAFA is a member of the Council of Veterans Associations)
> 
> I am seeking your advice on how to effectively protest this biased and unbalanced portrayal of our airborne military heritage.  I intend to take the following steps:
> 
> 1. Write a letter to the Minister of Defence on behalf of CAFA protesting the unbalanced coverage that the war museum is giving to this incident.
> 
> 2.  Send an email to all CAFA Branches asking them to send letters to their local MPs protesting that these two paintings are receiving such prominent coverage in the War Museum.  I will send a letter to my local MP as well.  I will also request letters to  local newspaper editors from as many CAFA members as possible protesting the distorted coverage.
> 
> 3. Post a notice on Jim Steeds "Skyhorse" site asking all airborne veterans to write, email or call their local MP's office and express their outrage for the unbalanced way in which this event is being presented.
> 
> Do you think that the right approach to this is to protest that the coverage is unbalanced in the context of our total Canadian Military History.   It is hard to say just don't depict it.  But it seems to me that we can make an argument that it is being blown out of proportion.  It is not, in my view, the mandate of the War Museum to glorify military villains such as Matchee and Brown. Any suggestion on the approach to take on this would be appreciated.  I think it will help our cause to have a common logical argument against these paintings being displayed.
> 
> Are there other influential people that we can bring into the argument on our side.  Does anyone know Peter Worthington well enough the ask him
> to support us?  Does anyone have Lou Mackiezie's email address( I seem to have lost it) and could ask him to speak out against the biased portrayal of this incident? Are there any other suggestions?
> 
> What else can we do to make our case?  Your suggestions would be appreciated as soon as possible, as I would like to get action rolling tomorrow. Please reply to all addressees where appropriate.
> 
> I have included the currently serving members of the board of directors as info addresses only.  You can play as much of a part in this action
> as you feel comfortable with, recognizing the restrictions on political dissent that you may be bound by.
> 
> Clay Samis
> Pres. CAFA


----------



## condor888000

I'm sorry, but it hasn't. I still feel, even after reading that, that ALL actions of Canadian troops abroad and at home should be shown. No matter what they show. It may not be what is wanted by all, but it is what I feel is right. And that is what I believe this painting is meant to show.


----------



## Old Sweat

The paintings show one aspect of Somalia, and frankly the impression sucks. What about informing Canadians about the terrific job done by the RCD squadron and the members of the commandos who got out in the scrub and made a difference?


----------



## condor888000

Hopefully those aspects are portrayed as well, unfortunately, the museum has yet to open, so I don't know if they are. If the curators were doing a good job those would be showed however. Right besides what these men did. Like I said before, show the good, the bad, and the ugly.


----------



## Steel Badger

I am pretty much horrifed at the "liberalization" of the new War Museum.

The painting discussed has no business in it. Before others jump in to say "it is history blah blah blah" I saw no paintings on the old War Museum that depicted : RCAF (and other allied) misdrops on allied troops in Normandy or of the mutinies in the RCN immediately post war....

What I am trying to point out is that the painting depicts ONE INCIDENT in the history of   a regiment that served Canada in exemplary fashion. One incident.   
The average vistitor to the Museum will believe that that is the MOST IMPORTANT incident in the history of the C.A.R. That is NOT the message we should be showing to people....

With respect to Condor: Should we also produce a painiting of the one soldier from my regiment covicted with rape in 1945? He was stripped of all regimental accoutrements by the RSM of the day and sent off to 12 years hard labour? Although that is part of our history, is a painting the proper format for it to be displayed??
Should we then continue with a series of Mackenna Brother's style paintings which depict those Queen's hard bargains whose conduct reach the depths of irreponsibility???

Condor, I ( and Many many others) would not permit a painting of the "rape" I described above to be displayed in our Unit Museum. While the act itself was deplorable, and punished with a sentance that most contemporay criminals would be horrified at......ceating a paintng of the event would only serve to cheapen the sacrifce made by our soldiers in two World Wars and in Korea.....

The war museum is not the place for such a painting........Stop the darn thing now.


Just my 2 cents


SB


----------



## Kat Stevens

Why don't we display a painting of three (insert French infantry regiment's name here) members who stalked a dependent child through the streets of Lahr and killed him with a butcher knife?  The point I tried to make earlier was that there are a zillion exemplary acts of Canadian troops that are not immortalized on canvas.  My understanding is that these two representations occupy a place of prominence in the museum. I apologize if I'm off base.....

CHIMO,  Kat


----------



## Infanteer

KevinB said:
			
		

> Does anyone think that the US will commission any paintings of the Abu Ghraib prison abuse for its military museums.



That statement there hit the mark - as a soldier, why do I want this crap to be the centerpiece of a museum dedicated to service?   WTF kind of logic is that?

Sure, the story can be told, but why make it the centerpiece?   To the showcase of Matchee/Brown I say BOOOOOO!


----------



## condor888000

Good points all, espically the bit about the public believing that this was the most importent event in the history of the CAR. I still think that the story needs to be told, though you have managned to convince me that it should be done in a more tasteful manner. But I still stand by my belief that all things done by members of the military should be shown, no matter how deplorable. What also needs to be shown is the aftermath however, what happened to the men once they were found out.


----------



## Canadian Sig

condor,


 Have you researched what happened after "they were found out". Do you know how they were found out? Man even what happened to that $%##^ Matchee was a tragedy ( and before I get nailed, I'm not a fan of that SOB ).


----------



## condor888000

No, I admit that I am ignorant in the matter. I was always more interested in the period up to the Korean war.


----------



## Infanteer

condor888000 said:
			
		

> No, I admit that I am ignorant in the matter. I was always more interested in the period up to the Korean war.



So you are basically saying that you have no clue what you are talking about?


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse

...and will not change?


----------



## condor888000

In effect yes. I know little of the Canadian mission to Somalia, that I freely admit(Actually that's not that true. I know parts. I know that one of hte men attempted suicide, failed and is now mentally deficent, unfit to stand trial. Thats about it though.). However, I still have an opinion, they're like assholes, everyone's got one...........

Also, nowhere in my posts do I say I know much about what happened in Somalia. I spoke in fairly broad terms, nothing in particular about that mission. With the possible exception of reply 83.

And yes Bruce, my opinion on the showing of all the behaviours of Canadian troops will not change.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse

Quote,
And yes Bruce, my opinion on the showing of all the behaviours of Canadian troops will not change.

.....yes, but when you go to the Hockey Hall of Fame would you expect the main exhibit, when you first walked in, to be Todd Bertuzzi punching Mr. Smith in the back of the head or Paul Henderson's goal of 1972?

Some things just should be more prioritized.......


----------



## condor888000

condor888000 said:
			
		

> I still think that the story needs to be told, though you have managned to convince me that it should be done in a more tasteful manner. But I still stand by my belief that all things done by members of the military should be shown, no matter how deplorable.



Like that says? 

NOTE: I meant that my opinion on the informing the public of both sides of the story wouldn't change. Not the opinion on the painting itself.


----------



## Infanteer

Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> .....yes, but when you go to the Hockey Hall of Fame would you expect the main exhibit, when you first walked in, to be Todd Bertuzzi punching Mr. Smith in the back of the head or Paul Henderson's goal of 1972?
> 
> Some things just should be more prioritized.......



Bingo.

Although it would be Mr. Moore on the receiving end of Bertuzzi's punch, this statement conveys what most of us feel.


----------



## George Wallace

2332Piper said:
			
		

> I think this is taking PC make-sure-we-remember-everything way to far. ...............
> Its like having a murderer in the family and then your neighbour hangs a picture of him on your front door for all to see.



Actually, I would say that that is exactly what it is.   

The same as my "Mark Lapine" comments.   Why is it OK to insult the CF, the Airborne, etc, but too PC to do something similar to another group?   I equate the insult to the former members of the Airborne, by this action of PC individuals, to what the women of this nation would feel should we rename their 'day of Remembrance' as Mark Lapine Day and hang up his portrait.   It is a very sour point with a group of people who have served this Nation, and who have been treated like dirt.   It is shameful that Canadian Soldiers, as witnessed in Holland this week, are treated with more respect outside of Canada, than they are here at home.

I intend to visit the Museum.   I will draw my conclusions on the matter from that visit.


----------



## winchable

> Therefore, we would have thousands of large portraits of soldiers doing their good deeds in a place of prominence.



Well since the museum isn't open, and no-one's seen the context these paintings are done in none of us can say for certain that this isnt the case.

The art gallery at the museum has 19,000 works of art!
The nature of an art gallery demands that these paintings will be rotated through.

In fact, I've seen nothing to suggest that these paintings are given any kind of central prominence in the museum.

I've been to the imperial war museum in London and they managed to portray all aspects of war (which is a fundementally uncivilized business) from the holocaust to the British Raj's exploits without any sort of outrage from the public.




> I intend to visit the Museum.  I will draw my conclusions on the matter from that visit.


Thankyou George, someone making sense.


----------



## Art Johnson

So far Condor all you have proved is that you are an immature Cadet with a closed mind. Maybe if you had seen some Active Service under fire you might change your mind.


----------



## camochick

Art Johnson said:
			
		

> So far Condor all you have proved is that you are an immature Cadet with a closed mind. Maybe if you had seen some Active Service under fire you might change your mind.



I don't think that throwing insults at someone is very productive to the thread.Perhaps an example of having a closed mind could be freaking out over an exhibit at a museum before the museum has even been opened.


----------



## the 48th regulator

camochick said:
			
		

> I don't think that throwing insults at someone is very productive to the thread.Perhaps an example of having a closed mind could be freaking out over an exhibit at a museum before the museum has even been opened.



Sorry I fail to see the insult, but a very true observation. Yet you make a statement about having a closed mind on the paintings....

dileas

tess


----------



## bossi

During the construction of the new War Museum, I kept wondering what the "Fifth Column" from the People's Liberation Army ... er, um ... federal Liberal party ... ooops ... politically correct Museum of Man Civilisation were plotting - I knew only too well that they'd plunge a dagger into the heart of our Army, but where and when was the only question ... and what a magnificent blow they struck (kinda reminds me of one of my favourite words in the English language:  "Quisling" - a man so reviled, his name became a word ... but ... I digress ... again ...).

What better way to cripple the pride, honour and heritage of our proud Army than to slap each and every visitor to the new War Museum in the face with these paintings?  Bravo.  I'm so impressed with their skullduggery, I'd like to get the author's autograph ... on the bottom of the Rideau Canal ... in blood ... (oh, dear ... was I using my "outer voice" again ... that darned malaria medication ...)

Proof in the pudding is this:  These paintings have already caused such outrage, and the Museum ain't even open yet (again - my hat is off to the Quislings inside the Museum ... they have administered a masterful coup de main ... or should I say "coup de peinture" ... chuckle - wish I knew how to say "stroke" as in "brush stroke" in French ...)

The Fifth Column inside the Museum are achieving their aim - regrettably, they know "us" only too well - Army guys have this ABSOLUTELY TERRIBLE habit of fighting amongst ourselves ... when we should be focussing our attention on an external enemy ... (but, again - I point to the incredibly adroit explotation of "divide and concquer" as demonstrated by these POS Rump Rangers within the Museum ...)

I hate it whenever we fight amongst ourselves instead of slaying and vanquishing our real enemies.
Whenever we start squabbling amongst ourselves, the bad guys are able to advance THEIR yardsticks
(e.g. they got away with disbanding the Airborne, we're losing our tanks, the infantry have lost pioneers and mortars, we sold our frikkin Chinooks to the Dutch, etc., etc. ad nauseum ...)

But, then again ... maybe I'm just grumpy because I've been awake since 0200 ...


----------



## jmacleod

There must be a concerted and totally focused movement to withdraw control of the National War Museum totally away from the Museum of Civilization, and ensure that a restructured War Museum be under the control of the serving and former Canadian military.
My recommendation is the model of the Imperial War Museum, well known to my associates and I. The Army, Navy and Air Force
Benevolent Funds could be the catalyst in forming an association with DND, all Veterans organizations, public spirited citizens and the private industrial and financial sector. The formula used to create the Canadian Warplane Heritage Foundation (CWHF), the HMCS Sackville Foundation the various private sector museums located across Canada which focus on the use of Tax Credits for funding, plus a Board of Trustees (Directors) with direct links to the Canadian military, and staff dedicated to the preservation of the outstanding military history of our country, without a subtle or otherwise hidden agenda is critically necessary.
I was very apprehensive when it was made known that the Canadian Museum of Civilization, which is not especially significant to Canadian history would be the agency of control over the National War Museum, and our apprehension turned out to be quite correct, as noted by Journalist Peter Worthington and Mr. Clifford Chadderton OC, men whose opinions count. One should visit if possible the Imperial War Museum, and it's Forces museums at RAF Duxford, Hendon, HMS Belfast, etc. - these are total participatory facilities, designed to attract public participation and private sector industry support - flying the Tornado F1 simulator at Duxford is an interesting and compelling experience.
Dr David Baird of Saint John NB former Director the Canadian National Museum of Science and Technology had the right idea - museums are for people and they must reflect in a positive light, a factual and compelling message. 
Jack MacLeod

Edited for presentation, content unchanged.


----------



## Kat Stevens

Thanks, jmacleod.  You summed up what I was trying to say much more eloquently....

CHIMO,  Kat


----------



## condor888000

Art Johnson said:
			
		

> So far Condor all you have proved is that you are an immature Cadet with a closed mind. Maybe if you had seen some Active Service under fire you might change your mind.



Immature cadet with a closed mind eh? You made this assumption after reading what? 4, 5 posts of mine in this thread? Never speaking to me personally? I guess you don't have to......seeing "cadet" in a profile is enough eh?  : 

Alright, you've made your point, I'll slink off back to the cadet form..........never to come back out and state my opinion in a matter which involes _all_ Canadians, those who have served or are serving, and those who haven't and never will.

PS: If you want to slam me, go ahead, however, don't slam cadets at the same time.


----------



## muskrat89

If we could get this thread back on course, please....

Thanks


----------



## the 48th regulator

He only pointed out your inexperienced opinion, and did not insult cadets.

You should feel honored receiving a comment like that from Art, not insulted.

dileas

tess


----------



## jamesj

I was at the museum today (990th member of the public to enter ;D), and I saw the painting. It is located across from the cloakroom on the wall of the Barney Danson Theatre, along with many other paintings. It is not prominent or singled out, and there is no sign explaining the painting. Most members of the public probably do not even know what the subject is. The new museum is quite impressive, and they do not glorify war, and they do not seem to single out this one atrocity. I felt that certain sections (esp. the ww1 area) were incredible, with walk in trenches w/ periscopes, and a more hands on approach to things. The large artifact area takes up half the ground floor, and there are artifacts ranging from early artillery to light armoured vehicles still in use (pretty much the best of Vimy House).
JamesJ


----------



## Infanteer

Well that is reassuring.


----------



## Gager

I also went to the War Museum today. 

The picture itself is not a centerpiece, but at the same time it is also not just another picture in a row of others. The picture is located in the last area of Section 4 (World War II - Present or Modern Conflicts) and beside a picture of Gen. Dallaire (similar to this one - http://www.carleton.ca/jmc/mediagenocide/background/images/4thumb.jpg ) These are the two main pictures in the area. On the other walls there are smaller pictures showcasing events like Oka, and rows of magazine covers from the likes of Time and McLeans, that show little blurbs about things that happened in the 90s (Again, Oka ... Hussein etc). In the center of the room there are seats, positioned to look at 3 television monitors that, to the tune of sentimental music, shows Canadian soldiers (from what I saw, didn't watch it all) as peacekeepers/disaster relief operators. To the left of the picture of the MCpl and Gen. Dallaire there is a table set up where you can write comments, which from what I saw was littered with "Violence is not the Answer!" etc. and of course my criticism. 

I did not see anything about other actions in Somalia, though it was busy and I was rushed for time. Perhaps I missed it. Perhaps they just didn't bother. I wouldn't be suprised if the latter were true - many of the exhibits at the museum were glossed over. I guess I expected more than to see one or two "Did Ya Know?" paragraphs on something like Somme. Likewise I expected to see more about Somalia than just a soldier strangling a Somali. Even with some of the amazing paintings, uniforms, vehicles and displays it just didn't feel like a pure and whole war museum, mainly because of omissions or just not hitting the mark.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse

Sat, May 7, 2005 
Memento of a terrible time
By HOLLY LAKE, Ottawa Sun
SOMETIMES THE smallest things make the most powerful statements. 

In the case of the new Canadian War Museum, set to open today, it's a tiny teddy bear that perhaps best illustrates the very human toll of war. 
Hand sewn by Aileen Rogers, she'd asked her father to wear it always to keep him safe while away at war. 
With its floppy ears and simply stitched facial features, the legless bear was a child's innocent attempt to comfort her father at a time when there was little comfort to be had. 

In the muddy trenches of France, the bear was a stark contrast to the unimaginable horror unfolding every day. 
But for two years Pte. Lawrence Rogers and the fuzzy fellow were inseparable. Together they faced some of the worst battles on the western front during World War I. 

When the 38-year-old medic was killed by shrapnel in 1917 while caring for a soldier in a Passchendaele field, the bear was with him. 
Rogers was buried, but a shell later exploded near his grave, destroying his remains. 

The tiny bear was all there was left to return to his family at their farm in Cowansville, Que. For 80 years, they held it close to their heart as Rogers had done. It was only in 2004 that they agreed to donate it to the museum. 
Curator and historian Tim Cook says the "powerful artifact" was important to include as it represents the human face of battle. 
"We think of the First World War as this massive industrial war, with machine guns and artillery, armies of millions fighting day after day, month after month, year after year," he says. 
"We have to keep in mind these were individuals." 

Next to the bear is a letter Rogers' son wrote to him on Sept. 8, 1917. Sadly, Rogers never received it. 
It arrived in Europe after he was killed and was sent back to his family unopened. 
The letter's content is mundane. School's going well. The boy misses his dad. Cook says it's another evocative image of soldiers leaving their families behind. 

"I found it very touching. We think of it as very much a young man's war. (But Rogers) was 38 when he enlisted and felt very passionate about going overseas. And he left behind a family -- a wife and two children," Cook says. 

"All of these soldiers, they all left behind families (for 4 1/2 years). It's worth remembering because that's part of the sacrifice of war." 
holly.lake@ott.sunpub.com


----------



## Korus

I'm on leave in Ottawa right now, and I took the opportunity to go to the war museum... All I can say is Wow.. amazing. I took about a hundred pictures. I'll try and post a couple when I'm back home next weekend.


----------



## Jonny Boy

i have heard it is not as nice as the old one.


----------



## Art Johnson

Hi Tess, I see your Iltis made on the CBC this afternoon, it was in the workshop.

Art J


----------



## the 48th regulator

with my luck they will patch the thing up and resell to make up for the debt of the new building. hehehe

dileas

tess


----------



## George Wallace

Actually that Iltis is on the main floor with all the other vehs on display.  Definitely not in the "Workshop".

Nice digs.  Will have to go again, when they finish all the displays and perhaps improve some of the labels.


----------



## Art Johnson

Thanks George, I guess when they did the article it was still in the shop. Either that or the commentator or I were confused.


----------



## bossi

I found this report very interesting, especially LGen Daillaire's perspective ...

*Divergent portraits of war
Canadian heroes relive their battles: War Museum's 'anguished' portrait troubles Dallaire*
   
Elizabeth Payne, The Ottawa Citizen, May 7, 2005

CREDIT: Wayne Cuddington, The Ottawa Citizen 
The painting of retired Lt.-Gen. Romeo Dallaire is set on a camouflage background and depicts him wearing the blue beret of the UN, one hand covering his face. While Lt.-Gen. Dallaire is concerned with the placement of the work, museum officials have said they have not received any complaints. 

More Columns By This Writer 
:: Have an Imperfect Christmas 



Retired Lt.-Gen. Romeo Dallaire says he is uncomfortable with the placement of an anguished portrait of him at the Canadian War Museum and would like it moved.

"I just felt that maybe people don't want to see something like that up front," Lt.-Gen. Dallaire said of the portrait by Toronto artist Gertrude Kearns that hangs on the portrait wall near the front of the building.

The powerful portrait, on nylon canvas printed in a camouflage pattern, depicts an emotional Lt.-Gen. Dallaire wearing the blue beret of the UN, one hand covering his face.

It is one of a series of paintings Ms. Kearns has done on Lt.-Gen. Dallaire and Rwanda. Another of her portraits of the general hangs further inside the museum.

The former head of the UN peacekeeping mission in Rwanda, interviewed by phone from Quebec City, said he finds the painting "difficult."

"I'm surprised they would have considered it to be in the war museum to start with."

Although Lt.-Gen. Dallaire won't be able to visit the new museum until later this month, he said a colleague contacted him with concerns that the painting was one of the first things museum visitors would see. Lt.-Gen. Dallaire agrees.

"It's not the kind of exhibit you want right near the entrance," he said.

Lt.-Gen. Dallaire, 58, led the United Nations peacekeeping mission in Rwanda during the 1994 genocide that was ignored by the UN and the Western world.

Lt.-Gen. Dallaire warned the UN of the approaching conflict, but he and his soldiers were left to look on as men, women and children were slaughtered before their eyes. He returned to Canada with post-traumatic stress syndrome and, at one point, tried to kill himself.

The author of Shake Hands with the Devil has spent the past few years travelling the country and telling his story.

Lt.-Gen. Dallaire has told Ms. Kearns that he finds the series of Rwanda paintings she did of him powerful, but difficult. He has only seen copies of the works, but the two have been in contact about the portraits.

The paintings have been called "brutal and brilliant," as well as "psychologically complex" by art critics.

Museum director Joe Geurts said yesterday he is not aware of any concerns about the Dallaire portrait.

"I have not personally heard from anyone who has visited the museum who has had any difficulty with that work," Mr. Geurts said.

And Lt.-Gen. Dallaire said it is "OK if they decide to leave it there. ... What (the museum) decides is up to them."

The portrait is the second of Ms. Kearns' works on the museum's portrait wall that has drawn fire in the days leading up to the opening of the $136-million museum. Earlier this week, Cliff Chadderton, chairman of the National Council of Veteran Associations, said he plans to boycott the opening because of Ms. Kearns' paintings depicting soldiers Clayton Matchee and Kyle Brown. The two were involved in the torture and death of Somali teenager Shidane Arone in 1993.

Mr. Chadderton, who called the works insulting, told the Citizen the paintings have no place in the museum. He even offered to pay to have them taken down. A few other veterans have written to the Citizen in support of his view.

In an interview this week, Ms. Kearns said she's not surprised the works are controversial, but that is one reason they belong in the Canadian War Museum.

"I wouldn't have been interested in the subject matter if it hadn't been controversial," she said of the Somalia affair. "It grabbed my imagination."

Ms. Kearns said she is surprised Mr. Chadderton is so upset by the Somalia paintings, since the fundraising group Friends of the War Museum, made up largely of veterans, was behind their purchase.

Nor are the paintings new to the museum. They have been part of its permanent collection -- albeit in storage -- for years.

Museum officials, who strongly support Ms. Kearns' works, have said they are proud the museum has not shied away from tough subjects.

Ms. Kearns says there is no doubt her paintings belong in the museum. And the fact that people are talking about them is a good thing.

"The Canadian public should realize that the conditions around missions are incredibly difficult."

Three of Ms. Kearns' works are displayed on the museum's portrait wall. In addition to the portrait of Lt.-Gen. Dallaire and the painting of Kyle Brown is a portrait of a soldier with post-traumatic stress disorder. The museum also has a poster by Ms. Kearns of Gen. Lewis McKenzie, with the words "Keep The Peace or I'll Kill You" written below. That is not on display at the museum.

Ms. Kearns said she is thrilled her works are in the new war museum. The museum's art curator, Laura Brandon, said people who have been through the museum during pre-opening tours generally have a different view of Ms. Kearns' works than those who have not yet seen the museum.

"Anyone who has come to the museum and been around the exhibits understands the whole picture."

There are nearly 500 pieces of war art on display in the museum. The portrait wall contains 26 paintings, including an honoured hero, a laughing war bride, a child, a drowning sailor and others.

http://www.canada.com/components/printstory/printstory4.aspx?id=b3d10597-6900-4cef-ab56-caa9a543c890


----------



## KevinB

Gee the Artist thinks they should be there - what a shock  : 

I wonder what would happen if a vet went up and ripped down the two pictures?


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse

The liberal press and "those" types would have a journalistic field days saying " See, we told you so, barbarians one and all"


----------



## Blue Max

I have not seen the new War Museum, but from reading all the posts on the subject it seems clear that instead of showing the sacrifices, bravery and accomplishments of our military, through many difficult years there is an attempt to humiliate, and showcase the failures of the Canadian military, without any context or explanation.

As for the artist wanting to see controversy with people looking at her paintings, I did not know that was the point of a Military museum, but then the artist and committee that bought it probably think that feces and used ladies toiletries can be made into art.


----------



## Thompson_JM

condor888000 said:
			
		

> Immature cadet with a closed mind eh? You made this assumption after reading what? 4, 5 posts of mine in this thread? Never speaking to me personally? I guess you don't have to......seeing "cadet" in a profile is enough eh?   :
> 
> Alright, you've made your point, I'll slink off back to the cadet form..........never to come back out and state my opinion in a matter which involes _all_ Canadians, those who have served or are serving, and those who haven't and never will.
> 
> PS: If you want to slam me, go ahead, however, don't slam cadets at the same time.



Okay, if we were to put it into a cadet context then.... obviously youre proud of cadets. youre proud of what you stand for and what you do...

now lets say theyre opening a cadet museum. and along with artwork of cadets doing good their are portraits of, oh i dunno... how about a CIC officer molesting some staff cadets, maybe another picture of staff cadets soddomizing a 12 year old cadet with the bug bar...  or if all else fails just show a montage painting depicting cadets at camp drinking behind the tents and fornicating like rabbits...

is cadets more then that? yes absolutely... do these things, and have these things happened within the cadet movement? yes. 

now do you understand clearly where many of these soldiers are comming from? personally I dont have a problem with the painting of the guy holding the dice... but the portrait of matchee is completely uneccisary and insulting...  IMHO it doesnt do anyting but give people a very negative veiw of the army and hold up the whole barbarian, baby killer stereotype. 

I will however visit the museum, so that i too can see for myself just how it is depicted. more so, however to see all the other displays which i missed when i toured the old museum, last summer.

anyways, from what people have wrote it seems that thankfully they are nor glorifying the portrait, but once again IMHO they could have found much better ways to educate canadians on the CAR 

regards


----------



## George Wallace

The New CWM is still unfinished.  In my two to three hour walk through (in a hurry) I saw several empty or unfinished displays.  It is a work in progress.  I noticed that there were omissions, such as no mention of the Canadian Cavalry Bde as far as I saw.  There is too much there to dwell on one location or event to any extent.  In many cases a single picture was all that represented a certain event while other events had a bit more than they really required.  The Dallaire and Brown paintings are in a hall near the Cafeteria.  The Matchee and another Camouflage paintings similar to the Dallaire painting, are at the end of the Present History gallery.  In both locations, security guards were quite obvious.  It has already been noted that the end of the Present Day History gallery there are tables with pre-addressed Post Cards where the Public could send their comments to various "Leaders" or "Organizations".  (I noticed one pre-addressed to the Leader of the Bloc and another pre-addressed to the President of the USA.)

I found that some of the labels were lacking in info, and in some cases the print was too small, an oddity for a Museum of this calibre.  As I have already mentioned, the displays are not all complete yet and I am sure once the initial crowds die down, Tour Guides will be better able to interpret the displays for groups of visitors (Something that is impossible to do at this stage.).  

Is this a Museum worth visiting?  The answer is yes, with the skilled guidance of an Interpreter.  A vastly different museum, than the old museum.  It is probably already too small for what it holds and wants to display.


----------



## Thompson_JM

saw the 'Lanc fly over my house on its way home from ottawa on sunday... its quite majestic to watch.. a piece of history flying over.. it'll be a sad day in my books when they are forced to ground it...


----------



## Jonny Boy

Cpl Thompson said:
			
		

> saw the 'Lanc fly over my house on its way home from ottawa on sunday... its quite majestic to watch.. a piece of history flying over.. it'll be a sad day in my books when they are forced to ground it...



which will hopefully not be anytime soon. my dad and i are trying to see if we can get my grandpa up to the Front to sit in the flight engineers seat for the first time in 60 years.


----------



## pbi

Asa far as I know, both Brown and Matchee were aboriginal soldiers. What do these images say about the good service and bravery of thousands of First Nations soldiers in our history? And (perhaps cynically...) how long would these images stay up if the AFN lodged a formal complaint that the pictures were racist because they portray native Canadian soldiers in a negative light? About one day, I'll bet.

Cheers.


----------



## Thompson_JM

note to self: get AFN to lodge a complaint.....


----------



## KevinB

PBI good point.

 Odd that Paul Springer who is also First Nations and was awarded a Medal of Bravey and CDS commendation (two different events - the Shark rescue and the Local convoy 'escort' who was shooting at delivery trucks drivers over a fee dispute.) was not portrayed or acknowledged.  It's almost like a consipracy...


----------



## jmacleod

I forwarded a formal compliant to the Director Canadian War Museum (copied to War Amps
Canada and Journalist Peter Worthington) pointing out that the "portraits" of former Canadian
soldier Kyle Brown and Clayton Matchee should not be displayed in the Museum. I have often
felt that Brown was a victim of Canadian military justice, and should not have been charged
much less convicted, and that Matchee in fact was not tried for the offences allegedly committed
by him in Somalia. It is also evident, in my opinion that there is a degree of blatant racism in
these "portraits", considering both Brown and Matchee are aboriginals, like very many who have
served in the Canadian Forces with distinction for many decades. I have also pointed out that the
Canadian War Museum should not be connected under any circumstance to it's current mentor,
whose agenda is not focused on, nor in sympathy with the Canadian military. As I have stated in any earlier post, my associates and friends were very apprehensive when we read an extract of the
business and development plan for the new Canadian War Museum, having seen first hand their
changes in the Halifax Citadel Military Museum N.S., which I will define in a later post. MacLeod


----------



## Michael Dorosh

It would appear the painting in question was purchased without the consent of the board...Worthington discusses it today.  I didn't see the painting in my brief tour of the museum - but the rest of the museum failed to impress me, too.  Nor the opening ceremonies, which were clearly not aimed at the veterans (apparently many of them got up and left after only a few minutes of sitting in the hot sun listening to modern French Canadian pop music....gee, why would an 80 year old man not want to endure that?)


----------



## Brad Sallows

One role of a museum is to provide material for visitors to interpret.  The museum staff presumably decide what material is to be made available for interpretation.

I prefer museums which simply amass and display masses of artifacts, in a semblance of order (eg. by period and campaign), with small cards asserting the important characteristics and lineage (if known) of each item on display.

It is a good idea to have a war art section.  It would also be good to have sections filled with small arms, uniforms, vehicles and equipment, campaign maps and descriptions, etc.


----------



## Infanteer

Brad Sallows said:
			
		

> I prefer museums which simply amass and display masses of artifacts, in a semblance of order (eg. by period and campaign), with small cards asserting the important characteristics and lineage (if known) of each item on display.



+1 to that.

A museum should attempt to convey the events and circumstances of the story it is trying to tell - what would do that better, a guy holding a black and white cube with some Hercs flying around him or an actual Maxim machine gun that guys had to lug across no-mans land.


----------



## jmacleod

My company provided a Business Plan for the Atlantic Canada Aviation Museum, Halifax NS, which was
their basis for funds from Federal sources to expand their excellent, but modest facility. I learned a
lot about modern museums while working on the EH101 Merlin project, visited virtually all the major
military museums in England; RN HMS Yeoville, RAF Hendon, RAF Duxford, Brigade of Guards London
Imperial War Museum East London, and the most impressive, the Museum of the Moving Image
London (the motion picture Museum). British Museums are designed to attract people, their
theme being, "total participation", so that in Duxford and Yeoville, you can fly an F1 "Tornado"
in simulation, or in Duxford, an SE-5 World War 1 fighter, and chase the "Red Baron" - participation
in the Museum of the Moving Image is very impressive - one can watch the recreation of a famous
film being photographed on a re created sound stage of the 1940's era, for instance. In the Imperial
War Museum, trenches have been recreated, and there is always a highly specialized display - last
time we were there, the feature was "The Victoria Cross" and outstanding journey into the award
history of the famous decoration. I have not been in the new Canadian War Museum, but what I have
seen, frankly did not impress me. The guidestaff at Hendon and Duxford in particular are very
knowledgeable - and the aircraft collections world famous. The Canadian Warplane Heritage Foundation
(CWHF) Mount Hope ON, is moving in the British direction, and Town Class Corvette HMCS Sackville
is a living ship, recreated to be exactly the way she looked in 1944-45. Our Museums, which feature
real Canadian history, must be marketed to Canadians, to ensure that our historic past is not
overlooked or forgotten. MacLeod


----------



## FastEddy

Brad Sallows said:
			
		

> One role of a museum is to provide material for visitors to interpret.   The museum staff presumably decide what material is to be made available for interpretation.
> 
> I prefer museums which simply amass and display masses of artifacts, in a semblance of order (eg. by period and campaign), with small cards asserting the important characteristics and lineage (if known) of each item on display.
> 
> It is a good idea to have a war art section.   It would also be good to have sections filled with small arms, uniforms, vehicles and equipment, campaign maps and descriptions, etc.




Absolutely, thats what I always thought a War Museum was. At least the only one I have ever seen was, The London Imperial War Museum.

Ottawa, Social conscience and truth, now there's the pot calling the kettle black.


----------



## Gager

jmacleod said:
			
		

> British Museums are designed to attract people, their theme being, "total participation", so that in Duxford and Yeoville, you can fly an F1 "Tornado" n simulation, or in Duxford, an SE-5 World War 1 fighter, and chase the "Red Baron" - participation
> in the Museum of the Moving Image is very impressive - one can watch the recreation of a famous
> film being photographed on a re created sound stage of the 1940's era, for instance. In the Imperial
> War Museum, trenches have been recreated, and there is always a highly specialized display - last
> time we were there, the feature was "The Victoria Cross" and outstanding journey into the award
> history of the famous decoration.



Out of curiousity - how big / long was the trench in the museum? In the CWM the trench 'section' is an S Shape, in a 'square' space probably no bigger than 15 x 20 ft


----------



## jmacleod

The sandbagged trench, with a painted dawn background, was in a single room and was about
20 to 25 ' I would think. A re-created dug-out was in the next dispaly to the right of the trench.
When the late GC Robert "Bob" Braham DSO,DFC etc., was Curator of the Citadel Military Museum
Halifax NS he created a similar trench and dugout. He also installed a periscope from a captured
German U-Boat,in operational condition, and was the catalyst in making the facility very attractive
to visitors. I remember the first time I saw the trench recreation in Halifax; it had used British bully
beef tins on the floor, and over in a quiet corner, a big rat sat contemplaying his next meal I
would think. The rat, like the entire display was very realistic; even the Ross rifles were there,
this being a Canadian Corps trench. GC Braham RAF, was considered the outstanding RAF night
fighter pilot of WWII - well known to many RCAF personnel of the period. He came to Halifax
and left as his legacy a remarkable well designed museum, full of historical artifacts and documents
going back to the Seven Years War - BGen Wolfe's Cape was on display for some years. MacLeod


----------



## winchable

> The sandbagged trench, with a painted dawn background, was in a single room and was about
> 20 to 25 ' I would think. A re-created dug-out was in the next dispaly to the right of the trench



Would that be the trench at the IWM London jmacleod?
I was impressed with that too, the atmosphere was heavy and the air was thick and stale, the periscope and the noises of the guns rattling really added to the realism.
They also had a recreation of what it was like to be in the blitz, not sure if you tried that, that was an eye opener..right down to the smells of the streets after.


----------



## jmacleod

Reply to Che; yes the first trench I mentioned was in the IWM, which I have visited many times
and learned a lot about military and related Museums in the UK. The other trench, as indicated
was in the Halifax Fortress Military Museum (the Citadel Hill fortress). My associates and I are aware
of a plan to establish the "Museum of the Regiments" in Edmonton AB, which we suggested 
should include an entire major section, to highlight the Airborne Forces. Not sure what the
current status of the "Museum of the Regiments" is, but I know it was discussed in DND and
Heritage Canada (when Copps was Minister). The British Museums deal in total participation
as you noticed in the London Blitz exhibit - very realistic, especially as one of the London firemen
was wearing a Canada shoulder patch - a lot of Canadians volunteered as fireman to serve in the
UK. I recommend a tour of RAF Duxford and RAF Hendon, plus the RN Fleet Air Arm Museum
at HMS Yeovilton, which has a very highly detailed sector commemorating the late Lt(P) Robert
Hampton Grey,VC, including details of his brothers, one of whom was an RCAF pilot. The preservation
of our military history must be a priority in the Federal government. MacLeod


----------



## Michael Dorosh

There is a similar trench, with dugout, periscope, and dead German lying in No Man's Land, at the PPCLI Museum in Calgary.  No rats, but there are flies on the officers' bread....


----------



## jmacleod

In Ottawa, they use real flies - supply appears to be unlimited. MacLeod


----------



## jmacleod

A recent letter to the Editor advocated that the Canadian War Museum be renamed "The Canadian
Peace Museum" - The new War Museum as envisaged decades ago by the Director and veteran's
organizations was to be a much larger facility than the then Ottawa building, designed to house all
the artifacts, weapons, uniforms and art works stored througout Canada. It was to a truly focused
part of our Canadian veteran's legacy - no thought of association with another Federal museum was
contemplated, expect for those with existing long term links, like the National Aeronautical
Collection. Somehow, a decision was made to make the War Museum an ancilliary of the Canadian
Museum of Civilization, which is mandated to provide a totally different concept of Canada, and in
particular Canada's wars, it's veterans, honors and awards, battles and Canada's emergence as the
third largest allied contributor to victory in World War II. Bureaucrats in the War Museum are providing
an anti-war message, which commences with the preamble on their web site. I have not visited
the new War Museum, but I know changes must be made, considering the remarks by Journalist
Peter Worthington and Mr. Clifford Chadderton and many others. The key to change is in the
board of Trustees and the bureaucrats employed - there must be control by veteran's and former
plus serving military personnel - guides must be former members of the military. Museums are used
to record real history, not an "interpretation" of history by person's with no real knowledge of this
country's vaunted fighting abilities, and the very high quality of those who served. The military
Museum resources in the United States provide a clear and definative message - honor for their
military history, in some of the finest facilities in the world, created with great care and affection.
MacLeod


----------



## Edward Campbell

History is always, without fail, _interpreted_.  Peter Wothington and Cliff Chadderton have their individual interpretations as does war artist Gertrude Kearns, and I am certain that her interpretations are different from those of, say, war artist Alex Colville.  (The plural matters, I think, because I am fairly certain that Ms. Kearns would interpret different situations in different ways in different time periods.)

My interpretation of events â â€œ _unification_ for example â â€œ which took place in the '60s is different, today, 40+ years on, than it was in those same '60s or in the '70s, '80s and '90s for that matter.

My interpretation of World War I differs, I suppose, from, say, Jack Granatsein's or, for all that it matters, from those of any historian â â€œ although I am close to Niall Ferguson's view â â€œ in _The Pity of War_, London, 1998.  Am I (and Ferguson) right?  Obviously I think I am but I am not so conceited (not quite, anyway) as to expect that others agree.

All interpretations, including those of jmacleod, pbi, and Michael Dorosh, etc, are 'right' in the eyes of those who make them.  One of the key functions of any museum is to provide a mechanism through which everyone may make their own _interpretations_ based, hopefully, on an objective presentation of the available evidence and that, presenting the available evidence, with _interpretations_ â â€œ because it is people doing the presenting, not machines, is, I argue, the work, indeed the duty of _scholars_, some of whom might, also, be soldiers.  In the end scholarship must 'win' because museums are not memorials â â€œ too many people make the serious mistake of confusing the two.  We have ways and means to honour and remember those who fought 'our' wars; we need ways to learn about how wars affect us and how they helped shape our country and our society.  Museums are one of the tools in the latter quest.


----------



## Michael Dorosh

Edward Campbell said:
			
		

> History is always, without fail, _interpreted_.  Peter Wothington and Cliff Chadderton have their individual interpretations as does war artist Gertrude Kearns, and I am certain that her interpretations are different from those of, say, war artist Alex Colville.  (The plural matters, I think, because I am fairly certain that Ms. Kearns would interpret different situations in different ways in different time periods.)
> 
> My interpretation of events â â€œ _unification_ for example â â€œ which took place in the '60s is different, today, 40+ years on, than it was in those same '60s or in the '70s, '80s and '90s for that matter.
> 
> My interpretation of World War I differs, I suppose, from, say, Jack Granatsein's or, for all that it matters, from those of any historian â â€œ although I am close to Niall Ferguson's view â â€œ in _The Pity of War_, London, 1998.  Am I (and Ferguson) right?  Obviously I think I am but I am not so conceited (not quite, anyway) as to expect that others agree.
> 
> All interpretations, including those of jmacleod, pbi, and Michael Dorosh, etc, are 'right' in the eyes of those who make them.  One of the key functions of any museum is to provide a mechanism through which everyone may make their own _interpretations_ based, hopefully, on an objective presentation of the available evidence and that, presenting the available evidence, with _interpretations_ â â€œ because it is people doing the presenting, not machines, is, I argue, the work, indeed the duty of _scholars_, some of whom might, also, be soldiers.  In the end scholarship must 'win' because museums are not memorials â â€œ too many people make the serious mistake of confusing the two.  We have ways and means to honour and remember those who fought 'our' wars; we need ways to learn about how wars affect us and how they helped shape our country and our society.  Museums are one of the tools in the latter quest.



I thought it bizarre that jmacleod would criticize the CWM for having an "anti-war" outlook - I think any museum, acting with any kind of accuracy or fidelity to what really happened in a war, would be an "anti-war" establishment, in the same way that any decent motion picture purporting to be an honest look at warfare would have to be - by necessity - "anti-war."  I also suspect he didn't intend to use that description in the way it came out.

I think I understand the point; my understanding is that he is saying US military museums show the professional side - details of uniform, equipment etc. and tales of heroic acts.  Tales of misery - or criminal acts - are quietly put aside in order to do honour to the subject matter.  I'm not sure I disagree with that stance.  Certainly I am more interested in seeing a depiction of the crossing of the Albert Canal in our regimental museum than I would be of, say, some collection of poorly run exercises by postwar colonels.  Museums, in the view of many here, should inspire also - not just capture what has happened, but remind us that it could happen again.


----------



## jmacleod

Let me illustrate was is bizarre in a military museum. The Halifax Fortress Military Museum Halifax NS
featured a diaorama three years ago, showing in great detail with model soldiers, an attack upon
the fortress circa 1867, by United States Federal soldiers. When I saw this, the director of their
museum guides was describing the "battle" to a group of visitors - when I got the opportunity
I pointed out that the US Army did not ever attack the fortress, nor would they. She was unaware
of the uniforms and battle ensigns displayed by the troops, charging up Citadel Hill - the uniforms
were of the Union Army Irish Brigade, recruited in New York, Boston and Philadelphia, which lost
over 8,000 dead in the Civil War, mostly Irish immigrants. Over 10,000 Nova Scotians served in the
Civil War, most in the Union Army; many served in the Irish Brigade. The carefully crafted diaorama
was created, in my opinion, to focus on the Finian Raids which came much later in central Canada.
How can a bureaucrat justify the deciption of a battle which never was, and more importantly
describe the non-existant battle to American visitors-tourists, many of whom are very knowledgeable
about the "War Between The States". I wrote to Heritage Minister Copps about this who took the
Museum Curator (who should have known better) to task. Mark my words, the Canadian War Museum
will suffer areas of credibility as their "interpretation" of Canadian history is modified, or re-created to
accomplish a certain political perspective, the Axworthy view of Canada's "world". MacLeod


----------



## FastEddy

2332Piper said:
			
		

> I went to the CWM today, and saw this infamous painting (and tess's Iltis). It is actually quite graphic and disturbing and is located in a semi-prominent location, its not right out there in your face, but its not hard to miss.
> 
> My previous statements in regards to this still stand, but other then that, an excellent museum all around. I was very impressed.




Compared to what?.


----------



## FastEddy

2332Piper said:
			
		

> The old one.




Good one, not that I expected any less


----------



## jmacleod

An observation based on experience. Under the direction of the Canadian Museum of Civilzation
the Canadian War Museum over the years ahead will be converted into an anti-military resource,
- time is on the side of the bureaucrats, as Canadian veterans pass on. The government which
approved funding for both facilities, including their business plans, and terms of reference has
not been partial to the Canadian military establishment, veterans, veterans organizations or the
roles in the international sector of the Canadian Forces. Gradually, the anti-military message will
become more prominent, at the same time, funding for the War Museum will gradually be 
reduced, as it was for the former Ottawa facility, and has been for military museums across
Canada, which in many cases are supported with generous donations from the private sector.
Only a significant change in the National Government will change the plan to denigrate this
country's commendable record in all the wars and peacekeeping/peace enforecment operations.
MacLeod


----------



## George Wallace

jmacleod said:
			
		

> Gradually, the anti-military message will
> become more prominent, at the same time, funding for the War Museum will gradually be
> reduced, as it was for the former Ottawa facility, and has been for military museums across
> Canada, which in many cases are supported with generous donations from the private sector.
> Only a significant change in the National Government will change the plan to denigrate this
> country's commendable record in all the wars and peacekeeping/peace enforecment operations.
> MacLeod



I suppose, if we had   compulsary 'National Service', the 'Youth' of today would more likely appreciate a Museum dedicated to their trials and tribulations in the Service of their Country, at home and abroad.   Even the Scout, Guide and Boys and Girls Club movements are falling into obscurity.   Instead, we get the rejuvination of Katimavik.    :


----------



## Michael Dorosh

jmacleod said:
			
		

> Only a significant change in the National Government will *change the plan* to denigrate this
> country's commendable record in all the wars and peacekeeping/peace enforecment operations.
> MacLeod



Wow, that's right up there with the Kennedy Assassination.

So, how much time and money have _you_ donated to the CWM - or a local museum?  I would say our fate is in our own hands.  Like most Canadians, we have little interest in saving our own skins.


----------



## OLD F of S

Just read the Toronto sun Worthington's article, we now know that 417 soldiers
contracted VD in the Korean war. Just somthing every visitor should know whe visiting theCWM.

           It just gets more annoying each day.


                                   Regards OLD F of S


----------



## Michael Dorosh

OLD F of S said:
			
		

> Just read the Toronto sun Worthington's article, we now know that 417 soldiers
> contracted VD in the Korean war. Just somthing every visitor should know whe visiting theCWM.
> 
> It just gets more annoying each day.
> 
> 
> Regards OLD F of S



So let's take action.   Or do we just want to moan about it on the internet?

Send me something interesting to post on my website at www.canadiansoldiers.com - a photo essay, or some letters home from a soldier.   Our history is just that - ours - and its our to either preserve - or to lose.   Wringing hands and complaining about how the federal government isn't doing it for us doesn't wash.   There are dozens of publishers out there doing great stuff with Canadian military subjects; I was at the post office and noticed a whole series of books on VE Day.

Did anyone buy any of them?

How many people here have paypalled Mike Bobbitt and helped subsidize this sounding board for Canadian military culture?

Why expect the Government to preserve our values for us?  I don't buy into the interpretation that they are actively destroying it.  They don't understand it.  Are probably frightened a bit by it.  Seeing the almost-violent reactions by some posters here, I can't say I blame them.

Get involved.  Write letters.  Pouting and sulking aren't the answer.


----------



## Danjanou

OLD F of S said:
			
		

> Just read the Toronto sun Worthington's article, we now know that 417 soldiers
> contracted VD in the Korean war. Just somthing every visitor should know whe visiting theCWM.
> 
> It just gets more annoying each day.
> 
> 
> Regards OLD F of S


Actually it was 414 per 1000 Canadian Soldiers suffered/contracted VD during the Korean War. What appears (and rightly so) to have Mr. Worthington's back up re this little bit of statistical trivia is the manner in which it is presented, misleading (deliberately so?) and out of context.

The way it is presented it seems that some 41% of the troops over there got he clap. In fact the stat is for total cases reported/treated and includes repeat offenders, which I would presume counted for a large number of the total number.  The way it reads, to paraphrase Worthington, suggests that 10 guys got it instead of one guy 10 times.

I have to ask my old class mate Dean Oliver, the museum's Historian how the hell he ever got through Dr Fisher's statistical history course(s) back at MUN. Right before I take him off my Christmas Card list. 

http://torontosun.canoe.ca/News/Columnists/Worthington_Peter/2005/05/17/1043248.html


----------



## a_majoor

Just a quick interjection of "interpretation". While you and I might have differences of opinion about certain events, there are certain fundamentals which have to be observed. Factual evidence is paramount, making stuff up will not do (i.e. Tess' Illtis in "Bosnia" or the diorama of the Irish Bde storming the Halifax Citadel). 

Even as far as interpretation, there need to be certain boundaries drawn. Context needs to be given for the events being portrayed; i.e. Canadian soldiers fought against Bolshevik Russia in 1918, National Socialist Germany 1939-45, Korea and the Cold War since we felt that Socialism was an evil which must be stopped, by force of arms if necessary. Expansionist Socialism was quite willing to spread through the use of armed force, so defensive measures were certainly necessary.

Since we notionally control these Museums through our tax dollars, a concentrated campaign of aggressively fact checking exhibits and publicly pointing out errors (to the staff on the spot, letters to the Museum director, letters to the editor and to your MP) will certainly put the pressure on. A parallel campaign to promote our own Regimental Museums and even put them "on tour" (travelling exhibits and veteran staff to explain the historical context) will also provide us a means to outflank the Museum of Civilization staff weenies, who I suspect have never faced opposition and will have no idea of how to respond.

Lets get out there people!

Arthur


----------



## Art Johnson

Yet another slap in the face by those weenies in Ottawa.


----------



## George Wallace

Art

Is there a Square Inch of the new CWM that you haven't Photographed?   ;D


----------



## KevinB

Well at least we know the boys in Korea got some action  ;D

Why we saved that for display... :


----------



## Michael Dorosh

KevinB said:
			
		

> Well at least we know the boys in Korea got some action   ;D
> 
> Why we saved that for display... :



I wonder how many cases were actually contracted in Japan, or brought from home...

It is a bit depressing that our Betsy - an anti-tank gun with a long history - sits rusting out on flat tires in the basement without even a placard to identify her, while stuff like that goes up on the walls.

Arthur's post is brilliant.  I guess it is time to write a letter to the CWM for all the good it might do.

If anybody wanted to write an in-depth, even-handed review of the new museum for my site, I'd be interested in posting it.


----------



## jmacleod

It happens that my associates and I and consultants who have worked with us know a great deal
about Museums. A Museum is not a "memorial" - it is a living testimonial to the activities of real
persons, Regiments, Squadrons, Ships and others who have contributed in a definative and significant
way to the actual history of real events of a period of time, defined as "war time" or, in the case
of post World War II and Korean War activities, peace keeping ( a political term). There are events
in Canadian military history that we are very familier with, which should not be commemorated in
a public forrum; for instance the famous "sit down strike" in 6 Bomber Group RCAF England. There
are others, but they are not significant in a military Museum. What is significant is that this country
provided hundreds of thousands of volunteers, who created the third largest allied Air Force, one
of the great fighting armies of World War II and Korea, and a Navy described by the Royal Navy 
as the difference in victory over the German U-Boats in the North Atlantic. What we are concerned
with, what Journalist Peter Worthington and Mr. Clifford Chadderton are concerned with is that the
truly magnificant contribution made by Canada, in the world of 1939 to 1945 will be trivialized by
young, ignorant bureaucrats with no empathy for the Canadian military. The ignorance expressed by
graduates of the many Universities we deal with on a professional basis of the Canadian military is
truly, repeat, truly appalling. We must ensure that the Canadian War Museum be part of Canada's
military establishment, which my family and associates are particularly proud of. MacLeod


----------



## Michael Dorosh

I can agree with all that; arguing that a government conspiracy exists, however, weakens your otherwise good points.  

There are many other facets of Canadian military history that are not exactly proud moments; if presented in the proper context, they can be illuminating.  Our own regimental museum commemorates the Japanese-Canadians who served bravely in WW I, while also acknowledging the internment of same in WW II.

Mentioning VD on its own isn't on; as part of a larger display devoted to service conditions, discipline and other "what it was like to be there" stuff, it may possibly be more appropriate. I personally wouldn't devote any space in a museum display to it, especially not a supposedly family-friendly museum.  

It's enticing to think such a conspiracy exists; even if it did, we would be well advised, I think, not to acknowledge it but simply soldier on - as we always have done - and where possible take appropriate actions to keep our history in the forefront.  Partners in Motion and their film on the VC winners is a good start.


----------



## jmacleod

Thanks for your input. I do not think there is a "government conspiracy", frankly having dealt with
Federal bureaucrats for several decades, I think that the politicians are unaware of of the perspectives
and motivations of the "bureaucrats" from the Museum of Civilization, certainly the Hon. Barnett 
Danson late Queen's Own Rifles of Canada is unaware, and former Defence Minister Danson, well
known to us, would be surprised and concerned about the "agenda" - but there is an agenda.
A military Museum should be totally controlled by the Canadian military establishment. The British
model is one option, the United States model , another. Providing our history of military activities,
defined in many, many historic narratives, in a public forum, should not be subject to "interpretation"
by a recent graduate of Carleton or, God preserve us, George Williams University or the CBC. Friend
and author Tony Foster (son of Major General Harry Foster OBE, DSO) authorr of "A Meeting of Generals", one of the great Canadian books about World War II have often discussed the roles
of Canadian museums in the public forum. In the case of the CWM, Foster would use a number of
expletives, not necessarily acceptable on the more or less, public site. MacLeod
,


----------



## Michael Dorosh

jmacleod said:
			
		

> Thanks for your input. I do not think there is a "government conspiracy", frankly having dealt with
> Federal bureaucrats for several decades, I think that the politicians are unaware of of the perspectives
> and motivations of the "bureaucrats" from the Museum of Civilization, certainly the Hon. Barnett
> Danson late Queen's Own Rifles of Canada is unaware, and former Defence Minister Danson, well
> known to us, would be surprised and concerned about the "agenda" - but there is an agenda.
> A military Museum should be totally controlled by the Canadian military establishment. The British
> model is one option, the United States model , another. Providing our history of military activities,
> defined in many, many historic narratives, in a public forum, should not be subject to "interpretation"
> by a recent graduate of Carleton or, God preserve us, George Williams University or the CBC. Friend
> and author Tony Foster (son of Major General Harry Foster OBE, DSO) authorr of "A Meeting of Generals", one of the great Canadian books about World War II have often discussed the roles
> of Canadian museums in the public forum. In the case of the CWM, Foster would use a number of
> expletives, not necessarily acceptable on the more or less, public site. MacLeod
> ,



I wonder how that agenda made its way into official policy....and at what point the military lost control?  Power vacuums are anathema in Canada - I am guessing someone dropped the ball, and "they" managed to slide into control?

I look at the writing of the official history of WW I as an example - it took decades to do.  The RCAF and RCN story of WW II I think took even longer IIRC - like 40 years or so?


----------



## George Wallace

Michael Dorosh said:
			
		

> I wonder how that agenda made its way into official policy....and at what point the military lost control?   Power vacuums are anathema in Canada - I am guessing someone dropped the ball, and "they" managed to slide into control?
> 
> I look at the writing of the official history of WW I as an example - it took decades to do.   The RCAF and RCN story of WW II I think took even longer IIRC - like 40 years or so?



It wasn't a difficult move in that direction.  Even CF Museums are run, for the most part, by non-military trained professionals educated in our University and College Systems.  Having worked in one such Museum and being a member of the OMMC, I have witnessed the consternation of those who truly try to preserve our Military History and Traditions.  They are frustrated by people in positions of power who have no concepts of Military Life and at the same time by the apathy shown to them by the hierarchy in NDHQ.  We do have some very fine Military Museums in Canada.  They are the result in the main part to the hard work of Military and Ex-military volunteers who have done fund raising, construction of displays, electrical work, tour guide, preservation of everything from documents to aircraft, and an endless list of other jobs large and small.  Every one of these museums has the same problems in funding, visitation, local and national support and many more to include the general apathy of the local military establishments.  

Congratulations should go out to all the people who have contributed so much to the preservation of our Military Heritage.  Many of them are doing the job, with little or no credit.  Take the time to visit some of these Museums.  They don't all rival the CWM, although some like the Museum of the Regiments, in Calgary, do.


----------



## jmacleod

Reply to George Wallace: Agreed. HMCS Sackville, the restored Town Class Corvette was created
by volunteers and the veterans of the RCN/RCNVR - with generous private sector contribitions -the
Canadian Warplane Heritage Museum, Mount Hope ON, was created the same way, with generous
contributions from the the Government of Ontario, and the Federal Government thanks to the Hon
Sheila Copps MP and Stelco, plus many, many others. The RCN RCNVR veterans who were responsible
for the expensive and compelling restoration of HMCS Sackville used the same process we advocated
to them used on behalf of CWHF, Mount Hope (tax credits for donations, etc).Our original plan in
Halifax was to restore a RCN Frigate and a long range German UBoat - the UBoat concept took to us
to Kiel Germany and the Frigate to London and Portsmouth UK. I remember as a 15 year old, the
German UBoats which surrendred in Halifax in 1945 - arrogant bastards, who lined seaman up on
their foredecks, is if they were visiting the port on a peacetime exercise. We want the military to
totally control the Canadian War Museum, the only way the facility will survive in an acceptable
manner. MacLeod


----------



## Michael Dorosh

I would replace "military" with the phrase "military community" and then I would be in total agreement. 

It's what I've said all along - why expect the government to do the right thing?

I've toyed with the fantasy of having government funding for my own website at canadiansoldiers.com - but after talking to the chap who runs Maple Leaf Up many years ago, he convinced me that govnerment control would only cheapen things and take away from the final product.

The military community - which includes re-enactors, collectors, artists, veterans, actors, relatives - needs to look after its own, and gets larger and more commited with each year.  The MOTR is a good example - I am thinking of the Soldiers of the Two Millenium event every summer, put on almost entirely by volunteers with some corporate sponsorship.  

Let Shell or Scotiabank fund military museums; leave the work in the hands of dedicated volunteers or staff with the experience to do the job.


----------



## jmacleod

Reply to Michael: Agreed, you are right, the term "military establishment" has a certain ring to
it and implies absolute integrity. I think Worthington, and Chadderton and all of us who are
concerned, or who have expressed concern should form a common objective. Once the
political situation in Ottawa is resolved, we must communicate with the MND and the MVA
Canada. My personal opinion is that the Liberal's will form the next government, but I may be
wrong - but hopefully we will deal with Federal ministers who will communicate and provide
some empathy - certainly Arthur Eggleton MP would be supportive, a much better MND than
the media recognized. In any event, the CWM is too important to our country to be sluffed
off by the granola crowd. I was talking to my three smart professional woman, well educated, 
high profile daughters today, who are not tuned into the military, and they wanted to know 
about their family's military history, never discussed earlier to any extent - they were fascinated
- it occurred to me that this is the key to change; young Canadians who should (and must) be
made familier with our great military traditions - MacLeod


----------



## Michael Dorosh

jmacleod said:
			
		

> I was talking to my three smart professional woman, well educated, high profile daughters today,



Can I PM you my phone number?


----------



## Art Johnson

Hey Tess, I see that your story made the latest issue of Espirit de Corps via the 48th Museum, along with a fine painting of the action. Was this set up by Anthony?


----------



## the 48th regulator

no I don't think so,

They tried contacting the regiment to get pictures, i was told. That was the last I heard of it.   Catherine Taylor did a painting many years back of our incident.

Is this the print in the magazine?

dileas

tess


----------



## Art Johnson

That'sthe one.


----------



## George Wallace

As they are married, I can see the benefits of using her print.  So easy to ask for permission across a morning coffee, than tracking down an obscure artist somewhere else.  

She has produced many fine military prints for probably every CF unit in existence.  Does anyone know if any of her works are in the CWM?


----------



## Art Johnson

Actually George the picture of the plaque wasn't taken by me It appeared in this month's KVA on line newsletter. The inclusion of this plaque will be discussed by officials of the CWM and a member of our executive.


----------



## Michael Dorosh

George Wallace said:
			
		

> As they are married, I can see the benefits of using her print.   So easy to ask for permission across a morning coffee, than tracking down an obscure artist somewhere else.
> 
> She has produced many fine military prints for probably every CF unit in existence.   Does anyone know if any of her works are in the CWM?



Some of her works are at the Museum of the Regiments, proudly displayed.


----------



## Kunu

This is admittedly a bit off the flow of this thread, but...



> The CWM has an extensive collection of War Art.  They will have to rotate it through the displays over a long period of time to ever be able to display the large portion of it.  As such and with the changes in the bureaucracy there, I am sure that both paintings will eventually move.



We can only hope.  The cynical side of me feels these paintings will receive some special treatment in this regard.


----------



## jmacleod

All members and visitors should read Journalist Peter Worthington in todays (29 May 2005) Toronto
Sun. There is no question in my mind that control of the Canadian War Museum must be permanently
removed from control of the Canadian Museum of Civilization, whose agenda is unquestionably to 
turn the new facility into a vehicle to promote their anti military message. I agree, and am aware of
all the points made by Journalist Worthington, except for one; the new Museum is not housed in
an attractive structure, it is in fact some bureaucrats idea of an "attractive building". The responsibility
for operating the facility should be borne by the Federal government, but the staff including all Trustees
must have a military background, and all veterans organizations in Canada represented. In all the
considerable analysis of international museums our associates have undertaken, the only example of
anti military bias we found was the display of the USAAC B-29 "Enola Gay", the 20th Air Force heavy
bomber that delivered the first nuclear bomb on Hiroshima Japan. The display when opened contained
a nasty, anti US and anti war tirade, which the USAF Association, and the US Air Force objected to
in no uncertain terms; turned out that the "message" was created by a Canadian, graduate of the
University of Calgary AB, whose knowlege of World War II was extremely limited and biased. There
will be continuing controvery focused on the new Museum, unless there are changes, which can
only be generated by a political decision from the present Cabinet. MacLeod


----------



## a_majoor

jmacleod said:
			
		

> There will be continuing controvery focused on the new Museum, unless there are changes, which can
> only be generated by a political decision from the present Cabinet. MacLeod



But what will make the Cabinet move? If there is change to be made, we must do it ourselves: Agressively critique the museum's displays for errors in fact, and make sure the staff, media, your MP and the Museum's board of directors know what needs to be changed. Be polite, be persistent and be public about it.

Promote your own Regimental Museum, both by fundraising, but more importantly, get people to come and see it. If you have children at school, organize a class outing (I did for my daughters school last Remembrance Day, and they have been back to the RCR museum several times since). If you can get access to the media, get them to cover your museum on regimental anniverseries, battle honours or signifigent events like D-Day or Remembrance Day.

We have already seen the turkeys in Ottawa at work (Do you think a person like Belinda Stronich even knows about the CWM? Unless it can further her political ambitions, why would she even care?), so it really is up to us.


----------



## Gunner

Peter Worthington's article.

http://torontosun.canoe.ca/News/Canada/2005/05/29/1061485-sun.html


----------



## jmacleod

Agreed, the post by A.Majoor is an accurate and precise method of effecting change. The Museum
of Civilization formed in 1990 is a Crown Corporation, with a Board of Trustees, who are responsible
to the Minister of Canadian Heritage. A Board for a crown corporation in Canada is selected by the
familier route of patronage. The Canadian War Museum is responsible to that Board of Trustees
whose only former military member is General Paul Manson CF to our knowledge. The Minister of
Canadian Heritage is not in the present cabinet's inner circle, so it appears that the most effective
way to effect change is through the offices of MP's at the constituency level, regardless of
political affiliation, and the media, plus all Veteran's organizations. The Canadian War Museum should
be directly responsible to Minister National Defence or Minister Veteran's Affairs, Canada. It is doubtful
that the present government will consider a change in management a priority at the present time,
being entirely focused on survival, but a letter writing exercise is a good start. I would think the
Asper media, and the Sun publications will be very supportive with news and editorial comment. MacLeod


----------



## Danjanou

a_majoor said:
			
		

> But what will make the Cabinet move? If there is change to be made, we must do it ourselves: Agressively critique the museum's displays for errors in fact, and make sure the staff, media, your MP and the Museum's board of directors know what needs to be changed. Be polite, be persistent and be public about it.



Good points, especially the polite aspect. Lets not give them any more ammunition. I would also suggest be "correct." If "we" point out an actual factual error or ommision in their displays then we need to ensure that we can provide proof it is so and also the correct information.  To sum up "be professional."


----------



## starlight

Ok first, my topic liine is a little off.  I would like to add  future generations to that.
 I just visited the Museum and I am personally not impressed. Why? First the Kyle Brown portrait is the first thing you see . Then theres a beatiful portrait of Matchee and  General Dallaire there. I beliieve in History and truth. but I think The CF deeds in the last 12 years has exceeded both those missions. I also believe that little was said of the lives lost over the years.true the museum is still new but better tribute could be paid to those who put thier lives on the line and did not come back. I feel we owe them at least that. And after my visit I know why Chadderton was offended .
 War should not be glorified. but at the same time you shouldn't whip the inocent. and the innocent are veterans, who  over the years  made a difference, and whose friends did not come back be it the great wars, Korea,Cyprus, Bosnia or Afghanistan
Also the museum struck me as leaning to the "left" when the veiw should be rather neutral. Any soldier  who has done "time on the line" and  goes there will probably draw the same conclusion.
Sure tell the story but tell it with out Bias.


----------



## starlight

I would like to think its just political  ignorance.......but it may be worse  a media game to draw people there ...... the Director should be slapped........


----------



## Infanteer

Alright, being angry is one thing but advocating an assault on Museum staff is silly and immature.... :


----------



## jmacleod

The operative word in changing and securing the Canadian War Museum to truly reflect the impressive
and established history of the Canadian military, is "pressure". Letters to Journalists like Peter Worthington, Toronto Sun, and local "Letters To the Editor" is a start - letters to Federal Members
of Parliament and Cabinet Ministers. The most effective way to secure control of the new Museum
is to (a) remove the facility from the control of the Museum of Civilization, (b) change the entire
Board of Trustees(c) find a funding process through public and private sector sources. Model we
used to provide a Business Plan to the Atlantic Canada Aviation Museum NS was the Royal Navy
Fleet Air Air Musem, RN Yeovilton, UK - much of its operational costs are provided by the British
(and international) aerospace and technology industries (who after all, provide the "toys") and
various tax incentive schemes. Many of the arrogant staff at the War Museum must be replaced,
(former military persons are the best option for this). Once the politicians in Ottawa are working
on a normal playing field, they will in my opinion, focus on change - I realize that this will not be
a priority with many of them, but many of them will listen, and hopefully effect, change. The
veterans of the Canadian Military deserve much better treatment in the new War Museum. MacLeod


----------



## pronto

"bang on" JMacLeod! I have written to my MP, and to the Veterans Afffairs Minister - (Not that THAT will be helpful). 

Best tactic: pressure on politicians via news media, via advocates, via politics, etc. etc. We need a multi-faceted approach to this - the media have moved on - so we can pretty well drop that unless someone can get Chadderton to bring it up again, or poke Peter Worthington again.

Cheers

PS: Too bad Lubor Zinck passed away - now HE would have had a field day with this! heh heh


----------



## sussex11

I joined this forum so I could participate in this thread. I know the CWM well, the old building and the new. I was in fact the Director and CEO from 1998-2000.
  The new building in my view is superb. The archives and library are wonderful, the conservation and restoration labs state of the art, and even the boutique is first-rate. So are the exhibits. The critics here, most of whom have not seen the CWM, are missing the point. The 2 Somalia paintings are not featured--they are simply there with 350 other paintings. The overall theme of the exhibits is the brutality of war and the way ordinary Canadians made extraordinary contributions in the most difficult of times. In my view, that's the only interpretation possible if you have toured the place. Cliff Chadderton and Peter Worthington typically have objected without seeing the CWM. Same with most of those in this thread. In other words, go see it and then react.
   Next, the criticism of the Canadian Museum of Civlization's rule. I don't like the CMC in Hull which is a PC place and ahistorical in my view. When I was at CWM, it was the model to be avoided, and I think those who succeeded me did not swerve away. CWM is a historical museum--it's chronology and context, something highly unusual in Canada, and it's all done by first-rate historians, literally the best in the country. Viewers might disagree with the interpretation in places, but there's a rational explanation for the choices. The aim was not--could not be--to tell only tales of heroism and glory. Terrible things happened and they had to be included, but overall, the impression created on visitors is precisely as I described it above (or so the cards filled in suggest)--extraordinary deeds by ordinary Canadians. CMC played no role--zero--in deciding on content or approach. What CMC did was contribute money from its funds to build the CWM thus slowing its own projects. It was and is a benign master. Some of your contributors want DND or VAC to run the place: imagine if a government department controlled CWM--how PC would it have been in an election year?
   We who support the CF and who think military history is important should be cheering. Instead, with what I consider a typical Cdn trait of missing the point, too many people are focussing on the wrong things. I said in a speech (at CWM) with the Defence minister present that CWM will make it much less easy for government to ignore the military. The CWM is that potent a symbol. How can so many people have been misled by this silly controversy?


----------



## Gunner

Dr Granatstein, thank you very much for your post and providing context to what the CWM is trying to accomplish.  You have brought up a very valid point that many of us succumbed to the perceptions provided by the media as well as our "jaded" views of the political masters in Ottawa.  Certainly we should all see the CMW prior to forming our opinions.  I agree with your comments that the CWM has come a long way and we should be proud of what has been given to us.  I look forward to seeing it the next time I am in Ottawa.

I hope you will consider continuing your viewing and perhaps posting at army.ca.  It would be an honour to have someone of your stature contributing to our forums (in military history or through open discussion).

Regards


----------



## Infanteer

Sussex11,

Welcome to Army.ca and thanks for the post.  Your perspective, obviously being from a different "vantage point", is refreshing.  It is good to see that there is some people upstairs that are trying to do the right thing and not the "right" thing.

Anyways, much of your work is well-regarded here; hopefully you can find some time to contribute in some of the discussions.

Cheers,
Infanteer


----------



## Michael Dorosh

Dr. Granatstein - I was honoured to receive your email last week and gratified to have our discussion.  I'm especially pleased that you've taken the plunge and made your opinions known here.  I'll join the staff in welcoming you, and add a public welcome to the invitation I extended to you privately.

As I said in our other conversation, if nothing else, the vitriol in this thread is evidence of the depth of feeling many have for our military and our heritage.  I do hope that the CWM continues to evolve as the natural expression of that love we have and that the current directors will be as open to public discussion as you are showing yourself to be.

Welcome aboard, Sir.

Mike


----------



## Art Johnson

Sussex11

Quote

"The 2 Somalia paintings are not featured--they are simply there with 350 other paintings. The overall theme of the exhibits is the brutality of war and the way ordinary Canadians made extraordinary contributions in the most difficult of times. In my view, that's the only interpretation possible if you have toured the place."

I must say that I am among those who have not toured the new CWM but as a Canadian Veteran I believe that I can comment on the content that has been to the fore in the National Press.

You say that the 2 Somalia pictures are not featured but just part of a display of 350 pictures, why have we not heard about the other
 pictures on display?

Can you explain what the picture of Cpl McKay is supposed to represent?

I am rather old fashioned and prefer the paintings of Canadian Soldiers doing their job not the aberrant behavior of a pair of misfits.


----------



## the 48th regulator

It is an honor and a privilege to have you aboard and to have the pleasure to meet you again, all be it in an electronic forum.

No, I have not visited the new museum, you are right.  As a veteran, as Art stated, I trust the judgment of my fellow compatriots.  I for one am upset in the fact that two paintings are displayed regarding a very despicable part of our history.  I am not an art critic, but please explain why we need to see an artist's rendition of a photograph done in a new medium (literally a copy) and some sort of far out abstract painting of the other culprit??  What is next, a portrait of Maj. Harry Schmidt pressing the trigger on the laser guided bomb? Or, how about a nice painting of Maj.William Umbach juggling four balls representing the souls of the fallen.

I could go on about how I feel, but the many pages of this thread exemplifies that.  I will one day bring my family to see the museum, which includes the iltis I was in, but I feel uncomfortable showing them alternative displays which cast a negative shadow on the commitment I have provided for my Country.

Yes we need to be vocal to inhibit change.  I feel that using these forums, I am making a change. Heck you have even discovered us! Therefore I hope that those that in the position of decision will do the same.

Please don't feel that I have vented on you, look at it as my passion about who we are as soldiers who have served our nation.

Do surf around and read some of our other forums, you will enjoy the craic here!!  All that I ask is that you don't ask questions that have already been discussed and to remember the spell check button before you post. Hehe.


Dileas Gu Brath

John Tescione


----------



## jmacleod

I have not visited the new War Museum, but my associates and I have undertaken business plans
and feasibility studies focused on several Museums in Canada, and we know the bureaucratic 
system which is responsible for the various facilities in Canada very well. Most of the bureaucrats
in Heritage Canada, for instance are hard working, dedicated professionals; some are not. They
have in most instances however a very limited knowledge of Canadian history, particularly Canadian
military history. When we became aware that the Canadian Museum of Civilization was to be the
responsible agency for the new Canadian War Museum, we were appalled. The former War Museum
in Ottawa was neglected and growing out of it's mediocre quarters, and eventually the political will
was found to create a new building. We are taliking about ideas and concepts. Our concern is that
the Canadian War Museum will become the Canadian Peace Museum. In order to ensure a positive
view of our military history, the story must be focused. We do not recommend that DND or DVA
have any financial input into the resource, but a change in the management structure is imperative
- if we were writing a business plan for the facility, we would recommend that control of the
Museum be in the hands of a not-for-profit Crown Corporation, and funded by both private sector
and public sector resources. One of the reasons that it took decades to create a new home for
the military museum, is the lack of a process to solicit private sector investment. We should insist
that the Board be comprised of individuals from the various veteran's organizations, and persons
and organizations with a sincere and ongoing dedication to preserve our military heritage. Despite
what bureaucrats in the CMC are indicating, change is on the horizon. A letter from Mr. Clifford
Chadderton appears in todays issue of the Toronto Sun, there will be many more. MacLeod


----------



## sussex11

First, there have been dozens of hugely positive articles on the new CWM in national newspapers and magazines. If you've not seen them, you couldn't have been looking.
  Second the Cdn Museum of Civiln Corp is already an independent, not-for-profit Crown Corporation and there is in place at CMC and CWM a fundraising program. CWM's, led by General Paul Manson working for a decade as a full-time volunteer, raised more than $16 million from private sources for the new building, a sine qua non as far as the govt was concerned for financing it. The decades it took to get a new museum was because the govt would not pay--until it decided to do so in 2000-01. And if the govt would not commit, the private sector would not contribute. Third, once more, CMC was a benign master that was only helpful. If CWM is cut loose, it will die, It's that simple.
  Finally I can't find Chadderrton's letter in today's paper but he has been consistently wrong in his public comments of late. He complained--and some in this thread repeated--that the purchase of the Somalia paintings had not been approved by the CWM Advisory Council. I'm the chair of that Committee and Chadderton/his rep is on it. (So are reps from the Legion and ANAFV.) He knows that's not the job of the Council; nor is it the job of the CWM Committee, a CMC board committee.The Board of Trustees of CMC includes General Manson who commands huge respect on it (and from me); the rest are appointed from across the country.  It was a wholly benign and helpful influence. 
   One of the Somalia paintings was purchased by the Friends of CWM; the other, as I understand it, was donated by the artist. The decision to include them in the exhibits was  made by the historical team and curators whose overall plan is OK'd by management and board. Again, Chadderton hasn't been to the new museum, but obviously he didn't pay attention to process when he was at the Advisory Council.
   Why are the Brown/Matchee painting up? Because Somalia happened. Because the paintings are powerful. Because one of the purposes of a historical museum is to jar and shock viewers out of their preconceptions and get them thinking. Again, they're not displayed to leap out at viewers and to be front and centre. Go and see where they are--be shocked, be jarred, re-think! Go see this splendid museum that, once again, conveys a powerful and positive message about the forces through our history, including the last 10 yrs.


----------



## jmacleod

Everything in the Sussex 11 post is substantillay correct, and we are well aware of how the CWM
was financed - we have experience in funding the Canadian Warplane Heritage Museum in Mount
Hope ON, and HMCS Sackville a Town class corvette from World War II. Sussex 11 is missing the
point - the paintings that have upset Chadderton and Worthington should not be on display, what
should be displayed is the Presidential Unit Citation the CAR earned in Somalia. My associates and I
are concerned with ideas formulated by the visiting public to the facility - many if not most of
the populace knowing nothing about Canadian military history. It is clear to us that there is an agenda
to have the public believe that war is unthinkable, and only "bad things happen in war" - the CWM
mandate however is to focus and preserve our highly commendable military past. There is no question
about this when you climb the gangplank to visit HMCS Sackville or the famed CWHF Museum in
Mount Hope. We have a genuine "military museum" facility in Halifax NS which remains a functioning
CF resource; Royal Artillery Park and the Cambridge Library, (the first such library in British North
America). Three years ago, as the plan current in DND focused on closure of 5 CF Bases in Canada
several bureaucrats in Ottawa decided to sell off RAP through Canada Lands Company - they forgot
to check the concept out with the old, long established political families in Halifax - result, plan
vanished. There was also a plan to shut down 12 Wing Shearwater and turn it into a housing
development - local political pressure stopped that, and now 12 Wing has a 50 year life plan. If the
CWM does not have a major Veteran's presence on it's board, its mandate will be slowily and surely
changed. And just who in Canada will benefit from that? MacLeod


----------



## sussex11

The last time I looked, General Manson was a veteran. So am I and so are many others associated with CWM, including the leadership of the Friends of CWM.
   You can argue that the 2 Somalia paintings shouldn't be up. They'll likely change in 6 mths and then there'll be something else to take exception to. It's a matter of not seeing the trees for the forest which, again, is a peculiarly Cdn trait.
  The key is an informed, interested public thast is prepared to argue--not vs 2 paintings--but for military history to be treated as central in the nation's past and present, To me, CWM gives a boost to our understanding of the military and it can only be helpful.  That is if some don't bite off their nose to spite their face by attacking CMC, its board, the govt etc, etc. Be realistic--we have something wonderful here and we ought to treasure it.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse

Sussex,
I have not been yet, so I will not comment on the pictures untill then.
I agree it happened, however a nagging little voice in me says "did it need to be opening time when all the press was there?"     
OK, I lied, just a small comment. :-[

The thing that really stuck in my craw was the VD plaque in Korea thing. I understand its been removed but if what you say is true about the members of the board, how in Gods name could anyone who put on a uniform even think for a moment that this fact should be posted ANYWHERE?
The fact it was posted does lessen the credbility of the museum, in my opinion.


----------



## sussex11

I guess the question is if the VD statistic was true or not. It was. And it wasn't a plaque--merely a statistic in a list of stats. A museum is not supposed to be a place that only lists "nice" things or that simply presents kit, badges etc. It interprets. It shocks and jars and changes the way we think of events. However, I'd have preferred to say that the CEF had the highest rate of VD in WWI among the Dominions and UK troops, adding that it didn't seem to affect its efficiency.


----------



## jmacleod

The Halifax Citadel Museum is one of the best, albeit small Military Museums anywhere, under the
control of Heritage Canada. It features an expensive highly detailed diaorama of an attack on the
Citadel Fortress, by post civil war Union troops. The troops wear the uniform of the Irish Brigade
formed in New York, Boston and later Philadelphia, over 8,000 of whom were killed during the
War. Some 10,000 Nova Scotians served on both sides in the US Civil War, many Irish immigrants
like mine served in the Irish Brigade. But none of the troops shown in the diaorama attacked
the Halifax Fortress - the Ottawa based bureaucrats confused the efforts of the Finian Brotherhood
to seize Canada, focused on raids in Ontario, Quebec and the New Brunswick Border. The Irish
Brotherhood, evolved from the Finian Society supported and assisted Louis Riel during his tenure in
the US - but the deciptiion of a non existant event which is an insult to many American visitors
to Halifax, particulary from the Irish Catholic families in Boston and New York is inexcusable. When this
was pointed out to the Director of Guides in the facility, she practically had a temper tantrum. When
we communicated this to Heritage Minister Copps, she was quite concerned and changes were recommended. As far as the CWM is concerned, the same type of nonsense will occur. I do not
know much about Canadian traits - my family came to Nova Scotia from Ireland in 1819, served in
all the wars, were among the founders of the NS Liberal Party, but I guess we have'nt assimilated
yet. Maybe CWM can create a diaorama showing the execution of Canadian soldiers for "cowardice"
in World War I, or a stirring description of the Zombies of World War II, and their VD rates. MacLeod


----------



## sussex11

I'm not sure what the last point is. No one supports mythical history and CWM doesn't show it. But I do believe that mention of executions in WW! would be useful; so too would something on WW2 conscripts. History happened--and museum directors/planners do no one any good by creating myths or not showing truths. Moreover, if I read the post right, the Minister (politician) intervened to correct the museum bureaucrat. Jeesh!
  But the serious point is that there will be political interference in the CWM if it is allowed to happen. Everyone who wrote an MP to complain about Matchee-Brown paintings should realize what they're encouraging.


----------



## jmacleod

I cannot understand how a diaorama, (an expensive diaorama) of an event that never occured
could under any circumstance be justified in a Museum's budget. The new Canadian War Museum 
is going to evolve into something not intended as it matures, and the Veteran's of World War II
and Korea pass on. It will become a haven for what will be an anti military message. The facility
should focus on a simple, straightforward message - Canada's military history, which is not a
popular subject in many areas of the Canada - in fact virtually unknown to many Canadian citizens
- the story must be told is a very straightforward way, no hidden agendas, no "messages" no
anti this or that bias. The political process will be the catylst of changing the CWM to reflect on
the real story of Canada in the military experience - should there be a section devoted to the
famous sit down strike in 6 Bomber Group RCAF UK? should the potential mutiny of the crew
of HMCS Ontario be a point of discussion? Ironically, with the notable exception of the Canada's
National Aviation Museum, the best facilities are those in the private sector, which are not motivated
by political correctness, or some bureaucrats preception of the Canadian military. Make no mistake
without dedicated political support, these facilities funded in the public sector will not survive. MacLeod


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse

Quote,
Make no mistake
without dedicated political support, these facilities funded in the public sector will not survive. 
....now that is the one thing this museum seems to have, I don't get where you are going here......


----------



## pronto

Ok - I've been to the Museum. I thought the pictures were in poor taste. I frankly don't care why they are there. They represent a time in Canada when the politicians failed the military again. Gee - let's punish a whole regiment for the actions (reprehensible as they were) of a few. I thought that was not doctrine, and I seem to recall the government of the day actually saying they would not punish the many for the actions of a few. Hmph. Guess again. 

To go with Sussex's points we should have representations of shootings at dawn of suspected traitors and deserters, shameful acts of prisoner abuse from WW2, retaliations against Germans for their prisoner abuses, a couple of Korean collatorally killed civilians, reported CanBAT issues, Hey - what about the NorthWest Rebellion, Metis killings, et cetera, et cetera... Why pick on this particular shameful act? Are we rubbing the military's nose in the dirt to teach them a lesson? "Bad army, bad army. Naughty soldiers..."

The military and a lot of vets seem to think so. Whether one has altruistic motives and wishes to show Canadian history "warts and all", doesn't abrogate the fact that we, a fair number of vets, feel slighted. It seems to me to be a bit patronising (and perhaps even intellectually arrogant) to dismiss this as "They'll likely change in 6 months and then there'll be something else to take exception to. It's a matter of not seeing the trees for the forest which, again, is a peculiarly Cdn trait". That seems to belittle the real feeling of the other side. An attack doesn't dismiss the fact that there are true feelings on both sides.

You say "The key is an informed, interested public thast is prepared to argue--not vs 2 paintings--but for military history to be treated as central in the nation's past and present, To me, CWM gives a boost to our understanding of the military and it can only be helpful" 

I posit that the CWM, the media, and the attention to shameful acts   does not raise an informed and interested public. Military History is not treated as central in the nation's past and present when the media and public sees these acts. We do not laud the enough the proud histories of the Canadian Military. I agree with Sussex here. Where we part company is when he defends keeping these paintings which are a sore point to veterans (yes, veterans), and in the eyes of the media, politicans, citizens, et cetera, draws attention from Military History writ large. 

Why can't the board of the CWM merely remove the paintings, it has been asked? Seems to me the two sides are entrenched and invested in their positions. The vets feeling poorly treated and humiliated, and the CWM feeling that to change would reduce their impartiality. The one side invested in humiliation, and the other afraid to be seen to knuckling under to pressure.

As for the warning "Everyone who wrote an MP to complain about Matchee-Brown paintings should realize what they're encouraging." I wrote. I know what I said, and what I was encouraging. I was encouraging my MPs, and duly elected representatives to review a situation about which I feel passionately. They don't have to take action. I, frankly, do not expect action. They are my representatives because they were elected to represent me in their best judgement. I don't expect my MP to "poll" (I know, it's not a verb!) me everytime she has a decision to make - I chose her because she has good judgement, and I am prepared to live with the consequences.

Frankly, as soon as the "fourth estate" got involved in the controversy on opening day, Mr. Sussex11, there became, de facto, if not de jure, political interference in the CWM. Any institution which purports to send a message to Canadians will inevitably be used by our political masters to send their message. Period.

Cheers


----------



## Cloud Cover

FWIW: To me, the paintings symbolize several turning points in Canadian military history, not the least of which is the defeat of Canada's most elite conventional fighting unit by fire teams of lawyers and certain egoist journalists.   

Without question, the army was forced to not only clean out the trouble makers, it also had to be seen to be cleaning house  in order to restore public faith in the institution.   While the various actions of the government of the day were dastardly opportunistic, such underhandedness is certainly not without general precedence in the history of the country- it was the form of delivery and gleefulness in execution that made it so   different. 

The critical difference between past political assassinations of 'things military' and what these paintings symbolize is that men like Hillier have now risen to the top and ostensibly posses the influence to change things for the good of the county, whereas before the military retreated further into itself. Certainly, that alone is of enough historical significance to justify the existence, but not the prominence, of the paintings.   

That being said, John Q public isn't going to draw those sorts of conclusions without a little help from sources like this board. As usual, an even larger impediment is sure to be organized disinformation or calculated mal-information on the part of certain elements of academia and mass media.* In other words, the effects of those murders may be felt for some time to come.

Anyway, those are my thoughts on the issue. 

Sussex11 ... welcome aboard sir.        

* Upon my taking of a " pause .. 2 .. 3" for edit, I will add that there is a linkage between what I am stating here and this statement made earlier today:

"But the serious point is that there will be political interference in the CWM if it is allowed to happen. Everyone who wrote an MP to complain about Matchee-Brown paintings should realize what they're encouraging. "


----------



## Art Johnson

Quote from sussex11

"one of the purposes of a historical museum is to jar and shock viewers out of their preconceptions and get them thinking. Again"

Quote from Canadian War Museum Web Site

"Mission is to Educate, Preserve, and Remember"

It would appear to me that sussex11 thoughts and the Mission Statement of the CWM do not agree. I have not been able to find anywhere a statement from the CWM that indicates that their Mission is to "jar and shock the viewer"

The more that I read from sussex11 makes me wonder if he and his ilk are part of the problem not the solution.


----------



## Michael Dorosh

I made the point earlier in this thread, but I will repeat here.  I do think that we still hear a lot of references to Somalia - being told this is the "post-Somalia" Army, for example, or reading books about the CF post Somalia - TARNISHED BRASS, SIGNIFICANT INCIDENT, or WHO KILLED THE CANADIAN MILITARY.

It was a defining event - a negative event, as the Holocaust was.  

I hope that no one thinks it should not be mentioned at all in the CWM.

However, I do think that it needs to be put into a proper context - and am reasonably sure the paintings failed to provide that on their own.


----------



## Infanteer

Will people walk away from this museum knowing more about Kap'yong, Ortona, or Passchendaele?  Or will they just know that Somalis were murdered on the Airborne's watch and that lots of Korean vets had the drip?


----------



## the 48th regulator

People will remember the shocking tid bits, and I definately feel they will remember the latter.

dileas

tess


----------



## Michael Dorosh

Infanteer said:
			
		

> Will people walk away from this museum knowing more about Kap'yong, Ortona, or Passchendaele?  Or will they just know that Somalis were murdered on the Airborne's watch and that lots of Korean vets had the drip?



Does it matter, though - doesn't it matter that they want to go out and learn more, by reading books and talking to veterans and finding out for themselves?  Shouldn't the museum be a starting point?  And not the end-all?


----------



## jmacleod

My associates and I spent much time in many Museums in the UK, US and Germany. The reason we
undertook this activity was to determine funding processes for a number of private sector Museums
in Canada. We discovered a great deal of significant information about how Museums operate. Our
main focus was the UK, since we were engaged in the promotion of the EH101 "Merlin" helicopter
to the CF. We met the senior executive officers on many facilities, but learned most about the
Museums, such as the RN Fleet Air Arm Museum, HMS Yeovilton from the museum guides. It has
always been of interest to me as a Canadian, that the RNFAA exhibit devoted to the late LT(P)
Robert Hampton Gray VC, RCNVR is far more detailed and much more significant than anything in his
memory in Canada - why is that? the reason we found is that there was, and is little interest in
Canada's military past (and present) in the offices of Federal MP's, due to the fact that Canadian
military history is virtually ignored in the Canadian education system. In England, the guides, most
if not all former members of the UK Forces provided a wealth of knowledge, particularly anecdotes
about the facilities, the politics of finding money for them, interservice rivialries in solicting funds,and
a host of valuable information. No public funded Museum in Canada however can operate without
political support focused on Treasury Board, and tax credits for the private sector contributors. The
Board of any Crown Corporation in Canada is chosen by the familier patronage route (as they are in
the UK, and certainly to a lesser degree in the US) - The politicians don't like to deal with people
who, for whatever reason are hostile to them, so their "friends" are selected. Ms Penny Collenette
used to be a selector for PM Chretien (what ever happened to Collenette). With some minor exceptions
the guides (the direct one on one link with the public) in Canadian Public Museums are not chosen for
their knowledge of Canadian military history, and although most are pleasant, charming young women
for instance, spiel off a message about a particular exhibit or painting or artifact, written by some
Museum bureaucrat (In the Quebec Fortress, Ancienne Lorette, Major Paul Triquet's VC was referred
to as "a foreign medal"). Profound ignorance is the standard. I am going to conclude my participation
in this thread, but will continue to press for change, to ensure the CWM does not become a "Peace
Museum" MacLeod


----------



## Slim

Michael Dorosh said:
			
		

> Does it matter, though - doesn't it matter that they want to go out and learn more, by reading books and talking to veterans and finding out for themselves?   Shouldn't the museum be a starting point?   And not the end-all?



Canadian public - will go to the museum, see the paintings, assume everyone in the CF is a "violent lout" then, quite content that"they" know whats going on, will get back on their cell-phones and chatter aimlessly on about health care and "why do we have an army anyway...Its not like they DO ANYTHING!?"   

Just like F*****G lemmings...Thats the Canadian public!

Slim (who ,at times, is really fed up and pissed off with our spoiled and pampered population)


----------



## pronto

Michael Dorosh said:
			
		

> Does it matter, though - doesn't it matter that they want to go out and learn more, by reading books and talking to veterans and finding out for themselves?   Shouldn't the museum be a starting point?   And not the end-all?


Well, when I went there, the vast majority of the people leaving were not all charged up on Canada's glorious military history. (no sarcasm intended, I really believe that). They weren't off to dig up a veteran or learn anything for themselves. I suspect Museum Curators would LOVE to believe that patrons leave in this new and transcended state, but I fear not. In these days of pre-digested pap, and crappy school systems, and "every one is a winner, so don't work too hard" museums are probably the end-all - not the starting place.

I think a director who thinks to "shock and jar" and "make the patrons think" is probably labouring under the assumption that the average patron is as well-educated and intellectually challenged as they are. This is reducto ad absurdum. It ain't so. You are proceeding from a false premise. Design the institution to assume no intellectual rigour in the patron, an inherant laziness, and a predilection for the 30 second sound bite. THEN you will capture their attention (albeit for 30 seconds) and you may have a chance to educate or illustrate.

Sounds bleak, but that's how the average (note: average) Canadian high school student is. And how the average middle aged Canadian has become.

Cheers

PS:: For JMacLeod: Penny Collennette is a visiting fellow at the University of Ottawa, and definitely out of favour with the Martin-ites.


----------



## sussex11

I think, like Macleod, it's time for me to drop out of this thread. CWM's aim is, as stated, "preserve, educate, remember"--but how one educates is, of course, open. I think a few shocks help to open minds long closed (or never opened). I don't need any persuasion on how little Cdns know of their history--I taught for 30 yrs--but we must continue to try. Just getting a new CWM is a long step forward in education on this subject.
   And yes, people will walk away from CWM knowing much more about Passchendaele, the Scheldt, Kapyong, and Somalia. If they even walk through, how could they not? Go and see it!


----------



## Edward Campbell

Here is another view, from Roy MacGregor in today's _Globe and Mail_:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20050613/MAC13/TPColumnists/



> It's the small things that catch us off guard at impressive war museum
> 
> By ROY MacGREGOR
> Monday, June 13, 2005 Page A2
> 
> He doesn't talk about it much.
> 
> In fact, he doesn't talk about it at all, apart from when he really has no other choice but to confirm or deny what others might have said without knowing what really happened.
> 
> He was in the air force. He was a radio operator on a Vickers Wellington that went down in the Mediterranean early in the Second World War. One didn't make it. The rest were rescued by Allied forces just as the leaking dinghy began taking on water.
> 
> Those details he has reluctantly confirmed.
> 
> He was, in the photograph of him in uniform that still sits in the family farm back in Saskatchewan, handsome as a movie star. He's still tall and straight and hardly looks his 83 years and roamed through Ottawa this past week as a newlywed -- his first marriage -- on his way to meet his new family in Nova Scotia.
> 
> The still-honeymooning couple stopped for a few days with old family, as well, and it seemed only appropriate to take Fred -- he wouldn't want the attention his full name might draw back home -- off to see the new Canadian War Museum.
> 
> It is an impressive, imposing building that is supposed to look like a bunker and sits on long-disputed municipal property known as LeBreton Flats. It was designed by Ottawa's Alex Rankin and Toronto's Raymond Moriyama (whose own war connection involves an internment camp in the B.C. Interior), opened on May 8, V-E Day, and cost $132-million.
> 
> Its story is, in fact, all about cost, but not the kind that comes with a dollar sign.
> 
> The most compelling displays are not the weapons of destruction -- the tanks and guns -- but the art.
> 
> Much of it is battle-oriented, as you might expect, but even here it has an effect that strikes someone who lucked into peace in ways that he might never before have considered. Alex Colville's painting of a dead paratrooper, for example, dark and dead in an open field while a cow stands nearby, back turned and its attention on the next meal.
> 
> But it is the paintings of what once passed for everyday life in war that truly rattle one who wasn't there. The Canadian airmen laughing over beer in a British pub, such sadness in their eyes. The soldiers sitting on rough benches to watch a Donald Duck cartoon. The woman entertaining the troops, the painting and song sharing the same title: "You'll Get Used to It."
> 
> Impossible and improbable as it seems, people did. There is even one absolutely stunning painting tagged "British Women and Children Interned in a Japanese Prison Camp, Syme Road, Singapore, 1945" that shows pale, skeletal children going about their lives: one repairing a shoe, one brushing her teeth, one child even sitting on a potty.
> 
> It is said that if you walk the entire museum you will cover two kilometres and travel from before the Plains of Abraham to beyond the horrors of Somalia. It is big things that catch the eyes of the children -- the huge tanks, the 18-pound shells -- but the small things that catch the rest of us off guard.
> 
> Small things, like the lucky rabbit's foot that took merchant mariner Percy Kelly through two sinkings and helped him save more than 70 crewmates when CNSS Lady Hawkins went down in 1942.
> 
> Small things, like the display honouring Private George Price, who died from sniper fire on Nov. 11, 1918, killed moments before the armistice and remembered as the "The last soldier killed in WWI."
> 
> Small things, like imagining what it must have been like that morning to hear The Globe and Mail -- "3 cents per copy" -- thud against the door and fall open to the headline of Monday, Sept. 11, 1939: "CANADA DECLARES WAR!"
> 
> Small things, like the window in the memorial hall where the architects promise that every Nov. 11, at precisely 11 a.m., the sun, if it happens to be out in Ottawa, will shine through and, on the opposing wall, light up a small white stone that reads: "A soldier of the Great War. A Canadian Regiment. Known unto God."
> 
> It is a remarkable experience to pass through this place, whether you are 8 or 83. You can stand and watch children running their hands over a cannon barrel that has been blown apart. You can watch while a tour from a seniors residence passes slowly through the stunning recreation of the bleak, burned-out Passchendaele battlefield, the wheelchairs at one and the same time seemingly out of place and most assuredly in place.
> 
> There is almost too much to see -- Hitler's parade car, video of Dieppe, taped interviews with red-eyed veterans -- but perhaps there should still be one more small exhibit.
> 
> A simple room with nothing on the walls and nothing but silence to commemorate all the thousands of Freds who just never talk about it.
> 
> He is tired now, having walked for two hours and travelled decades. He is ready to go, still ramrod straight, still staring straight ahead.
> 
> Was he impressed, he is asked.
> 
> "Yes."



I expressed my views on this (and all) museums a bit more than a month ago (on page 4 or 5, I think).  Ask me in a few years and I will tell you if this is a 'good' museum when I examine its library/reading room to see if serious scholars are working there, trying to make the impact of war on Canada and Canadians clear to my grandchildren.

When I feel the need to remember, memorialize the greatest Canadians I will walk to the cenotaph.


----------



## Slim

My brother and I are going to visit the museum this Sunday.

I will post my thoughts here after I return.

Slim


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse

Hey all,

Finally got my chance to see the museum, well worth it.  I am going to pick up on a few things that I didn't like simply because to list all the good things would take this months complete bandwidth allotment.

The visitors guide and  the"which way signs" were not explanatory at all,  they seem to have been written for those who already had an understanding of how the building was laid out. Definitely needs clarification.

The info signs around the various pieces of kit in the Gallery were terrible, not nearly enough info, small letters and sitting on the ground a lot of older people wouldn't even be able to read them.  [ and on a Gunners note, surely one could find a muzzle break for my friend the 
L-5]

Please put a sign up indicating the location of the "reflection room", the only reason I found it is because while the family was in the boutique, I was scouring the area for some friends and watched someone " dissapear" into some little opening hidden along a wall.
 In my opinion, that room is required visiting for the public for the powerful statement it gives, mark it as so.

Now , the moment of truth, the paintings, well Sussex 11, I guess its a draw. The portrait of Clayton Matchee I thought was in the perfect spot beside the painting of General Dallaire just after having seen all the dangers of peacekeeping, cold war, etc. I think it showed the public the human price of what it is soldiers are called upon to do, the human frailty if you will. It belongs there in its location.
However, the portrait of Kyle Brown in the main lobby was pathetic. I can't think of one reason why it is even in the museum, it looked out of place and even after explaining it to my daughters they didn't understand it. The "dice" thing is/was just plain stupid, even my 12 year old thought it was "dumb"[ without any prompting on my part]. I really cannot put into words how utterly moronic that painting looked there, it DID NOT tell a story, it DID NOT have anything to do with the events in Somalia, and.............etc.

Now after saying all that, what a wonderful place. I will be going again without the children so that I can enjoy it longer.
[ parents beware, it is a lot of walking for young ones]


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse

Oh, and one thing that slipped my mind untill now, much as he is/was not my favourite PM, turn up the sound on the video clip[" just watch me"] for the FLQ crisis. It is always refreshing to see the last time a Canadian Prime Minister  actually used some balls.


----------



## Gramps

It would also be the last time a PM had some charisma too.


----------



## STONEY

I just returned from an extended road trip of several months so i was unaware of the controversy about the CWM so i viewed the place without any pre-conceived notions.  During my travels i visited 8 different military museums including over seven hours at the CWM.  I am passing on my 2 cents of comments. Firstly i did not even notice the oft mentioned controversial paintings and neither did my companions but then we wern't speciffically looking for them. My biggest impression was that everything wasn't finished yet and must be a work still in progress. The layout and directions to see all the displays i found poor as i came away after 7 hours not knowing if i had seen all the displays or missed some rooms altogether. I found numerous items on display with no explanition as to what they were or why they were on display, i found myself on several occasions trying to explain items to mystified members of the public. Some individual battles i found covered quite well but they didn't seem to be tied to other battles or in any order but i guess that comes with trying to cover so much material in only a limited amount of space. Overall my impression was favourable but like i've said before that the place doesn't seem to be finished yet , but it certainly shoul get the unwashed masses thinking.

Cheers


----------



## jmacleod

Our associates and I have commenced the procedure to submit a formal complaint to the Canadian
Human Rights Commission Ottawa, focused on the paintings of two former Canadian soldiers who
are Aboriginal Canadians. We feel that both paintings reflect discredit on all Aboriginal Canadians
who have served in the Canadian Forces, and will be the subect of much controversy unless both
are removed. These paintings have been the subject of complaints from Mr. Clifford Chadderton
War Amps Canada, and Mr. Peter Worthington, Journalist, plus many others. MacLeod


----------



## Infanteer

Well, as much as the Matchee/Brown painting controversy left a bad taste in my mouth, the banality of going to the Human Rights Commission is too much for me.

No one is violating the rights on Natives, and trying to paint the issue in this way completely misses the point.  By doing this, you seem to be implying that Natives can't get by in life without worrying about the spectre couple paintings of Native dudes.

Kinda reminds me of the stupidity that is SHARP....


----------



## Slim

> We feel that both paintings reflect discredit on all Aboriginal Canadians
> who have served in the Canadian Forces, and will be the subect of much controversy unless both
> are removed.



One question...

WHY!?


----------



## jmacleod

The Canadian Human Rights Commission will decide the issue. The paintings should be removed
or better still, destroyed. They will be the subject of controversy as long as they are displayed
-I agree with Mr. Chadderton and Mr. Worthington. If the Canadian Human Rights Commission
decides otherwise, so be it. It is obvious however that the bureaucrats chosen to run the
facility have no real empathy with the Canadian Military of Canadian military history - this is a
problem in all the Federal Museums in Canada, staff with their own Agenda. It is ironical in 
this country that the best museum facilities are in the private sector, like the restored HMCS
Sackville, a Town Class Corvette, restored as an complete and accurate tribute to the members
of the Canadian naval forces of World War II who fought in the Battle of the North Atlantic.
The staff are all volunteers, most if not all former members of the Canadian post war Navy-
it is not a Federal government resource. MacLeod


----------



## Slim

You still haven't answered my question...

Why?


----------



## Gramps

"Well, as much as the Matchee/Brown painting controversy left a bad taste in my mouth, the banality of going to the Human Rights Commission is too much for me.

No one is violating the rights on Natives, and trying to paint the issue in this way completely misses the point.   By doing this, you seem to be implying that Natives can't get by in life without worrying about the spectre couple paintings of Native dudes.

Kinda reminds me of the stupidity that is SHARP"

Funny, it seems to me that it is alright for everyone to get upset when the issue is about the CF but, when someone takes issue with it from a racial point then they are just being paranoid. No, I don't think it is a human rights issue at all in fact I think it is a bit silly but, I am not offended by the paintings in any way, shape or form from a CF point of view or a racial point of view. I in fact think that the paintings should remain right where they are to show the good and bad sides. By no stretch of the imagination do I think the disbandment of the CAR was justified, it was a knee jerk reaction and window dressing in an attempt to show the public that the Government was proactive, which was a failure as far as I am concerned.


----------



## jmacleod

Once more citizens of this Country visit the "new" War Museum they will notice the level of
mediocrity which permeates the facility - it is not good enough in the  National scheme of
focus on Canadian military history, period. The arrogance of members of the staff of a public
resource also is distastefull - so changes must be made in the public interest in our opinion
-there will be changes over time. We expect contrary opinions, but the opinions we listen
to are from the Chadderton's and Worthington's of this country. We do not intend to debate 
this option provided to us by the Government of Canada. MacLeod


----------



## Teddy Ruxpin

I must be missing something here...

I spent about four hours in the CWM a couple of weeks ago.  Overall, I thought it was pretty decent.  A little too "happy Canadian peacekeeper" in the modern section for my tastes, there was some mislabeling (probably the result of the move from the old building) or no labeling at all, and I was a touch confused as to what the "Northwest Resistance" was...  A tad PC.  My guess is that many of the museum's display problems are connected with the newness of the facility and the move from the old CWM.  The staff on the floor was very helpful and spotted immediately that I was serving military (must be the hair!) - getting me in for free... 

However, I saw both paintings and the two of Romeo Dellaire and cannot for the life of me see where (1) there would be any foundation in saying that they're being displayed due to some racial element and (2) what the big deal was.

Frankly, IMHO the paintings concerned are downright bad.  The one of Brown is laughable and a perfect example of "modern art" (to paraphrase Churchill).  They're amongst literally hundreds of other paintings - some of them controversial subjects from the Second World War, including one of a drowning that is quite horrific.  I had to go out of my way to find them.

Poor choice?  Probably.  Worthy of a formal complaint?  Hardly.

One last thing:  if you're listening to the Worthingtons of the country in order to guide your opinions, you're going to get sidetracked very quickly.  He's part of the Scott Taylor cabal and his latest reporting from Kabul (during my tour) was laughably poor and slanted, as was discussed at length here at the time.


----------



## Roger

Teddy Ruxpin said:
			
		

> I must be missing something here...
> 
> One last thing:   if you're listening to the Worthingtons of the country in order to guide your opinions, you're going to get sidetracked very quickly.   He's part of the Scott Taylor cabal and his latest reporting from Kabul (during my tour) was laughably poor and slanted, as was discussed at length here at the time.



I was not going to reply at all as I was angry and frustrated. But I feel the need. 

My point from the beginning was that the Canadian Airborne Regiment was disbanded because of the Somalia incident. I do not agree with anyone being murdered and that if any Canadian soldier murders a man anywhere in the world then he should face the music.

My point is that I really think deep down in my heart that the government or the brass did not defend the Canadian Airborne Regiment at all and used the whole incident as a reason to cut the budget. Hence the Regiment was disbanded. There has been other wrong doings by Canadian soldiers through all of its history but this was the first time that many paid the price for the few.

And by showing the painting, it shows justification for the political decision at the time. That is what I am in total disagreement with.

So in a nutshell, by showing the painting in the museum they add to the justification in not what the real truth is of why the Canadian Airborne Regiment was disbanded but  perpetuating the incident as what was intended to disband the Regiment.


----------



## Infanteer

Gramps said:
			
		

> Funny, it seems to me that it is alright for everyone to get upset when the issue is about the CF but, when someone takes issue with it from a racial point then they are just being paranoid.



I never mentioned paranoia, I said banal.

Are you trying to say something here?


----------



## jmacleod

Written back and forth to Journalist Peter Worthington since his story on the death of Lee Harvey
Oswald in Dallas in November 1963. Worthington is one of Canada's foremost journalists. Don't
know anything about Taylor or his "cabal" whatever that is, have not read anything by Taylor
for years, just not interested. Journalist Worthington is not part of anything but the Toronto Sun
-an interesting paper, don't always agree with it, but that's what journalism is all about. Worthington
would get a good laugh about being part of a "cabal". MacLeod


----------



## Gramps

No, I am not trying to accuse anyone of anything. My point was that when people seem to have a different opinion on something or are offended by something in a different way from the majority of people on these forums they are shot down rather quickly. Maybe "paranoid" was a poor choice of words on my part, so be it.


----------



## Teddy Ruxpin

jmacleod said:
			
		

> Written back and forth to Journalist Peter Worthington since his story on the death of Lee Harvey
> Oswald in Dallas in November 1963. Worthington is one of Canada's foremost journalists. Don't
> know anything about Taylor or his "cabal" whatever that is, have not read anything by Taylor
> for years, just not interested. Journalist Worthington is not part of anything but the Toronto Sun
> -an interesting paper, don't always agree with it, but that's what journalism is all about. Worthington
> would get a good laugh about being part of a "cabal". MacLeod



That may well be true, but his reporting from Kabul was "shite", plain and simple, and he routinely uses the likes of Taylor and Drapeau as a basis for his commentary.


----------



## Gunner

> My point is that I really think deep down in my heart that the government or the brass did not defend the Canadian Airborne Regiment at all and used the whole incident as a reason to cut the budget. Hence the Regiment was disbanded. There has been other wrong doings by Canadian soldiers through all of its history but this was the first time that many paid the price for the few.



Well, the budget was going down long before the CAR incident occurred as part of the "peace dividend" from the end of the Cold War and the mounting debt and deficit from Federal mismanagement of the countries books.  There were alot of officers that submitted their retirement over this incident (MGen Vernon being but one) and no one seems to remember...


----------



## Roger

Gunner said:
			
		

> Well, the budget was going down long before the CAR incident occurred as part of the "peace dividend" from the end of the Cold War and the mounting debt and deficit from Federal mismanagement of the countries books.   There were alot of officers that submitted their retirement over this incident (MGen Vernon being but one) and no one seems to remember...



Yes I agree and I will stand with pride and sheke the hand of Mgen Verno any time anywhere and General Lewis MacKenzie I have the upmost recpect for them. But they where too few to change the course of history at the time.


----------



## Gunner

Our much maligned general officers have a lot to be criticized about but there are moments in history that get brushed over by over generalizations that your original post indicated.  Look up the admiral's revolt due to integration (including Adm Landymore who almost took us to war with Cuba), the refusing of raises in the late 80s/early 90s by army general's to highlight the lack of funding going into eqpt, etc.  Gen Vernons and Mckenzie are not the only ones who pulled pin on principle after the CAR disbanded...


----------



## jmacleod

Wrote many letters to a number of Defence Minister's including Minister David Collenette, in 
support and retention of the CAR, and later to other MND's to reinstate the famous unit, to
no avail, in fact I posted a reply from one MND on this site. Collenette was a Toronto MP,who
stumbled into the Liberal nomination when the sitting MP, Doug Abbott became ill. He was a
consultant in Toronto, "Mandrake Consultants". He was an early supporter of Chretien, who
made sure his political supporters were rewarded, but, having said that, I have always felt that
if the Generals of the period had formed a common front, and were not intimidated by DM 
Fowler, Collenette would have caved in. Chretien of course could have cared less about the CAR
-he never had any links with the Canadian Military - just a politician. One of the worst days in the
history of the Canadian Army, an event that should never have happened. Scott Taylor was no 
friend to the CAR, as many of you know far better than I - a lot of the negative stuff was leaked
by him to the CBC, who did a real hatchet job on the troops -wrote Taylor off years ago. MacLeod


----------



## Slim

Mr MCleod

You made a statement about why the paintings should be pulled off the wals of the CWM. You cited aborigonal issues.

Would you please quantify your earlier statement!?

Slim
STAFF


----------



## KevinB

I doubt the intent was racist - but I find it funny that Tommy Prince or Paul Springer (MB and CDS comd in Somalia) did not rate while the negatives did...


----------



## Teddy Ruxpin

If I recall correctly, there is a Tommy Prince display in the CWM...


----------



## KevinB

Okay I will take off my tinfoil hat now.

 But I'd venture to say that a painting of Paul shooting the Somalia truck drive shooting up the aid wharehouse and at the driver and workers would have been more in keeping with the Somalia mission - or their rescue of the French woman attacked by the shark (though she died)  - Call me CRAZY but I thought the CWM was about WAR...


----------



## jmacleod

What a good many people in Canada are concerned about is the "agenda" of the bureaucrats
who staff the CWM - why indeed is the Presidential Unit Citation won by the CAR for their service
to the Country in Somalia not on display - Former CF member Clayton Matchee was never convicted
of a crime, he was never tried by a CM or in a Canadian Court of Ordinary Criminal Jurisdiction - and
Brown in our opinion would not have been convicted in a Canadian Criminal Court, yet these rwo
unfortunate Canadian Aboriginal soldiers are singled out by bureaucrats who have no links whatever
to the Canadian Military - why? Who made the decision? - you will not find a portrait of former Marine
Corps Private Lee Harvey Oswald on display in any USMC or US Military Museum. Like the famed military
museums in the United Kngdom, staff at the CWM must be former members of the CF in our opinion
-they do not have a hidden agenda, most I have met in my 75 years are very knowledgeable,
articulate, as proven by this site, and can maintain public interest - because without that, the CWM
will fail. MacLeod


----------



## KevinB

Mr Macleod - your RTFO on the conviction issue.


----------



## Infanteer

Sure, we don't find Lee Harvey Oswald or William Calley in an American museum, but the issue isn't one of racism.

If you disagree with the above, which I am assuming by your complaint to the Human Rights Commission, then quit pussyfooting around the issue and state that you believe the Museum directors are racist bigots for putting the paintings up.


----------



## jmacleod

Thats exactly what the Canadian Human Rights Commission will determine - once the CHRC starts
looking the controversial paintings will vanish - because CHRC activities will bring on media views,
particularly from the Sun newspapers - Journalist Worthington writes for the Sun. We do not
"pussyfoot around" - leave that to General Officers in the CF. MacLeod


----------



## Infanteer

jmacleod said:
			
		

> Thats exactly what the Canadian Human Rights Commission will determine - once the CHRC starts
> looking the controversial paintings will vanish - because CHRC activities will bring on media views,
> particularly from the Sun newspapers - Journalist Worthington writes for the Sun. We do not
> "pussyfoot around" - leave that to General Officers in the CF.



I'm not asking what the Human Rights Commission thinks, I'm asking for your thoughts, since you announced that your were bringing the charge of racism (by way of the Matchee and Brown paintings) to the Commission.

Sounds like some politicking to me - you don't like the paintings (or perhaps the guys who put them up), so you are drumming up a charge that you refuse to substantiate here.


----------



## jmacleod

Thanks for your positive thoughts - changes nothing of course. MacLeod


----------



## Infanteer

jmacleod said:
			
		

> Thanks for your positive thoughts - changes nothing of course. MacLeod



That's what I thought.

Good luck.


----------



## sussex11

I had not intended to participate further in the War Museum discussion, but I cannot let J. Macleod's comments pass. He makes a series of charges about the "agenda" of CWM bureaucrats. Evidence please? He says they have no liniks to the CF. Evidence please. He says CWM staff must be ex-CF. Why? And, most important in his recent posts, he suggests the Matchee and Brown paintings are offensive to First Nations people. I know a ploy when I see one, but this is an extraordinarily silly one. Are Brown and Matchee identified as Indians in the captions at CWM? Who, except the extremely well informed, would know their ethnicity? And in what way is the hanging of two paintings--one a work of imagination, the other based on a photograph--a human rights issue?
   Let's be clear here: J. Macleod is mischief-making, using a phony human rights argument to advance a particular point of view about what CWM should and should not display. It hasn't worked on those who have responded here; it won't work on CWM either. And it will be tossed out by the CHRC.


----------



## Teddy Ruxpin

Acorn has summed my thoughts on this up very well.

It is readily apparent to me that we have a cabal (my word o' the week) of naysayers and conspiracy theorists who, apparently, are determined to resort to any means in an attempt to get their rather nebulous point across.  What bothers me, as sussex11 has alluded to, is that these people will often claim that issues such as this are an "insult to the soldiers" and will argue that they are serving the interests of the CF by pushing their agenda.  This is what has bothered me about Taylor, Drapeau, Worthington, and (to a lesser extent) Chatterton no matter what respect I have for the accomplishments of the latter two gentlemen.

Surely, jmacleod, the posts here from a number of serving officers, Sr NCOs and soldiers at least gives you something to reflect upon before launching a vitriolic and senseless CHRC complaint based upon nothing.  Or perhaps the opinions of those whom you claim to represent don't count?


----------



## jmacleod

*******************Acorn is entitled to his opinion, but it will not change anything
-there is nothing vitriolic about our perspective. There are paintings decipting former Canadian
Aborignal soldiers displayed in the Canadian War Museum, which no one has been able to explain
what they are doing there. What is the positive impact of these paintings? You can insult Clifford
Chadderton and Peter Worthington, I am sure they are used to this by now, considering their
public careers. We commenced on this activity some weeks ago. This complaint is something
that the Canadian Human Rights Commission will have to deal with. Their decision will be the
final arbitrator, in this particular instance. I can assure Sussex 11 that they will not "throw it
out". What surprises me is that a couple of individuals support the display of these controversial
paintings? why is that? One of the members of the Museum's Board of Trustees is an Aboriginal
woman from Cape Breton N.S. - what is her opinion?   Macleod









MODERATOR EDIT:
Inappropriate and abusive name calling toward another forum member.


----------



## Fishbone Jones

macleod,

Fix your post re: the childish attack on Acorn's nom de plume. Your online so do it now.


----------



## Edward Campbell

I went back and reviewed this thread, post-by-post, all 17 pages of it.

Like Mr. MacLeod I am a fan of the Imperial War Museum but I am not sure I see how its governance is markedly different from that of our national museums.

The IWM describes its arrangement as:

_The Sovereign appoints the President of the Board.   The Prime Minister appoints ten members, the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs two (Sir Robin Fearn and Sir Thomas Harris), the Secretary of State for Defence one (Mr Andrews) and the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport one (Miss Adie).   Their High Commissioners represent seven Commonwealth Governments ex officio._

That seems, to me, to be eerily similar to the _quasi-arm's length_ relationship which the Canadian Museum of Civilization Corp. has with the government of Canada.   In both cases the government of the day can 'stack' the governing body with political hacks, flacks and bagmen or scholars and managers â â€œ essentially at the whim of the PM of the day.

I said, early in this thread, that, in my not at all humble opinion, museums are places for scholarship â â€œ and I think they should be run by and for scholars, which, largely lets out the _â ?...   Army, Navy and Air Force Benevolent Funds ... all Veterans organizations, public spirited citizens and the private industrial and financial sector.â ?_   (I believe all Canadian museums, including our regimental museums, have good links to the â Å“private industrial and financial sectorâ ? and are constantly working at improving them â â€œ there is never, ever enough money.)

On 15 May Mr. MacLeod said, _â ?...   Museums are used to record real history, not an "interpretation" of history ...â ?_

I replied, perhaps a bit testily:

_â ? History is always, without fail, interpreted.   Peter Wothington and Cliff Chadderton have their individual interpretations as does war artist Gertrude Kearns, and I am certain that her interpretations are different from those of, say, war artist Alex Colville.   (The plural matters, I think, because I am fairly certain that Ms. Kearns would interpret different situations in different ways in different time periods.)

My interpretation of events â â€œ unification for example â â€œ which took place in the '60s is different, today, 40+ years on, than it was in those same '60s or in the '70s, '80s and '90s for that matter.

My interpretation of World War I differs, I suppose, from, say, Jack Granatstein's or, for all that it matters, from those of any historian â â€œ although I am close to Niall Ferguson's view â â€œ in The Pity of War, London, 1998.   Am I (and Ferguson) right?   Obviously I think I am but I am not so conceited (not quite, anyway) as to expect that others agree.

All interpretations, including those of jmacleod, pbi, and Michael Dorosh, etc, are 'right' in the eyes of those who make them.   One of the key functions of any museum is to provide a mechanism through which everyone may make their own interpretations based, hopefully, on an objective presentation of the available evidence and that, presenting the available evidence, with interpretations â â€œ because it is people doing the presenting, not machines, is, I argue, the work, indeed the duty of scholars, some of whom might, also, be soldiers.   In the end scholarship must 'win' because museums are not memorials â â€œ too many people make the serious mistake of confusing the two.   We have ways and means to honour and remember those who fought 'our' wars; we need ways to learn about how wars affect us and how they helped shape our country and our society.   Museums are one of the tools in the latter quest.â ?_

I stick by that, obviously.

There are a lot of things which need improvement in the CWM â â€œ I am confident (and in a couple of cases have been reassured) that many are in hand, awaiting those ever scarce resources: money and experts' time.   I have some personal views on what's good and bad at the CWM, including some thoughts on the art on display, I expressed my concerns to the museum staff; but my _interpretation_ of history is no better than anyone else's so they will have to have to wait in the queue and some may be addressed, on their merits - if any, in due course.

Mr. MacLeod is adamant that the CWM must have a change in governance â â€œ to put control firmly in the hands of an, essentially, military Board of Trustees.     On 12 May Mr. MacLeod informed us that he, his company and his associates are in the business of providing business plans for museums.   He has also told us that his family is deeply and firmly tied to the Liberal Party of Canada.   I have to wonder: *is Mr. MacLeod angling for some government money, and is he using army.ca to drum up support?*   Perhaps he plans to do some consulting for his proposed new, Board which would be bereft of the _insider_ knowledge resident in the Board of the Canadian Museum of Civilization â â€œ of course MacLeod's Board would also be weak in (but not entirely devoid of) scholarship, too, which is why I oppose his proposal.


----------



## jmacleod

Well at least you did not insult Clifford Chadderton or Peter Worthington. The rest of your post has
a number of positive points, but my focus is only on a much better facility, we have no commercial
interest in the Museum or this site. But I will say that the Canadian War Museum is medicore at
best and amateurish in execution - far too much public money was spent on the struture, which
will like the Confederation Centre in Charlottetown PEI, be expensive to heat,operate and upgrade
and will require subsidies forever. Industry will step back from a controversial facility, and perhaps 
someone can explain to me why paintings of two former Aboriginal Canadian soldiers, of poor
execution and quality are hanging in a multi-million dollar edifice owned by the Government
of Canada, the same Liberal Government constantly attacked by Sussex 11 who provided the
money. The Honorable Barnet Danson PC MP was a Liberal Cabinet Minister - a great friend to
the Canadian Military, and a focal point (the theatre) in the Museum. MacLeod


----------



## sussex11

I guess I do attack the Grits--for the way they've shortchanged the CF. I rather thought that J. Macleod would agree with such complaints. I also know that Barney Danson was a Liberal--so what? So far as I know, I've not attacked him! (He's a good friend, so I'd not be likely to do so.) I also know there would not have been a new CWM without Danson's efforts.
   I don't know what an aboriginal member of the Museum of Civilization Board would say about the 2 Kearns paintings. In my experience at CWM, the Board NEVER meddled in exhibitions; it's job was to help senior management shape policy. That's what a Board does. 
    Let me explain what the two paintings are doing at CWM, since J. Macleod asks. The Brown piece is in a large grouping showing individuals in war/the military. The Matchee is paired with a painting of Dallaire--showing the stresses of PKOs. They both make good sense to me in context. Both, in my view, are of high quality and well-executed. 
  Like Edward Campbell, I had begun to wonder about J. Macleod's motives. I was afraid if I said these things, I'd get slammed. So thank you, Mr Campbell, for saying what many must have been thinking.
   Whatever else CWM is, it's not mediocre, J. Macleod notwithstanding. No one who has seen it could sensibly say that. Nothing that stirs people as it does could be called mediocre. However, it may be that CWM will require subsidies forever. What national museum imn any country, let alone ours, is self-supporting? Does that mean it shouldn't have been built? Better for the Govt to subsidize CWM, in my view, than advertising firms.
   Once again, at last we have a first-rate national military museum. The carping of Macleod, Chadderton, and Worthington does them no credit. And the idea of a bogus CHRC complaint.... Jeesh!


----------



## jmacleod

Sussex 11 with his significant knowledge of the inner workings of Government is as aware as my
associates and I, long established aerospace and technology consultants (more than thirty years)
that the present Government is moving towards privitization and elimination of subsidies in the
operation of government services, particularly in the DND. Sussex 11 has a great deal of expertise
in a number of areas (read him all the time) but Museums is not one of them. Dr David Baird of
the National Museum of Science and Technology was the foremost expert anywhere on the
operation of Museums. The future of an unsubsidized Canadian War Museum must be predicated
on non-public support - meaning that the facility, like virtually all the Museums in the UK, has to
become a "living museum" - it is after all, and I think Edward Campbell and Sussex 11 will agree
a public resource which must to survive, change it's motivation and direction. Dave Baird was right
when he told me that "we need people to pay to come through the doors" - a significant private
sector operator of Museums is Vancouver based Jimmy Pattison, who operates commercial museums
for the bad word "profit" (Madame Tussaud's London UK, Ripley's Believe It or Not USA) Pattison
has said the same thing (we worked with the Pattison group to bring the Canadian National Aquarium
to Halifax NS, being built at this moment in Niagara Falls ON). The badly planned NS Museum of
Transportation, New Glaswgow NS suffered because not enough money was generated to pay
their Staff - so it had to shut down for months while money was found in the private sector. We 
did not like what we saw in Ottawa - why such an ugly, very expensive buildiing? who was that
supposed to impress. It certainly did not impress Treasury Board. Despite what Edward Campbell
thinks we are only interested in a better, long lasting edifice. What we have seen does not fill
any of our guys with a warm fuzzy feeling. MacLeod


----------



## the 48th regulator

> we are only interested in a better, long lasting edifice



I believe we all want exactly that.  I for one was not a fan of having those paintings in the museum ( I have stated this in this thread).  But, to use the Human rights commission to claim that they are racist, hoping that this angle will have them removed?  A bit over the top for me...

What if you succeed?  You will do more damage to the museum, as the outside world, motivated by the media will pick up;

"Canadian National War Museum Forced to remove Racist pictures of aboriginals"

Bad move jmacleod 

dileas

tess


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse

jmacleod,
Have you been there yet?


----------



## KevinB

jmacleod,

 You seem to be posting like a drunken sailor   - changing tacks without warning and generally sailing all over the place.   You seem to have changed your end state several times, or is there more hidden rationale for your actions so far?


You made a rather unusual comment about the fact Matchee has not been convicted (his being mentally incompetant to come to trial seems to make you think that he woudl get off?) and you also posted that you thought that Brown would have gotten off if it had been a civilian court that had tried him.   I as a serving soldier both then and now take issue with those statements.   Firstly if you feel they should have gotten off, you have absolutely ZERO understanding of the military, the Geneva and Hague convensions and how they relate to the Laws of Land Warfare.   They where both guilty of abusing, torturing and killing a prisoner that they where duty bound to protect.

Now you've cast disparaging comments about racism involved with the pictures of Brown and Matchee.   

Your diatribe with the board and its composition is another issue where I start to lose you.   You seem to spit out streams of 'data' some good some bad - but you dont seem to have compiled in any sort of logical order to allow the readers here to understant exactly what you want - and why.   To me this looks like the Exxon Valdez cruising aimlessly looking for a sandbar to hit and spill its load.


Is your endstate the "living museum" concept - why?   Just to cut public funding?   Any what has your red herrings got to do with this - other than raise controversy and drive people to it like a train wrech that they just cannot turn away.


Cheers

Kevin 




edit spelling (I was tired)


----------



## jmacleod

Kevin B means "drunken sailor". Former Canadian soldier, Matchee (and an Aboriginal) was not convicted
of any crime. Former soldier, Brown (and an Aboriginal) was convicted in a Military Court Martial, that is
tried for, what in law is an indictable offence before a court of amateurs, that is why most of the
GCM decisions are overturned on appeal by competent lawyers. My point never wavers, 
although we go off into other areas of discussion - the paintings of Brown and Matchee should
not be on exhibition in the Canadian War Museum. It appears that Aboriginal soldiers are singled
out for possible contempt and negative opinions by the visiting public - the portraits serve no
useful purpose. That is the view of Mr. Chadderton and Mr Worthington, both distinguisdhed
former Canadian soldiers. Oh, in closing, the supertanker "Exxon Valdez" was not cruising aimlessly
was not "looking for a sandbar", did not in fact "hit" a sandbar, anymore than your comments
have changed my mind or our associates minds. MacLeod


----------



## KevinB

True a vast amount of Court Martials are overturned on appeal - the Court Martial Appear Board consists of Federal Court Judges (I know two).  Be that as it may Brown was convicted, and it was not overturned, and Matchee was determined not to be mentally competnant to stand trial.  The fact is they where soliders who comitted crimes - trying to add the race card is a just adding smoke.

I agree with you that I find the inclusion of those painting to be in bad taste, but I think if anything you are creating a larger spectacle.


----------



## jmacleod

Kevin B: Suggest you go to Worthington today in the Toronto Sun, for another controversy in
the Canadian War Museum - about veneral disease (VD) rates in the 25 Infantry Brigade, which
was the Korean Brigade - as usual Worthington pin points the problem. What all of us are
concerned with is the arrogance of the bureaucrats who run the Canadian War Museum of behalf
of the Canadian Public - who have little or no empathy with the Canadian Military, or real motivation
about focusing Canadian military history which is unquestionably significant. So the fact that the
Aboriginal soldiers were singled out cannot be justified, nor has anyone told us why those particular
paintings are in the Museum, at all. They serve no useful purpose, other than to create controversy
- which could easily be avoided by removing them. MacLeod


----------



## Edward Campbell

jmacleod said:
			
		

> ... They serve no useful purpose, other than to create controversy
> - which could easily be avoided by removing them. MacLeod



But, maybe a certain amount of controversy is just good marketing.  It is, I believe, an old entertainment industry maxim that there is no such thing as bad publicity.

I wonder how many people, who might, otherwise, has given the place a pass, went because there was something controversial in the papers or on TV and then, once there, actually learned something?


----------



## jmacleod

Good point - you may be right. MacLeod


----------



## sjm

With all this free advertising I just have to check out the place.  Going this weekend.  I'll take a pic of the little plaque that states "Here is a picture of an Aboriginal torturing a kid in Somalia" and post it here next week.


----------



## Art Johnson

With a tip of the hat to Alex Blair;

" Letter to the editor - RE: Canadian War Museum (CWM) statistics on VD flawed 
OTTAWA, July 12 /CNW Telbec/ - One of the several items for concern in
the exhibits in the new Canadian War Museum states that, in the Korean War,
41.4 percent of Canadians who served in that war contracted venereal disease.
Confronted with the information by officials of The Korea Veterans
Association of Canada, Joe Geurts, CEO of the CWM, agreed to remove the
offensive description. On examination, the government officials covered up
only part of the sign with the offensive statistic.
It is known, for example, that, although there was some VD, much of it
was due to prostitution while the veterans were on leave in Japan. Dr. Victor
Rabinovitch, President of the Museum of Civilization Corporation which
operates the CWM, states in a letter to the publisher of the Manitoba Korea
Veterans Association newsletter that the VD information "was taken from solid
scholarly sources, notably the work of Brent Watson."
Watson wrote a 180-page book titled The Far Eastern Tour. He quotes
Private Jacket Coates, whose comments, according to Watson, came from the war
diary of the 2nd Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry.
Our research indicates there was no such person in the entire Canadian
Army by the name of Jacket Coates. He appears to be a figment of the
imagination of Rabinovitch and was invented in a novel by the late Lt-Col Herb
Wood, who commanded a battalion of the PPCLI in Korea. Quotes, according to
Rabinovitch, also come from a book titled The Private War of Jacket Coates.
Irrespective of whether Rabinovitch's sources are correct, we must be
critical of the CWM in posting the information in the first place. The
publisher of the Korea Veterans Association web site states that the statistic
is "disgusting, false and maligns every soldier who served."
The matter has reached high echelons. A Past President of KVA wrote to
the Korean Ambassador in Ottawa. We learned that the Korean government,
quietly, we suppose, is raising the issue with the Canadian government.
Retired Major Jacques Boire of the Royal 22nd Regiment wrote to Heritage
Minister Liza Frulla, stating that the signage was "an offense to the courage
and integrity shown by Canadians."
Korean veterans are demanding that the signage be eliminated in its
entirety. As Chairman of the 52-member National Council of Veteran
Associations, we go one step further. There are grounds, in our view, for the
Canadian government to offer an apology.
This kind of scurrilous attack, on extremely weak (if not nonexistent)
evidence of those who have written books on Korea, stands as a significant
insult not only to Korean veterans but to all Canadians who served. To have
contracted venereal disease is hardly concomitant with the purpose of CWM,
which is to tell Canadians the full story of war.
We cite no less an authority than Rudyard Kipling, famous British poet.
He is generally thought to be the author of the description that soldiers are
not plaster saints, but they take up the world's most dangerous profession: to
fight for their country against dictators who would take great joy in
criticizing those of us who are willing to lay down our lives.

Yours sincerely,
(signed)

H. Clifford Chadderton, CC, O.Ont., OStJ, CLJ, CAE, DCL, LLD
Chairman


*I woncer if this is typical of the CWM research?*


----------



## FormerHorseGuard

I do not think tha pictures, the STD reports, should be the main view or display  that  people take home from the Museum.
I use to visit the old museum every chance I got, not sure i will visit the new one now. I do not think we should only display the good stuff , we should show some of the bad things that  happen in wars.  A lot of good things came out of wars and peackeeping and peace making missions. The Canadians who faught for peace and helped protect the peace should have a place to show the good and the bad together but I think it should be on a equal footing. 

show the food we gave to the people, show the schools and other buildings we provided, show the mass graves that were found after we went in, show the living people we protected.  show the paintings , the good ones, the bad ones and the ugly ones.  just keep it in context we did not send boy scouts to do the job, we sent soldiers, depending on what  side of the story  your on, we sent the right unit or we sent the wrong unit.

The writing was on the wall for the Airborne, they  were going out  no matter what  they did,  budget cuts, lack of aircraft, lack of understanding by  the leaders of the country, they did not know what  the army needed to support an airborne unit.  needed a mission, needed aircraft that  would drop them and most of all needed to be respected. we lost our  quick reaction unit, lost the unit we all joked about, but we lost the unit if you were 031 you wanted to be in.  you wanted the wings, the smock, and the training. 

I always thought no matter the group of people you  put together there are going to be some bad apples among the good apples. They  killed a person, some carrers were ruined, some Canadian history was made. I think we sent the right men for the job, if the politics would of stayed out of it, I think we would of come out of there smelling like roses. 

there is never much said about another unit of paras that were from another NATO country with the same Iltis as us and how they  were dealing with looters and tresspassers.  they  shot a few and story was told they  hung them on the fence as a reminder. 


But back to the topic, keep the paintings on display, and the std display, but make sure the people when they  leave , come away with a positive thought of the men and women who served for freedom of others.

Opie ONe Out


----------



## sussex11

I keep swearing to withdraw but inevitably something comes along to get me riled.
  Let me see if I understand Mr Chadderton's letter. The new CWM had a statistic on VD among Korean War personnel--but it has now covered it up so it is no longer visible. So what's the problem now? Much of the VD was contracted on R&R in Japan. So? Who said it had been contracted in Korea? Third, in my own writing about Korea, I have made good use of the Jacket Coates novel (which I recommend to all, especially vets who will find their experiences faithfully mirrored) because it was written by LCol H.F. Wood who commanded a battalion there and then wrote the official history of Canadian army participation in Korea. I worked for Col Wood at DHist in the 1960s, and it was office gospel that everything that couldn't be put into the official history was in the novel. Clearly Chadderton has never read it.
   Finally if, as Chadderton says, CWM's purpose is to tell the full story, how are VD rates not part of that story? If all that was in the Museum about Korea was this STD, then complain. But that's not the case at all.
   For whatever reason, some people have launched a campaign to slag the new CWM, focussing on a tiny percentage of the art and exhibits and trying to have the museum tell a story that, frankly, would sanitize Canadian military history. Ours is a good history and it can withstand the exposure of a few warts. It's a great museum too, and it's the best exposition of our military history we will ever have. Stop carping, stop blaming the alleged (unproven) mindset of bureaucrats
and go see it. So far as I know, neither Chadderton nor Worthington has visited yet.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse

Quote,
_Finally if, as Chadderton says, CWM's purpose is to tell the full story, how are VD rates not part of that story?  If all that was in the Museum about Korea was this STD, then complain. But that's not the case at all._

Aww, come on,
Does an adult really need to answer this question? 
Sussex, 
whether you see it or not, you are the doppleganger of those other two you mentioned. They will find something to criticize, just because.....and you will defend something, just because.
I admited, that once I toured it was a split on the paintings, and that as much as I loved the place there are {naturally}a few warts, you however seem to give  off the opinion that the sun shines out the museums ass.


----------



## jmacleod

Actually, Journalist Worthington while serrving in Korea under Col Wood proofread the work of
fiction - I wonder how many people have read Col Wood's book? - the reality is that there are
decisions being made in the CWM bureaucracy that are are subject to criticism, because, although
I hate to say this, they are wrong - what a surprise. MacLeod


----------



## sussex11

Bruce Monkhouse is right--which is why I keep trying to escape this thread. (And, as usual, J. MacLeod is wrong!)


----------



## Infanteer

How come the Canadian War Museum seems to be pissing off veterans and soldiers of various generations?


----------



## Edward Campbell

Infanteer said:
			
		

> How come the Canadian War Museum seems to be pissing off veterans and soldiers of various generations?



I have visited twice now, once in company with some army.ca folks, once on my own.  During both visits I exchanged a few words with other visitors â â€œ including some retired members and some Korea and WWII veterans.

I am sure that some veterans are p!ssed off; others, including all the ones I met in the CWM, are, like me, mildly disappointed with some _bits_ â â€œ not big _bits_, either â â€œ and hope (and trust) that the scholars who run the place will make improvements as time and money permit.

I need to reiterate that the CWM does not _*belong*_ to the veterans â â€œ neither the old or the young ones.  Its mission is to educate.  History, as I have said, is always being revised by everyone, not just Jack Grantastein, Niall Ferguson and Cliff Chatterton.  Museums reflect the latest _revision_, that's all; and that's all we can and should expect.


----------



## jmacleod

What should be of concern is that the staff of the CWM posted and displayed statistics of the
veneral disease rates of Canadian soldiers serving in the 25th Infantry Brigade in Korea - but the
statistics were based on a source named as "Jacket Coates" quoting the War Diary of 2PPCLI
-but there is and never was a soldier, or indeed a real person called "Jacket Coates" . The 
character was created by Lt.Col. Herb Woods CO 2PPCLI in his work of fiction "The Private
War of Jacket Coates" - Vince Courtenay, a Korea vet, and publisher Koreavetnews, says
"the statistic is disgusting, false and maligns every soldier who served" Source is Peter Worthington
Toronto Sun 10 July 2005 article "VD Stats From Novel" - Worthington served as an officer in
2PPCLI in Korea - he is also an outstanding Journalist. We are concerned with the quality of the
CWM, and are advocating change, before the CWM becomes the "Canadian Peace Museum".
MacLeod


----------



## Edward Campbell

jmacleod said:
			
		

> ... We are concerned with the quality of the CWM, and are advocating change ...â ?



Good!  We should all be concerned about the quality of all our museums.

All Canadians have a perfect right to advocate whatever they want â â€œ others have an equal right to advocate just the opposite, and governments have duties to listen, consider and, eventually, act in the broad _public_ interest.

I am a wee bit perplexed about how people who have yet to visit the museum will comment, with even the tiniest hint of credibility, on what it is, or is not doing poorly or well.  I am confident, however, that many Canadians will do just that â â€œ nothing ever prevents citizens from riding their hobby horses off in all directions.  I am equally confident that the Museum's Board will give all these inputs all the consideration they deserve.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse

Well since the family has gone for a couple of days, I think its time for me to go back tomorrow and re-tour without the [however wonderful] distractions I had last time.
Edward?........Mike?.....


EDIT:..sorry jmacleod,  I didn't see your answer to my question,..have YOU [ or your associates ]been there yet?


----------



## Kunu

Just verbalizing my eyebrow raising here, but in addition to the debate over the mere existence of Jacket Coates, how would a random Private know about the incidence of VD among soldiers to one decimal place?  The only possibility I can imagine is if he was involved in any way with the collection or analysis of such statistics, and if so, why are those not being cited directly instead?


----------



## Old Sweat

Mr Macleod,

While the display of the VD statistics in the context stated was insensitive, these data were not taken from The Private War of Jacket Coates, which was published in 1966. After reading Mister Worthington's article, I checked my copies of Jacket Coates and David Bercuson's Blood on the Hills. 

There was no mention of VD statistics in Wood's book; however there was considerable play made of the propensity of Canadian troops in rear areas to frequent establishments of less than sterling repute. In Blood on the Hills, Bercuson discussed the concern expressed by the national authorities of the nations contributing troops to the Commonwealth Division over the high rate of VD. Now, the Canadian figures were higher than those of the British, Australians and New Zealanders, but our data included certain infections that the other countries did not class as venereal in nature. Having said that, VD has been a problem for the Canadian army dating back to the Boer War. (I found a reference to a fairly large number of soldiers in one unit in South Africa having been diagnosed with it in an entry in a Canadian staff diary while researching my book on that conflict.)

After having said all that, there are two points I consider moot:

a. When dealing with material that may be controversial, it is best to rely on primary sources as much as possible. I do not know if the CWM staff did this or not. However, if they had, surely Mister Rabinovich would have cited these sources in the letter referred to by Peter Worthington.

b. If the design of the caption on the display was as quoted, than it was in very questionable taste. One can only wonder what the senior staff were thinking when they approved it. Surely there was a better way of making the point.


----------



## Sam69

Although I am loathe to extend this already messy discussion, I thought it might be helpful to offer a view of the two pictures being discussed for the benefit of those who have not yet been to the new CWM (both were taken during my first visit to the CWM when it opened in May):












Despite my great respect for Sussex11, I will disagree with him on one point. I found neither painting to be particularly well executed. In particular, the painting of Kyle Brown really falls short, in my opinion, of the standard of the museum. I also feel that the painting of Brown offers absolutely no relevant context to the incident in Belet Huen and does little more than open old wounds.

On the positive side, I've now visited the museum three times since its opening and have noticed that the improvements are legion every time I go. I was quite critical of some of the obmissions after my first visit but I have found them to be rapidly filling in as the staff has more time to research and flesh out the exhibits.

And, if you have not visited yet, you should really make the effort to go see it. Whatever you do, don't miss the easy to overlook Memorial Hall with the original gravestone for the Unknown Soldier. It is stunning:






Sam


----------



## Slim

Just outside the door to that room mentioned above I quite unexpectedly came across the name of a friend I'd gone though battleschool with.

It was inscribed into a memorial stone set into the wall. 

Cpl James Oglvie, a friend to several of us here on Army.ca had died in the former Yugoslavia.

Although quite a shock to me (and others once told about it) it was never-the-less well done and, in an odd way, pleasing to see that our friends are being remembered. Not just the soldiers from the WW1 & 2 and Korea.

Slim


----------



## JimmyPeeOn

So, does the museum have anything good to say about the rest of the Airborne's history?  Or just another perverbial slap?


Cheers,
Andrew


----------



## jmacleod

I would be surprised if senior (or any) staff of the CWM replied to Mr. Worthingtom or 
Mr. Chadderton - not their style. This is common in the Canadian public service, particularly
in Heritage Canada, for whatever reason. Then there are the flunkies; lots of flunkies in
Ottawa to support Ministers. They are political, mostly focused on a political career after
Ottawa ministerial service - some are competent, some are not, they are of course a great
source of information (mostly opinions). Only problem we have encountered from time to
time is that they feel in some cases that they can speak on behalf of a Minister, which as all
of you know, can be a problem at a political level of escalating proportions. We know Dr. David
Bercuson, provided him with information included in his book "The Secret Army" the story of the
Israeli Air Force - Dave Bercuson is a very thorough researcher and it is rare that something of
consequence affecting the CWM would get by him. MacLeod


----------



## Gunner

> I would be surprised if senior (or any) staff of the CWM replied to Mr. Worthingtom or Mr. Chadderton - not their style.



If anyone at the CWM responded to either of the gentlemen, would they have even listened to the CWM side of argument?



> Dave Bercuson is a very thorough researcher and it is rare that something of consequence affecting the CWM would get by him.



Dr Bercuson is a reputable academic however he is not without his own faults when it comes to research as described by Dr Brereton Greehous' review of his book on Korea:

http://www.journal.dnd.ca/engraph/Vol1/no1/pdf/75-80_e.pdf

You need to scroll down to the book review.  You can witness some wonderful intellectual banter between the two in subsequent issues.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse

Well, Edward Campbell  and I went through the museum again and what a difference going during the week can make.
More time on each article, less looking over/ through people, it was really nice. Of course, having a military history buff alongside makes it better also.
There were two things that really grabbed me, the WW 1 interactive bunker and the "badlands" display were fantastic, I really am disappointed that the day that I took my kids we skipped that area[WW 1] because of the crowds at the entrance. They really got thinking with the "Ortona" display in the WW2 area about how dangerous the war "thing" can be. Those displays would have really sent it home.
 We saw new displays already happening, looking even better than before.
Everyone should check out this wonderful building whenever you get the chance.

Now, for a few "things"..... the Kyle Brown painting, please give it to me so I can adorn the inside of my wood stove with it, pretty please?

It would be nice, but I don't think feasible, if the Spitfire could go into the gallery, I think this infamous bird needs to have more than the wheels and undercarriage seen.
...and lastly, for the love of God, please put more emphasis on the "Queen Victoria Scarf" exhibit, I had no clue about this and the fact that she hand-knitted these bravery scarfs [8] just blew me away. I pretty much stared [gaping] for several minutes on this one, it truly should be a "showpiece".


----------



## McG

> *Atrocities OK for war museum, but sex is out*
> Statistics that 414 out of 1,000 Canadian soldiers got VD during Korean War edited out of exhibit
> _Alex Hutchinson
> Ottawa Citizen
> July 16, 2005_
> 
> OTTAWA - Wartime atrocities are an inescapable part of the history told at the Canadian War Museum, but apparently sex can be edited out.
> 
> After meeting with members of the Korea Veterans Association of Canada last month, curators at the museum quietly changed an exhibit containing the statistic that 414 out of every 1,000 Canadians who served in Korea contracted venereal disease while overseas.
> 
> "We tried to balance historical fact with the concerns of veterans," museum spokesman Pierre Leduc said.
> 
> Earlier protests from veterans about paintings relating to the torture and death of Somali teen Shidane Arone by members of the Canadian military didn't result in any changes to the museum's display.
> 
> The altered panel is situated at the entry to the museum's exhibit on the Korean War, and contains a series of statistics about the soldiers who served in Korea, including average age, level of education and work experience. The statistic on venereal disease was changed to state that the ratio of disease and accident cases versus battle injuries was 5-to-1 for Canadians in Korea, with no reference to venereal disease.
> 
> "Korea was an unhealthy place to serve," said Les Peate, head of the Korea veterans' group. The exhibit is still able to make that point without needing to mention venereal disease, he said.
> 
> "It's not a very nice thing for a guy to take his family and his grandkids along and have them confronted with that statistic."
> 
> Since the message of the exhibit about the hazards of service in Korea wasn't altered, the museum was willing to make the change, Leduc said. The paintings of the Somali incident, on the other hand, were central to that exhibit. "You have this very successful mission, which the UN thanked us for," he said.  "And as a consequence of the actions of a very small group of soldiers, an entire regiment was disbanded and it brought the military to the forefront of public discussion. That is the story we're trying to tell."
> 
> Peate said he doesn't believe the paintings of the Somali incident belong in the museum either, and he supports the efforts of Clifford Chadderton of the National Council of Veteran Associations in Canada to have them removed. But in his own dealings with the museum, he found them very reasonable.
> 
> "When we heard it was there, I gave a call to Dean Oliver, who is the director of exhibits there, and we discussed it on a rational basis," Peate said. "We didn't start screaming and hollering like they did over the Somalia thing."
> 
> Chadderton has been sharply critical of the exhibits in the new museum, which opened in May.


----------



## Lance Wiebe

I'm heading through Ontario on vacation next week, and plan to visit the War Museum on the 27th.  Then I'll add my two bits worth....


----------



## jmacleod

Mike Strobel writing in the Toronto Sun today, defines "The Forgotten Heros". He is referring
to the many Canadians who served in the Far East Campaigns in World War II, which included
India and Burma. He also is focused on yet another problem with the Canadian War Museum
in it's reference to the Far East as decipted in it's VJ-Day Exhibit - which features only a passing
reference to Burma (and India) and the campaign, in which Canadians participated is referred
to as "the Pacific Campaign". Well, that in fact is not what it was. Two RCAF Squadrons participated
in support of the British 14th Army in Burma, 435 and 436. A restored Douglas DC-3 (C-47) Dakota
is displayed in the Canadian Warplane Heritage Museum Mount Hope ON, in the colors of RCAF 436
Squadron, which for one thing supplied the Special Service Force commanded by General Orde
Wingate, "the Chindits". When one of those Daks was stripped down at RCAF Trention (6RD)
in 1949 for reconfiguation as a Nav Trainer, we found rice husks under the floor boards. In any
event, the veterans of the Forgotten War from Canada, deserve better from the CWM, including
Major Charles Hoey of B.C. who won the VC while serving with the British Army in Burma. The problem
with the CWM is that they just don't get it.  MacLeod


----------



## Gunner

> The problem with the CWM is that they just don't get it.



 :


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse

jmacleod,
This is the third time I have asked you this, have you or any of your "associates" actually been there?

If all you have are the ramblings of others, than you have no case and are not qualified to render the level of judgement that you do on the museum or on those who are running the show.

I've have been twice now and I would not even think to suggest these people "don't get it". There is simply a lot "to get".

Stay in your lane!!


----------



## jmacleod

The answer is yes. One of our Ottawa people was there. This facilty needs a change in direction
it is simply not good enough - now I am sorry you are excited, annoyed and agitated about
this, but another sitiuation has been brought forward by a respected Journalist - have you read
Mike Stroble's article "The Forgotten Heros" in todays Toronto Sun. If not, read it. The fact is
that Mr. Chadderton, Mr. Worthington, Mr. Stroble, the Korean Veteran's Organization, Mr.
Farquharson (former RCAF 435 Squadron, Burma-India WWII) plus a number of Letter's to The
Editor about the new Canadian War Museum are all saying the same thing. If you think so much
about this rather murky facility, why not go to work there. Bob Farquharson is a former Professor
at the University of Toronto - he says " The Museum is the one place that can finally make people
aware - it's shocking what they've done" Professor Farquharson's book "For Your Tomorrow" 
described by Strobel as " an exotic, intoxicating ride through the Forgotten War" Why is not
the late S/L Len Birchall, "the Saviour of Ceylon" not given the stature he deserves in the CWM?


----------



## Fishbone Jones

Mr McLeod,

I may have missed it in a very early post or some such, but you keep talking about your "associates". You've been asked on numerous occasions who they are, and what they're about. Really, I'm not that interested. What does interest me though is if this is a private initiative by yourself and "associates" or are you tied to some sort of organization, a la Polaris Institute or some such. Your posts definitely have the flavour of a "political agenda" for the sake of "a" party, as opposed to the population in general. 

Your kin involved in politics have taught you well, while not as obsfucating as the "Velvet Fog" you manage to skirt direct questioning and slyly change the direction of the conversation quite adeptly. 

So straight answer to straight questions please. Does the group your speaking for consitute a formal organization? Does it's agenda seek to keep/ dispose of the party in power? If the answer to either is yes, who are you, what do you represent, and please provide a web link.


----------



## pronto

Tell ya what Mr. Monkhouse. I have been to the museum a couple of times. I am not impressed with the tone, but am impressed with the building and it is nice to finally see some decent exhibition space. I am qualified to make similar judgements to Mr. MacLeod. (PM me if you want to know more). The museum misses its mark in a number of areas. The nasty attention paid to the airborne debacle is just an example. This thread is a bit tiresome, and I have made some comments similar to this in the past, but what the hey.....

I feel that the museum's staff have shown some poor judgement, and been offensive to some elements of the military. I feel that this is a result of getting input from the political and intellectual elite, rather than "polling" the rank and file (as it were). The representatives (self-appointed and otherwise) of the CWM indulge in a never-ending justification of ther decisions rather than admitting poor judgement, errors or even that others may have a point. Remember, if you disallow that someone else has an opinion or even feelings on a topic, then you are devaluing their position, and you really have no basis for congress. The louder someone complains about the CWM,   the more entrenched (sorry... couldn't resist) the positions become.

The long list of forgotten items, missed research, offensive exhibits, false stats, etc. etc. is merely getting longer. I think that ordering Mr. MacLeod to "stay in his lane" is a little offensive in an opinion board which is admittedly just that - a board for exchanging opinions. I have exchanged emails with Mr. MacLeod and his bona fides prove impressive. His opinion is no less valid than ours, and perhaps, given his background and associates, even a little more valid.

I was blessed to meet S/L Birchall. The saviour of Ceylon. An amazing, kind and generous man. His incredible exploits belong in pride of place, not Kyle Brown and Clay Matchee (or, in my opinion - Romeo Dallaire). That was a really good point, Mr. MacLeod. An exhibit on Mr Birchall should be prominent.

Mr. MacLeod - telling Mr. Monkhouse to "go work there" will merely inflame him. (Not really worthy of you either)... Besides, I personally would not want to trade Merrickville for Sodom-on-the-Ottawa!!!

The upshot, I think is that there will always be complaints about a public institution run by flawed human beings. We need to make them better. I would really like some suggestions on how to get the CWM to listen, react and stop negating others opinions. Hell I am getting tired of them petulantly dropping out of debates and information exchanges when they don't hear total agreement.

Ah well.... Have a good one out there in Halifax and Merrickville - they're better than Ottawa!


----------



## Fishbone Jones

pronto said:
			
		

> I have exchanged emails with Mr. MacLeod *and his bona fides prove impressive*. His opinion is no less valid than ours, and perhaps, *given his background and associates, even a little more valid*.



Which I'd like him to establish and be open about. I get a queasy feeling when people keep avoiding being open about this sort of thing. He's a name dropper extrordinairre, but unless he can prove a real connection to these people, he's a poser. People will, understandably, get riled and concentric on points and miss the big picture. I think if a person is posting, seemingly acting as the spokesman, for a group, we're entitled to know who they are, the nature of their business, and what the agenda is.


----------



## jmacleod

My associates and I are long established (over thirty years) in the Technology and Aerospace Sector
-we are currently based in Moncton NB - we have contractural agreements with many associated
consultants, most of who are part time, and engaged in other, for the most part academic pursuits
-some are based in Ottawa, Halifax, London UK and the United States. We are all well over 70
years old, we have no hidden agenda, but know far more about government, and aerospace
projects than I care to discuss. But the primary interest in the "new" Canadian War Museum are
personal and shared with Mr. Chadderton, Worthington and others not in the public eye. I sign
my name to all posts, and I say exactly what I think. I remember the former Military Museum in
Ottawa - a national disgrace. I remember taliking with former Heritage Minister Copps about the
proposed "new" Canadian War Museum - I could not believe the mediocrity of the design, which 
from a technical vierwpoint will have a number of functional problems. But my focus, along with
Mr. Chadderton and Mr. Worthington, plus others I have or have not mentioned in the poor quality
of presentations to the public, and the arrogance and lack of empathy by the bureaucrats who
run the place. It does not matter that you agree or disagree with me in the least. I am also not
used to dealing with people who do not sign their names - I do not know or care what your
background is, but it cannot not match mine or as you and Monkhose put it our "associates"MacLeod


----------



## Fishbone Jones

jmacleod said:
			
		

> It does not matter that you agree or disagree with me in the least. I am also not
> used to dealing with people who do not sign their names - I do not know or care what your
> background is, but it cannot not match mine or as you and Monkhose put it our "associates"MacLeod



Well excuse me for being a mere mortal and trying to understand exactly where your coming from. I guess I just didn't realise the mist that was landing on me was really piss from some lofty perch. While you say your concerns are personal, the gist of your posts "seem" otherwise. I only wished to clarify. And as far as agreeing or not, I could care less also. I give the same amount of stature to the man on the street as I do to self appointed pseudo intellectuals who believe they deserve something extra.

Dave Winterburn


----------



## jmacleod

Thanks Dave.  MacLeod


----------



## sussex11

I guess I'm the CWM rep who drops out from the thread when someone disagrees. Well, I'm not a CWM rep, but I do know bias and prejudice when I see it, and I take it the answer to the thrice asked question is that J. MacLeod has not been to the new building. I also know a bit about the Burma display.
   The vets' association president went through the new CWM months ago before the caption was in and wrote complaining that they had been left out. In fact, he simply missed it entirely--which is easy to do because the signage wasn't very good at the beginning. (There--I can be critical!) Then CWM replied to list the artifacts on display at the time of his visit, which included a 3'x3' piece of wreckage from the recovered Dakota, a huge photo, several captions and smaller pictures, and artifacts recovered from the wreckage, but he said that that was not enough. The Burma Vets' president then raised the 'Pacific' vs 'Far East' issue, which is debatable, but which CWM agreed to change in any case; there are now two text blocks, one on 'the war against Japan', and the other simply titled 'Burma'. Both of those were there on May 8, but of course no one mentions that. When Strobel of the Sun phoned CWM, he was likely surprised to find that the Museum actually had a display on Burma and that the wreckage was so big, but by that time of course his jeremiad had already been written, so he went with a pretty hackneyed few references, worthy of Worthington's columns (who also has not visited the new CWM) himself. The vets, of course, told him that CWM had nothing at all on Burma.
    There's another point. The CWM is big, but there's a lot of history to cover. Not every campaign, not every battalion, ship, or squadron will be featured or even mentioned. You can't get everything in. Yes, Burma was important but only 5 in every thousand Canadian servicemen in WW2 served in that campaign. Frankly, instead of complaining that there isn't enough coverage of their part of the war, Burma vets should be pleased.
  Jack Granatstein (see, I even signed my name. And I have been to the new CWM.)


----------



## the 48th regulator

> I am also not
> used to dealing with people who do not sign their names - I do not know or care what your
> background is, but it cannot not match mine or as you and Monkhose put it our "associates"MacLeod



Unfair shot Mr. MacLeod,

You continue to make some fairly negative comments regarding the museum.  Fair enough.  But it is you that alludes to the "Associates", what is this a Dan Brown Novel??  I do not agree with what I have heard or read that is at the museum, I trust my comrades, as you, to help me understand the museum.  Will I visit?  Hell ya, yet I was on a stance to boycott it.  I did not appreciate some of the concepts presented (the paintings, the black mark on the Korean vets).  But I let everyone understand who I am and where I stand.  You on the other had allude to associates and present a very scary agenda.  I am not on side with that.

I am John Tescione.

dileas

tess


----------



## Fishbone Jones

Thanks Jack,

I have not been myself, which is why I don't get into the discussions on the contents. However, it is refreshing to see someone that is involved, and been there, come here and give plain, unbiased answers that don't require "An Idiot's Guide to Parlimentary Doublespeak"


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse

Quote from Pronto,
 The museum misses its mark in a number of areas. The nasty attention paid to the airborne debacle is just an example

...actually if one know nothing of the, totally agreed debacle, I don't think one would leave the museum knowing anything more about it.
The paintings don't really have much info with them, of course there is not enough info with most things but, I'm told signage is a work in progress.

Pronto,
The fact that you have been there does give you more authourity to post your negatives about the museum, in fact I will be more than happy to read your thoughts, however all jmaceod has done is cast dispersions from afar,.... over and over and.........

Also, I agree with you on the Merrickville thing, however all good things come to an end, moving back to the south of Ontario in a few weeks. :crybaby:


----------



## jmacleod

My main focus is to change the Canadian War Museum for the better, because the history (the
story) of the Canadian Military deserves better. For people who support the concept of the facility
I am on your side - but I have to question the attitude of public employees who have a mind
set based on ignorance, and refuse to listen or accept criticsm - and at 75, I am weary of arrogant
patronizing bureaucrats. The attitude of the Canadian Museum of Civilization, and the Canadian
War Museum is not, for instance like that of those volunteers who staff the famed Canadian
Warplane Heritage Museum at Mount Hope, or the British staff of the RAF Museum at Duxford
UK, and many many others I am familier with - there has to be a great degree of empathy with
the Canadian military, and a real, not a text book understanding of the complexities of Canada's
historic contributions to the Wars, fit for discussion with the wide variety of vistors to this
public place. MacLeod


----------



## the 48th regulator

and you are also weary of us, the troops, the general public?  

You stated;



> I do not know or care what your
> background is




On a site Mike Bobbitt dedicates to the troops.  This tells me you are not fighting for us the troops.  For us as Canadians.  You are fighting for your self and your own agenda to be recognized, along with your associates.

Please stop using the thread I started as some sort of voice box for your mission to attack;



> public employees who have a mind
> set based on ignorance, and refuse to listen or accept criticism - and at 75, I am weary of arrogant
> patronizing bureaucrats



dileas

tess


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse

Quote from jmacleod,
_ I do not know or care what your
background is, but it cannot not match mine or as you and Monkhose put it our "associates"_

Well now, missed that.....background?  Well I guess ya got me, just Joe Average Canadian from a loving family to Joe Average Canadian Father who just strives to be the same loving parents that mine were.
 No aspirations except for that...... gee, I'm so ashamed..... :


----------



## jmacleod

Good for you Bruce. MacLeod


----------



## Art Johnson

And the discussion goes on, the CWM is under the control of a bunch of PCPs who have no intention of listening to the complaints of Veterans:

http://torontosun.com/News/Columnists/Worthington_Peter/2005/08/19/1179026.html


----------



## Armymedic

If "they" won't listen to people of the likes of Mr. Petit, what chances do we ordinary citizens and serving soldiers have of changing the ways things are displayed?


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse

Much as I have made my disdain for the Kyle Brown painting be heard, it is a low blow bringing the race card into it.
Got a news flash for ya Worthington, they were both Native........and has zero bearing on the fine service of other serving or retired Native soldiers.

I feel like Bill Murray,...."I've been slimed".

Edit: been there yet Armymedic?


----------



## Lance Wiebe

I did wander through the museum on my drive to Thunder Bay.  

The museum is, in terms of layout and sheer size, far superior to the old museum.  They also let me and my family in for free (I'm starting to think that people think I'm older than I really am...... )

I liked the vehicle displays, now that they have room for them.  I liked the weapon displays.

I disliked things being labelled wrong, for example, a M1911 being called a colt 45 revolver in the display.  I disliked the fact that all of the interactive displays were broken.  I disliked the fact that the place had several burnt out lights, and wasn't all that clean.

It seems to me that so much money was spent on the building, that no money was put aside for routine maintenance and repairs.

As for the paintings, wrong place, wrong setting.  Sorry guys, I just did not buy the "warts and all" argument.  If that was the case, then there should be a seperate wing showing the warts.  Including the awarding of contracts to bail out companies in trouble (Western Star & Bombardier come immediately to mind).  The so-called "warts" are only in one portion of the museum, perhaps because the museum paid a huge  amount of money for the paintings, for whatever reason.  There is no paintings showing Canadians being tortured and maltreated by the Japanese.  Lousy arguments........


----------



## Armymedic

Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> Edit: been there yet Armymedic?



No, I have only been home just under 2 weeks. Definitely want to before the kids go back to school.


----------



## lahr_brat

Hi,

Not sure if this is the proper forum .

Just visited the CWM with my dad who is a Korean Vet so we got in free, yea!!!!!!

I always thought it was the North West Rebellion.  I guess "Rebellion" is too aggressive for our politically correct politicians.  Since when was it ever a "Resistance"????  What is next the First and Second "Great Misunderstandings".

What are your thoughts on the way history is being taught these days.  I personally am shocked and appaulled.


----------



## Michael Dorosh

lahr_brat said:
			
		

> What are your thoughts on the way history is being taught these days.   I personally am shocked and *appaulled.*



I'm skipping the easy joke here. 

I found it interesting on the weekend when out for a jeep ride that I was driving past Louis Riel Junior High School.  It never occured to me before, but my companion pointed out the name and asked "wasn't he hanged as a traitor?"

And yet, there is the school named for him, not in Manitoba, but in Calgary.  Odd choice?


----------



## Mineguy

Ref mr riel on a side note i have a story i just cant not tell here. I can remember being in waterpeg manitoba in 1997 during the flood and we were around this area called the bronkild dike or somthing doing our engr stuff. Well...on the news that evening they had a direct great great grandson or somthing (im pretty sure it was the grand son and not cousin or somthing) of louis Riel giving an interview about efforts in his neighborhood while he was in front of his house sandbagging. Well we were in the exact same neighborhood and working and our troop commander was gen middletons great great grandson. What a coincedence.The main thing though is even the people who i thought were history buffs from previous conversation didnt even seem to care or find it one of those weird lucky co incedences that it really was! :


----------



## sigpig

lahr_brat said:
			
		

> I always thought it was the North West Rebellion.  I guess "Rebellion" is too aggressive for our politically correct politicians.  Since when was it ever a "Resistance"????



In 1986 or 87 the Strat officers visited the Batoche battlefield site. There is a beautiful, large, expensive interpretive centre where they showed a presentation of the battle with pictures, movies, mannequins, automated actors. All the trimmings, very well done and impressive. Very biased towards the Metis side. All of these army officers were looking at each other saying, "When did we become the bad guys?"


----------



## mdh

Lahr_Brat

Riel is regularly portrayed as some sort of Che Guvera of the Prairies.   The truth is that Riel was considered a dangerous Catholic apostate - nowhere more so than in 19th century Ultra-Montaine Quebec whose unreconstructed Catholicism didn't take kindly to people declaring themselves personally ordained by God to lead the Metis. As for Thomas Scott - whom Riel executed after a show trial - historians routinely describe him as an unreasonable and obstreperous bigot.   But as Peter Brimelow pointed out in his screed on Canadian historiography - Scott's real crime was remaining loyal to Canada - something he paid for with his life.

cheers, mdh


----------



## Infanteer

North-West _*Resistence*_?  WTF?  Seems the CWM has got it right again.... :


----------



## KevinB

Well I stayed out of posting - since I swore not to go.

BUT I went.

 Some VERY interesting recreating of history there.

Plains of Abraham - apparent the Canadians fought the British...
  I may have accepted Canadiennes - but WTF Canadians?

The WHOLE North West Rebellion was a farce.

Boer War - did not 100% jibe with how it was intially rendered to me - but I will defer since I am not in anyway a SME in that area.

A wide variety of Peacekeeping innacuracies.



I want to take back part of my original bile on the Matchee and Brown painting -- ALL her work SUCKS not just those two pictures, I went with two buddies - one an was ex CF (got out in '95) and the other never past cadets -- both agreed those pics where in ppor taste and generally out of the element of the rest of the museum.

Generally it appears to be a work in progress.


----------



## pronto

Infanteer said:
			
		

> North-West _*Resistence*_?   WTF?   Seems the CWM has got it right again.... :



Hmmm time for the RCMP, and all those other regiments to get out the official regimental embroiderer to change the wording on those regimental colours...


----------



## Cloud Cover

KevinB said:
			
		

> Well I stayed out of posting - since I swore not to go.
> 
> Plains of Abraham - apparent the Canadians fought the British...
> I may have accepted Canadiennes - but WTF Canadians?



You're joking, right?


----------



## Infanteer

That's odd - I could of swore Montcalm was from France.... ???

This is approaching _farcical_ in nature.


----------



## KevinB

sadly I am not kidding.

 The did mention French Regulars, Indians (from what band I cant recall) and CANADIANS


----------



## Cloud Cover

Okay... Deep cleansing breath.... All is calm ...  :-X

Can anybody provide me with an explanation for this that has an air of reality to it?


----------



## Edward Campbell

whiskey601 said:
			
		

> Okay... Deep cleansing breath.... All is calm ...  :-X
> 
> Can anybody provide me with an explanation for this that has an air of reality to it?



Go back just a few years, less than five, I think: Jean Chrétien said something like, _"For me, I wish da French had won da battle on da Plains of Abraham."_

It isn't just Chrétien; he was speaking for millions, yes millions of French Canadians from whom 1759 is still a tragedy.  The Canadian _cultural agenda_, for all Canadians, everywhere, has been in the firm grip of that minority, and some _fellow travelers_, since 1968.  They believe that Canada *is* French with a persistent, unwelcome _Anglo_ political/legal overlay â â€œ something which never should have happened and, for many, something which should, can and will be shrugged off.

See also: Keith Spicer, on almost any topic.


----------



## KevinB

News flash for the rest of Canada, we are English - we won - SUCK IT UP...  ;D

Unfortunately Ed hti the nail on the head (and much more elquently than I could ever hope to.)


----------



## Michael Dorosh

KevinB said:
			
		

> News flash for the rest of Canada, we are English - we won - SUCK IT UP...   ;D
> 
> Unfortunately Ed hti the nail on the head (and much more elquently than I could ever hope to.)



No need to thank me; my predecessors at that point in time were somewhere in Galicia...


----------



## pronto

This is off topic, but hey... My wife and I recently spent some time in Quebec City. The vaunted plains of Abraham were desecrated as follows: an in-line skate ring, a running track, a boatload of sunbathing quebecers in speedos, an outdoor playground, an ice cream stand, a roundabout, lots of one way streets, a rather bad museum-y thingie, a large expanse of burnt grass, and an incomplete citadel. O yea, the booming base from an impromptu rock concert. A sad, sad commentary on a battlefield where soldiers lost their lives. I was shocked, appalled and just out-right saddened.


----------



## KevinB

Your surprised?

 I guess the monument to "YOU LOST FRENCHIE" was a little too much for them  

Realistically - if we put monuments everywhere soliders have died over th world 0 we'd all be living in some pretty tall aparatment and all the areable land would be cemetaries.


----------



## geo

you can't seriously expect the Gov't, any Gov't to cordon off the Plains of Abraham in perpetuity - it doesn't make any sense at all. 
Did they cordon off the area around Waterloo? of course not - it does not make sense at all.
Did the US cordon off all their Revolutionary war battlefields? of course not - it does not make sense at all.
Let's wake up and smell the Café & croissants


----------



## Slim

geo said:
			
		

> Did the US cordon off all their Revolutionary war battlefields? of course not



Well actually...

http://www.nps.gov/gett/
http://www.nps.gov/mana/home.htm
http://www.nps.gov/anti/


http://www.pc.gc.ca/lhn-nhs/on/queenston/index_e.asp
http://www.city.toronto.on.ca/culture/fort_york.htm
http://www.pc.gc.ca/lhn-nhs/on/fortgeorge/index_e.asp


----------



## Michael Dorosh

Slim said:
			
		

> Well actually...
> 
> http://www.nps.gov/gett/
> http://www.nps.gov/mana/home.htm
> http://www.nps.gov/anti/
> 
> 
> http://www.pc.gc.ca/lhn-nhs/on/queenston/index_e.asp
> http://www.city.toronto.on.ca/culture/fort_york.htm
> http://www.pc.gc.ca/lhn-nhs/on/fortgeorge/index_e.asp



Have you noticed where the Alamo is these days, Slim?  And the 1836 war with Mexico is just as big in the hearts of Texans as the Revolutionary War is to a Virginian or New Englander....


----------



## jmacleod

The National Historic Site, The Plains of Abraham is under the control of the National Battlefields
Commission, and have been since 1908 - go to the site "The Plains of Abraham" for updated
information, and the 100th Anniversary of the site planned for 2008. The Battle on the Plains
of Abraham (Abraham's Farm) changed the course of North American history, and decided the
fate of what was then French North America - for an historic perception of those historic days
go to Francis Parkman "Montcalm and Wolfe" - and Gordon Donaldson, "The Battle for a Continent"
 - just a point of interest; the uniforms worn by the reanactors in French and British uniforms of
the period were originally provided by the MacDonald-Stewart Trust Fund (MacDonald Tobacco)
a great supporter of historic sites in Canada for many years. The site has been well preserved, but
it should not permit any overt commercialization, other than the Museum , Interpretation Centre
and Gift Shop. It should be treated like the Louisbourg Fortress in Nova Scotia, or the Gettyburg
National Historic Battlefield in the United States. MacLeod


----------



## pronto

Nah, I am not really expecting the whole plains to be preserved. That'd be as silly as can be. I DO expect a liitle reverence somewhere on the plains though. Somewhere? Anywhere? The speedos and Jazz fusion were just over the top. Maybe something like Queenston?

KevinB, your email made me laugh out loud! Thanks


----------



## Jungle

In another thread, Edward Campbell seemed surprised that there were some anglophobe Officers in the R22R in the 70s... In the last few days, it is apparent that there are francophobes not only in our Army today, but on this site as well. Some people are being unreasonnable here. I wonder how a thread on the CWM has turned, again, into a French-Canadian bashing party...  : I thought we were beyond that at least on this site. 
The Plains of Abraham are administered by the Federal govt. I think they are well-kept, and I don't see a problem with fitness or cultural activities taking place there. It is actually surprising that the whole park was preserved; imagine it's real estate value, in the heart of Québec City and overlooking the St-Lawrence river ??
The Citadelle was falling apart a few years ago; some people were appalled that the govt was letting that happen. Now, some here are appalled that it is not finished... If they didn't work on it, it would be nothing but ruins in a few years. Also, it had to be modernised to provide safe access to pedestrians. Eversince it was built, the only access to enter the Citadelle was a single-lane chicane-type entrance for both pedestrians and motor vehicles; they are now making a separate pedestrian entrance.


----------



## Springroll

When we stayed in Quebec City last year, we were able to see the The Plains of Abraham from our hotel room(Loews le Concorde) and I was in awe of the view and beauty. I think they have done a fine job.

Now bringing this back onto topic, my mother in law was able to take her design students on a tour of the CWM before it was opened, and were able to have the tour done by the designer of the facility. Everything in there has a significant reason to it, from the placemernt of a painting, to the way the sun hits the windows on Nov 11th at 11am(yes, they designed that into it!). There are many more things about the design that she told us about, but I can't remember them all. One that does stick out is the bathrooms. The designer originally had incorporated the war theme into the bathrooms, but they were not approved and as a result, when someone goes into the bathrooms, the effects of the museum is lost(they have basic bathrooms now). If I recall correctly, the design for the bathrooms had red and green in there to represent blood and grass, a common sight in the WW's and such.

My mother in law strongly suggested that the next time we go to Ottawa that we make the stop(we saw the old one a few years back) and to make sure we brought tissues, since it is a very moving exhibit. The designer wanted to make sure that every aspect of war was in there, the good, the bad, and the ugly. War should not be made to look pretty, because it isn't.


----------



## geo

I agree whole heartedly with you Jungle,

Spent some time in Valcatraz with 5Bde over the last month. As a matter of fact there are a large number of Anglophone officers within the ranks of the R22R, 5CER, 12RBC & 5SSG.   Some are from "down home" while others are from Ont & MB... all are quite happy and valued members of their Reg'ts. (would presume that 5RALC similar conditions exist).

WRT the speedos on the Plains.... sorry - forgot to stipulate dress code. It is one of the City's major green spaces and a magnet to the entire population. It's paths and walkways attract all sorts. The Gov't built & maintained a prison on it's grounds (La petite Bastille) - this facility was decommissioned & is now a youth hostel..... teenagers and young adults are not always the most respectful - at the best of times.

WRT the Citadelle. Lovely facility any way you slice & dice it. Officers & SR NCOs mess & quarters are exceptional BUT.... when you get down to it, old fortresses are not really the ideal facilities for active army battalions. Nevertheless - R22R continue to maintain their RHQ there.


----------



## Infanteer

Jungle said:
			
		

> In another thread, Edward Campbell seemed surprised that there were some anglophobe Officers in the R22R in the 70s... In the last few days, it is apparent that there are francophobes not only in our Army today, but on this site as well. Some people are being unreasonnable here. I wonder how a thread on the CWM has turned, again, into a French-Canadian bashing party...   : I thought we were beyond that at least on this site.



He's right, we're hammering on the War Museum here - let's stay on topic....


----------



## geo

Seen!


----------



## KevinB

Jungle - excellent point, I'm kind of embarrased that I started it.

 Secondly I think to be a CANADIAN one is not British or French -- BUT... class: CANADIAN.

 Both cultures created who we are.


I do wish for a little more accuracy in reporting - especially when they put a bust of me up with a VC


----------



## pronto

Yup right you are, - sorry dudes and dudettes.


----------



## jmacleod

Met a lot of Anglophone officers from the R22R at RA Park Mess over the years in Halifax NS -
DND policy probably dictates a number in each Francophone unit - how could it be otherwise in
a military which is officially bi-lingual? O'Carroll's was a favourite spot for military visitors to Halifax
over the years - on the waterfront. The original building was the HQ of Lord Amherst where
the attack on Quebec was planned (Amherst,Wolfe, Monckton, Murray,Townshend) there was
a plaque on the leased structure (owned by the Feds) denoting this, but the lessor, staunch
IRA (Dublin) removed it (for a while at least) - interesting footnote to surrender of the French
in Quebec to the British Forces - French were represented by James Johnstone Chevelier de Johnston
who had served Charles Edward Stuart at Culloden Moor, fought at Louisbourg and Quebec and
replied to the Terms of surrender in Gaelic, since the CO Fraser Highlanders representing the Brits
as the senior Field Officer after Wolfe's death, and not fluent in English or French, knew that he
could converse with Johnston in Gaelic. French in Quebec were defeated essentially by mercenaries
from Scottish Highlands. MacLeod


----------



## geo

McLeod,

historical note noted - let's discuss the war museum on this thread.
if warranted - we can discuss franco & anglo composition of the CF in a new thread.

Chimo!


----------



## jmacleod

You are right, of course. There are a lot of complaints about the CWM throughout Canada
-as all of you are aware - the impression I get, is that the CWM and the Canadian Museum
of Civilization are "right" and everbody else, which is a considerable spectrum, are "wrong"
- no surprise to me. MacLeod


----------



## Springroll

jmacleod said:
			
		

> You are right, of course. There are a lot of complaints about the CWM throughout Canada



What exactly are the complaints about the CWM?


----------



## jmacleod

I guess you don't read the papers. MacLeod


----------



## Springroll

Nope...I don't read the papers. 
They are too biased and full of inaccurate information.


----------



## geo

McLeod, 
While I appreciate your frustration with some of our government's moves and decisions; do you have any particular "for instances" to discuss.
Generalised gratuitous statements don't give us much meat on which to discuss


----------



## the 48th regulator

> What exactly are the complaints about the CWM?



A good start is reading this thread from the beginning.  It will give yousome idea from the Canadians that post here.

dileas

tess


----------



## Springroll

Well, I am sure that jmacleod was referring to what has been in the papers, that is why I asked. 
I have read at least half the thread(was offline yesterday so I couldn't finish it) but will be finishing it in a bit, after I p/u my hubby.


----------



## the 48th regulator

Very good, 

You will also find quite a bit of what jmacleod is referring to, within the threads regarding what was in the papers, as well as our concerns.

dileas

tess


----------



## jmacleod

Springroll - My apologies - I misunderstood. There have been complaints about the paintings of
former Aboriginal Canadian soldiers in the CWM, from the CEO Canadian War Amps and Journalist
Peter Worthington, Sun Newspapers which are considered demeaning and racist. Korean Veterans
are concerned about statements focused on their incidence of venereal disease in Korea, Pacific
War veterans are concerned about a preceived lack of information about their wartime activities,
there is focus on the fact that the CWM refers to the NorthWest Rebellion as the North West
"Resistance" - there are perhaps others - all reported in the media throughout Canada. The
Aboriginal and Metis Veterans of Canada are particularly concerned, since none of them, they report
were invited to the official  opening of the Museum,and the paintings mentioned earlier, which
a number of people feel should not be in the facility; they serve no purpose other than to create
controversy. MacLeod


----------



## Infanteer

...all which is discussed in detail in this thread.


----------



## jmacleod

The complaints referred to have been more than simply discussed on this Forum - our opinions
pro and con are nothing more than that, opinions, but the organizations involved have complained
to several Federal cabinet ministers I understand - one Minister for sure is Hon. Andy Scott MP,
Fredericton NB, Minister of Aboriginal Affairs - important player, sits in the Cabinet inner circle
and is a member of the planning and priorities committee - Minister Frulla MP, Quebec, Canadian
Heritage portfolio and perhaps one or two others. The organizations, like War Amps and the
Sun Group of newspapers have considerable clout as well. CWM would be better off simply to
remove the controversial Brown and Matchee paintings, considered by many, racist and demeaning.
MacLeod


----------



## Springroll

Does anyone have a link to these two particular paintings??


----------



## the 48th regulator

http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/30345.0.html


They are posted within the thread, as I stated before, read it from beginning and you will get all the answers to the questions that you are asking


dileas

tess


----------



## Springroll

For those that are curious what page the paintings are on, they are on page 19.

The first painting doesn't look too bad, but the second one is a little off. I was expecting worse though.

I don't believe that they should be removed from the walls of the CWM. 
Art is a very personal thing, and what one person finds disturbing, another will find intriguing or will induce feelings or thoughts.
The point of a museum is not to show only the good aspects, but also the trials and tribulations.


----------



## George Wallace

Springroll said:
			
		

> The point of a museum is not to show only the good aspects, but also the trials and tribulations.



I think the act of murder is not in the catagory of "trials and tribulations". 

 To gloryfiy or display a criminal act as such as this has a better home in the "Prison Museum" down in Kingston.


----------



## Kat Stevens

The paintings in question don't represent trials and tribulations.  They represent a reprehensible act by a very small group of mentally unstable individuals.  An act that led ultimately to the disgrace and dimantling of an honourable and justifiably proud Regiment.

Kat


----------



## Springroll

Better way to word it rather than trials and tribulations... The Good, The Bad and The Ugly.

War is not nice. It is not all roses and gardens. People are killed.
I am sure there has been more than just that incident where our troops have behaved disgracefully.

I still feel the paintings should stay. 
Too take them down would be to censor the realities of war. 
As sad as the situation was, the kid was stealing from the base, was caught, and was wronglyfully treated by a few soldiers.

If someone stole from you, what would you do if you caught them?


----------



## the 48th regulator

Springroll said:
			
		

> Better way to word it rather than trials and tribulations... The Good, The Bad and The Ugly.
> 
> War is not nice. It is not all roses and gardens. People are killed.
> I am sure there has been more than just that incident where our troops have behaved disgracefully.
> 
> I still feel the paintings should stay.
> Too take them down would be to censor the realities of war.
> As sad as the situation was, the kid was stealing from the base, was caught, and was wronglyfully treated by a few soldiers.
> 
> If someone stole from you, what would you do if you caught them?



And as previously in this thread I stated,  my reaction to your statement would be the same as before,

http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/30345/post-225626.html#msg225626

_No, I have not visited the new museum, you are right.  As a veteran, as Art stated, I trust the judgment of my fellow compatriots.  I for one am upset in the fact that two paintings are displayed regarding a very despicable part of our history.  I am not an art critic, but please explain why we need to see an artist's rendition of a photograph done in a new medium (literally a copy) and some sort of far out abstract painting of the other culprit??  What is next, a portrait of Maj. Harry Schmidt pressing the trigger on the laser guided bomb? Or, how about a nice painting of Maj.William Umbach juggling four balls representing the souls of the fallen._

dileas

tess


----------



## George Wallace

Springroll

Next time you do something that may not fall under the good graces of the Law, and someone takes a picture of you in the act, then paints a painting from that image (basically a reproduction of the photo in oil and canvas) and puts it up in the "Museum of Military Spouses" for all to see in perpetituity, then we will all see where you are coming from.   If you can live with shaming all Military Spouses who have been before you, those of current Serving Members, and those to come, then do so.   Until then it may help to look more deeply into what it means for your hubby to wear his uniform and serve his country.


----------



## Armymedic

edited to remove comments which, like the ones Springroll posted above, do nothing to add to the conversation.


----------



## aesop081

Springroll said:
			
		

> War is not nice. It is not all roses and gardens. People are killed.



Well thank you for enlightening us on the subject.  I bow to your infinite experience.



> As sad as the situation was, the kid was stealing from the base, was caught, and was wronglyfully treated by a few soldiers.



Of course, you were there right ?



			
				Springroll said:
			
		

> I am sure there has been more than just that incident where our troops have behaved disgracefully.



Well, again, thank you.  Of course you have the right to make alegations without basis.


----------



## Slim

Springroll

Please stop posting in this thread for now.

You don't see what the others are trying to say. What you're doing is really upsetting a whole bunch of people for nothing, some of whom were there, on the ground, in Africa when this happened. For them its not a "painting" but a forced view of events that never should have taken place. 

To them you are merely rubbing their wounds (and they have them!) with salt.

Try listening instead of forcing you opinion on others.

You may find that you could learn alot.

Slim
STAFF


----------



## Springroll

Armymedic said:
			
		

> I am sure there are several, but remember what side of the fence you are on in this discussion. You are knocking on a hornets nest with those statements. Remeber, War Crimes are declared and tried by the winners of the conflict.
> 
> People on this site helped make the history that is portrayed in the CWM. For us it is personal. We (the greater we, not just me) don't like how the bad has prominance over the greater good.



My family also helped to make the history that is portrayed in the CWM and I really do not feel that I have said anything wrong, and do not intend to "disgrace" anyone. It is a shame that the few bad apples in the bunch screwed it up for the rest of them, but that is how society is, regardless of it being military or not. 

I do agree that I also do not like "how the bad has prominance over the greater good", but by what I have been told by my mother in law about the museum, the majority of it portrays the CF, past and present, in a good light, and not a bad one. 

I will not take back my opinion about the paintings, but I do understand where all of you are coming from and will just leave it at that.   

Edited to add: 
I am sorry if my opinion has upset anyone. It was not my intention to.


----------



## Slim

Springroll said:
			
		

> ", but by what I have been told by my mother in law



I asked you nicely...

You just don't get it do you.

Your mother in law told you...

There are people here who were THERE!

Stop pushing their buttons needlessly. I have a tremendous amount of respect for those who were in that horrible place, trying to do an impossible job.

What do they get...One rude housewife, who hasn't served a day, telling them off.

BTW I was also made privilage to the letter you wrote a wounded veteran from this site. Basically saying his sacrifice does not matter.

THIS IS YOUR LAST WARNING.

One more thing and I will ban you from Army.Ca for good.

Enough is enough

Slim
STAFF


----------



## Kat Stevens

May I suggest a 24-48 hour cooling off on this topic?  It's degenerated rapidly into a poo flinging bout in a monkey cage....

Kat


----------



## muskrat89

Agreed.

I'm going to go back and clean some of this up. MD, I'm going to delete your post because springroll's angst was directed at me, not slim.. if that makes sense  ???


----------



## Michael Dorosh

muskrat89 said:
			
		

> Agreed.
> 
> I'm going to go back and clean some of this up. MD, I'm going to delete your post because springroll's angst was directed at me, not slim.. if that makes sense   ???



No worries.  Springroll, I had some comments about your sewing machine but the thread was locked - I have a similar machine - PM me and I'll send you some info.


----------



## McG

Kat Stevens said:
			
		

> May I suggest a 24-48 hour cooling off on this topic?  It's degenerated rapidly into a poo flinging bout in a monkey cage....
> 
> Kat


It seems we need at least the 24 hrs for this one. Time out (again).


----------



## McG

Springroll said:
			
		

> I don't believe that they should be removed from the walls of the CWM.
> Art is a very personal thing, and what one person finds disturbing, another will find intriguing or will induce feelings or thoughts.


Should the CWM be hanging art that requires obscure emotional interpretation in order to decipher, or should CWM art be limited to items that clearly show visitors what it was like to have been present through periods of our nations military history?   Keep in mind, the CWM is an historical museum & not an art museum (which does exist in another building of the National Capitol Region).

As I see it, the murder in Somalia belongs in the museum.   Not because it was reflective of any unit or the military as a whole, but because of the impact it had on public perceptions and several major changes to the military over the following years.   But, I don't think the paintings show that, nor do they give viewers a feeling for what it was like to have been a part of that Somalia mission.


----------



## TCBF

"Art is not a mirror - Art is a hammer." 

Tom

I will now add the full quote:

"Art is not a mirror held up to reality, but a hammer with which to shape it."

Bertolt Brecht (1898-1956), German playwright.


----------



## Art Johnson

There is a political bent to the inclusion of these paintings in the CWM. Jack Granatstien mentioned it in one of his posts and I had read it in a Newsletter. The Friends of the Canadian War Museum provided the funds to purchase these paintings. The PCPs took over the direction of the Friends some years ago and intend to see that the CWM is run according to their PC view of things. They have attempted to change the name of the CWM before and they will keep at it until they get their way.

I will be resigning from the Friends and I do not intend to visit the new CWM nor will I be sending them anymore donations. It is my intention to concentrate my efforts on the museums of the two regiments that I served in.

Cheers

Art J.


----------



## sussex11

I have not said there was a political intent behind the hanging of the two Kearns paintings, because I do not believe there was one. The aim, I believe, was to show the stresses inherent in "peace" operations. And there is, in my view both as a member and as one who has worked with them, not the slightest evidence of a PC attitude among the Friends. Its leadership is as pro-military as can be--as are those who built and designed the exhibits in the new CWM.
  What is there in CWM is the recognition that politics is very much part of Canada's wars and peace support missions, but that is very different that making a "political" decision to hang a piece of art. Military art, incidentally, is not just about battles, as some appear to believe.


----------



## pronto

My Soul. I think the vast majority of the people on this thread do indeed believe that there was a political intent behind the hanging of the paintings. They, and I, believe that the intent was not to show stresses in "peace" operations. We believe that there are many other, and to us, less offensive, ways to show that. We feel that bureaucrats, revisionists, and the media (who prosecuted the affair to the point that the politicians became nervous) decided to rub our noses in it. 

This is such a lightning rod of an issue, isn't it? I find I get annoyed just thinking about it, so do please forgive me.

We all believe that the Museum of Civilisation and CWN knuckled under to pressures somewhere in the systems (albeit, and perhaps, not even apparent or overt to them) to reinforce a shameful decision by a previous "regime" in Ottawa. The Liberals got nervous when they took power, and punished an entire regiment for the actions of a few. Something which is, and was, inherently against the ethos of the military. The Conservatives were no better.

We all very much fear that the CWM does indeed recognise that politics is part of wars and peace missions, I guess we just fear that an institution purporting in part, to represent us, in a minor way, is too aware of politics, and is required to pay homage to political masters. 

You know, I also suspect that the vast majority of the thread-contributors are realists. We know politics rules (especially in Ottawa). Maybe it would help for someone to just up and acknowledge it. The ones in power, and the bureaucracy get to direct what happens in public institutions - it's a fact, and we really do "get" that.

Maybe we would just encourage and hope that the CWM recognise this by purchasing, hanging, commissioning, et cetera works of art for the other "political" decisions. I guess that we feel that the attention paid to this one incident is reminiscent of someone "rubbing our noses in it" and loudly declaiming "Bad, Airborne, naughty Airborne"...  We'd probably all go away happy if the CWM hung some other art to outline other issues, and just put these ones away for a while. 

Anyway, enough ramblings for today. I really do think the architecture of the building is wonderful, the exhibit space is well-done and thoughtful, and there is a potential for this to become one fine institution! I enjoyed the place with the the exception of the great, glaring, wart on what was an otherwise potentially beautiful face.

Pronto


----------



## sussex11

Pronto, feelings are one thing, facts another. I worked in the CWM system and I never saw a political hand affecting or trying to affect what the exhibits said. (What the exhibits might mean to you or me was, like the beauty of art, in the eye of the beholder.) Unless and until someone has hard evidence of political interference in the mounting of exhibits in the new museum, all this is, I regret to say, just blather.


----------



## sussex11

One  further thought re Pronto's conspiracy thesis: We have a govt that can't find its way to the washroom without help, that can't even think to vet a GG nominee. How is it that the pols and bureaucrats could get themselves together to decide on the exhibits in CWM and to trash the CAR?


----------



## pronto

Uhhh, yeah... That's why I used the terms "believe" and "feel" and "fear".   Of course it is blather... That's the point of a forum. Conspiracy theories notwithstanding..

 ;D


----------



## Art Johnson

QUOTE from sussex11
"I guess the question is if the VD statistic was true or not. It was. And it wasn't a plaque--merely a statistic in a list of stats. A museum is not supposed to be a place that only lists "nice" things or that simply presents kit, badges etc. It interprets. It shocks and jars and changes the way we think of events. However, I'd have preferred to say that the CEF had the highest rate of VD in WWI among the Dominions and UK troops, adding that it didn't seem to affect its efficiency"

(extract from a letter from the Friends of the Canadian War Museum dated 14 September 1999. Signed by Jerry Holtzhaur and Paul Manson
"It is vital that this knowledge and its historical legacy not be lost. The new Canadian War Museum will be a memorial and tribute to the 114,000 young men and women who died in the service of this country, and it will be a major educational and outrech centre - teaching present and future generations that the freedom and national character they cherish so much were not bought without great cost."
It goes on and asks you to contact your MP and write the Prime Minister. Gee and I thought that sussex11 and his friends were against contacting polititions. Oh and please tell me how quoting VD statisticts "will be a memorial and tribute to 114000 young men and women who died in the service of this country"?

QUOTE from sussex11
"I'm not sure what the last point is. No one supports mythical history and CWM doesn't show it. But I do believe that mention of executions in WW! would be useful; so too would something on WW2 conscripts. History happened--and museum directors/planners do no one any good by creating myths or not showing truths. Moreover, if I read the post right, the Minister (politician) intervened to correct the museum bureaucrat. Jeesh!
But the serious point is that there will be political interference in the CWM if it is allowed to happen. Everyone who wrote an MP to complain about Matchee-Brown paintings should realize what they're encouraging"
(extract from the same letter, final pararaph)

"Thank you for our continued support of this worthy project. We are at a crucial period in the developement of the new Canadian War Museum, and your voice (italics mine) is vital in ensuring that this important iniiative is not neglected or set aside. With your help we hope to build a facility that remembers and preserves Canada's important legacy of  military history, while also passing on its valuable messages and lessons to future generations."

My comments:
1- First we are encouraged to contact our MPs to build this edifice.

2 - Next we are told don't contact your MP just because you don't like something in the museum. Jeesh as sussex11 would say.

3 - The only person who is getting anything out of this is sussex11. "The inclusion of this institute in the new Canadian War Museum fulfills a dream of Jack Granatstein to establish the museum as the national centre for research into Canadian military history."


Art J.


----------



## Infanteer

I'm still trying to figure out what the hell the "North-West Resistance" is....


----------



## pronto

sussex11 said:
			
		

> One   further thought re Pronto's conspiracy thesis: We have a govt that can't find its way to the washroom without help, that can't even think to vet a GG nominee. How is it that the pols and bureaucrats could get themselves together to decide on the exhibits in CWM and to trash the CAR?


There is a theory out there that Bureaucracies act like organisms, and will mindlessly attack any differences/loud people/changes to maintain a status quo. Someone even did a PhD on this somewhere, if I recall. It just may be, Sussex11, that the government and bureaucrats for whom you state such contempt either act as a collective (god - the borg?) or they really are smart enough to manage a collective decision at the highest levels.

Personally, I have to interact with them daily. Most of them are pretty GD smart, and a few are frighteningly brilliant.

Of course, that's the fun with consipracy theories isn't it? We can't prove anything except by trend and statistic, and we all know what we think about statistics. I guess I would agree with you - the gov't and bureaucrats are just stupid, and perhaps the CWM acted on its own to decide to insult us, and refuse to budge 'cause the positions are entrenched...

See y'all next weekend!

Pronto


----------



## sussex11

Good research, Art Johnson. I'm not sure I got anything out of the CWM, except some personal satisfaction at the result. Contrary to what you might think, I and the FCWM are not in the same pocket. I don't vet Jerry Holtzhauer's letters and he doesn't clear mine. There's no doubt CWM used the political process to urge a new museum; that is hardly interference in the direct operations of those who do the exhibits. Complaining to MPs about specific content, however, opens the door to egregious political interference. Seems to me that is a different matter entirely--and let me assure you, you will not like the results if this occurs.
    As I've said before, CWM changes exhibits on a regular basis. Wait 6 mths and you will have something else to be unhappy about.


----------



## sussex11

Reply to Pronto's last: I don't think bureaucrats are stupid. I do think this govt is very badly organized and all but incapable of getting its act together on anything, major or minor. I wish you joy in working within the belly of the beast!


----------



## Pvt. Moloney

I just went to the War Museum in Ottawa yesterday while visiting my uncle who lives in ottawa and i have to say its one of the best Canadian war museums ive ever been too it took us about 3 and a half hours to look thgough it and there was still a few things we didnt see so if anyones going through ottawa any time soon i recomennd seeing the Canadian War Museum there, And the greastest part of it is its not just past it has our present military there aswell.

EDIT - If anyone has been there can u tell me what u thought of it


----------



## jmacleod

On any given day, the Government of Canada has little or no interest in the operation of the
Canadian War Museum or the Canadian Museum of Civilization - both are in place essentially to
serve the public, but the consequences of the display of the Brown and Matchee portraits has
changed that. The various organizations who have complained about the portraits and Korean
War history, etc., have submitted formal complaints to Federal Cabinet Ministers. One such is
the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs who is compelled to deal with incensed Aboriginal and Metis
leaders who consider the portraits racist and demeaning - this at a time when Minister Scott is
in delicate negotiations with the leaders, and does not need to be reminded of the arrogant
response of the all white, insensitive comments by Federal employees who are employed by CWM
to serve the interests of the public. The Ministers of Justice and Canadian Heritage are involved
and the Canadian Human Rights Commission are monitoring press reports and corrrespondence.
The Minister of Justice is a well known human rights activist, who once represented Nelson Mandela.
There is no logical or pertinent reason why the Brown and Matchee portraits should be displayed
-this is also agreed by the Sun Group of Newspapers, who have and are focused on the controversy.
The weekend edition of the National Post printed a column by an obscure journalist who states that
the entire Canadian military are responsible for a sad and regrettable, but isolated incident in Somalia
which should have been dealt with exclusively in the military justice system - a spin, but for what 
reason? A situation which had no political implications, certainly has them now MacLeod


----------



## sjm

Finally got to see the place.  Had to go before the gunners' display was pulled.  Overall the museum itself is quite nice.  Big, spacious and quite spartan in the contents.

I, like many on this thread went with kids in tow and will have to revisit to actually see any of the artifacts on display.

The artillery display is utter crap or more appropriately "scrap".  It looks like some of the old heaps from the fields of Shilo was flatbedded there and dumped in no particular order.  Very little info on the equipment and guards everywhere keeping the kids off.  Tetanus shots are cheap, let the kids play I say.

Now to the artwork in question.  Kyle Brown looks quite Asian, not native.  And Clayton Matchee's complexion was much paler than I ever remember.  Very strange since he was in a desert.

I looked real hard and couldn't find any references to either being "Natives".  As far as the artwork goes it wasn't bad, somewhat more interesting that a dress made of beef.

If natives should be upset by anything at the CWM it should be by the lack of anything on Tommy Prince.

Not a bad visit, but like I wrote earlier, I will be going again.  Afterall parking and admission are free.


----------



## George Wallace

How to make friends and......hang a couple of paintings and let the CF become even more divisive...


----------



## Infanteer

Okay, back on target.  Anymore posts about disbanding the Airborne, and I'll simply delete them.  Take it to the PM's if you want.


----------



## Ubique RCA

I don't think it really matters what is up on the wall. What matters is that it is history and we as a nation and an army have learnt from it. The point of the museum is to convey what war is like. So that we don't forget what people from the begin till now have done, so that we can be where we are today. Wether it was something that was condemned or awarded for.


----------



## geo

given the large number of individuals who have suffered PTSD throughout all campaigns; shouldn't the CWM cover it in some way or shape? I have a number of comrades who have served with distinction but have been forced out due to PTSD issues.... should they be ignored?


----------



## Armymedic

http://torontosun.canoe.ca/News/Columnists/Worthington_Peter/2005/09/04/pf-1201360.html

Museum flaunts brutality 
By PETER WORTHINGTON

Last week the National Post ran an article that seemed a rebuke at the Sun and respected native leader, Claude Petit, who felt torture paintings displayed at the new Canadian War Museum were a slight against soldiers of aboriginal blood. 

The article's author, curiously, was Len Kruzenga, editor of two aboriginal monthlies, First Perspectives and The Drum, both based in Winnipeg. 

As I wrote recently, The National Aboriginal Veterans Associaton (NAVA) and Congress of Aboriginal Peoples(CAP) want the paintings of two Metis soldiers -- Clayton Matchee and Kyle Brown -- removed from the museum because they imply aboriginal soldiers indulge in torture. 

Matchee tortured to death a young Somali thief during a 1993 peacekeeping mission and irreparably damaged his brain when he tried to kill himself. As a result, he was unfit to stand trial, but Brown got five years for his role in the same incident. 

Kruzenga's article argued the paintings do not reflect badly on aboriginal soldiers as "both men were, first and foremost, Canadian soldiers who dishonoured the reputation of the nation they served, the uniforms they wore and their brothers-in-arms." 

As justification for purchasing and displaying the Brown portrait and the painting (copied from a photo Brown took of Matchee choking the Somali with a baton) the article says, "History must be true." 

Kruzenga's view is an echo of museum director Joe Geurts' comment that the paintings could be of anyone. But they aren't "anyone." They are aboriginals -- and the museum's only example of Canadian soldiers doing disgraceful acts going back to the Boer war, WWI, WWII and Korea. 

That upsets veterans, as well as Petit, president of NAVA, a Korean veteran and holder of the Order of Canada. 

Kruzenga was never available when I phoned him this week. Petit, who knows just about everyone of consequence in aboriginal circles, says he doesn't know him or the publications he edits. He notes that Kruzenga referred in his piece to Matchee as a "corporal" when he was a master corporal -- a mistake no former soldier would be likely to make. 

Petit (who is a friend of mine, going back to Korea) says he's even received e-mails from Australia supporting his objections to the paintings, as well as support from most aboriginal groups. "If (Kruzenga) is going to knock what I say, you'd think he'd at least call me," he complains. 

Anyone who has served in the army has respect for our Indian soldiers. Personally, I believe when the heat dies down, the museum will quietly take down these paintings. 

In the meantime, it should consider setting up a native-Canadian corner in the museum based around Tommy Prince's WWII medals, where others of aborignal blood can also be honoured. 

For instance, there is Francis "Peggy" Pegahmagabow, with three Military Medals for valour, some 378 sniper kills and 300 German soldiers taken prisoner in WWI; and Alberta rodeo rider turned sniper Henry Norwest, who won two MMs and knocked off 115 Germans. From the Six Nations Cayuga band, brothers Alex and Charles Smith each won the Military Cross. 

Some 12,000 aboriginals have worn their country's uniform and served in all Canada's wars. The museum made a mistake (one of several) in spending $10,000 on these paintings, which have nothing to do with "truth" but reflect poorly on every soldier, and imply that aboriginals are prone to torture. 

If this isn't the intent, get rid of the damn things.


----------



## verstappen

Ubique and Geo both state two points that are repeatedly sidelined by quoting articles about how the paintings depict native americans in hate crimes. Most people, that go to the museum do not even know, nor care of their aboriginal heritage, and nor do most have any idea the two had ties to hate groups.

I am of course going to say something that has been repeatedly posted and ignored:

They are works of conscience, and the museum has an interest in showing the human effects of war on those involved, be they military or civilian.

Perhaps if we ignore these acts, we may one day find ourselves repeating them.


----------



## verstappen

On the same note, I have met with Mrs. Gertrude Kearns after having heard she would be attending a certain gallery showing some of her works. She stresses the fact the paintings have nothing to do with the aboriginal heritage of those depicted.

------------------------------------
He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you. 
Friedrich Nietzsche, Beyond Good and Evil, Aphorism 146


----------



## Art Johnson

Verstapen, you really have no clue as to what you are talking about. Go back through the newspapers of the time and you will find that these two Canadian Soldiers were considered to be racists because they had names that would normally be considered as being of the WHITE RACE. The CAR did a fantastic job in Somalia, why don't we hear about that? Why indeed, because as Jack Granasteins says, we need to be shocked and have things interpereted for us.   He and his coterie don't think we are bright enough to figure things out for ourselves. Why does he not give us his version of the true story of Rawanda and the General who ran from a fight if he wants to shock us.

Youmay or may not appreciate this blog;

http://cdrsalamander.blogspot.com/2005/05/shame-of-elite-canadian-self-hate.html


----------



## Gunner

http://www.peterwarren.ca/editorials/webpages/sept262005.htm



> Editorial of the week - Sept 26, 2005
> The new Canadian War Museum in Ottawa is still stuck in the middle of a controversy about that large picture of a Canadian soldier torturing to death a young Somali thief ...and the battle of words concerning another display about the claim 41 per cent of the men who served during the Korean conflict contracted venereal disease.
> 
> Some veterans say these displays taint the fine service provided by the Canadian armed forces in various and sundry wars, including Somalia and Korea. The museum is being generally accused of insensitivity - in fact, retired Col. Chip Bowness feels the display of the torture painting implies "Canada sends soldiers overseas to murder unarmed black people."
> 
> Sorry to have to disagree - the museum, hopefully, is not there to glorify war. It is there to tell a story.
> 
> In these two cases, the stories are repulsive...but they should not be glossed over.
> 
> War is hell. We should not try to tell it any differently.
> 
> 
> This is Warren. And that is One Man's Opinion.


----------



## Glorified Ape

Who really cares if they're native or not? Does that change what they did? All of a sudden we're supposed to gloss over regrettable events in history because to remember them would be to remember a minority group doing something bad? Please. In my opinion, the war museum should depict as much of Canadian military/war history as it possibly can, both negative and positive. 

Cherry-picking the sweet stuff doesn't do anything but put us on par with the propagandists that exclude unpleasant parts of their national history from textbooks. Excluding events because they were committed by Natives and might lead, in some strange alternate dimension, to someone with an IQ of 20 concluding that ALL natives must do that type of thing is ridiculous. Maybe we should exclude the atrocious treatment of native peoples from our textbooks, museums, and historical publications because it "makes white people look bad". Absolutely idiotic, I swear. I don't know what people are thinking sometimes.


----------



## geo

.... which is what the Japanese have done... wrote their own history that skips over the unpleasant parts....
WW2.... who me?
Rape of Nanking.... who me?


----------



## TCBF

"given the large number of individuals who have suffered PTSD throughout all campaigns; shouldn't the CWM cover it in some way or shape? I have a number of comrades who have served with distinction but have been forced out due to PTSD issues.... should they be ignored?"

 _ I suppose we could have a PTSD display, an OSI display, a traumatic amputation display, a sucking chest wound display.. 

- It's a War Museum.  lets focus on the big picture.

Tom


----------



## Glorified Ape

geo said:
			
		

> .... which is what the Japanese have done... wrote their own history that skips over the unpleasant parts....
> WW2.... who me?
> Rape of Nanking.... who me?



I believe the textbooks in question, when it came time to buy them, were shunned by the overwhelming majority (nearly all) of Japanese school boards.


----------



## TangoTwoBravo

Finally went to the museum last night and I was very impressed.  I urge people to go if they have not done so already.

I took my sons along with me (six and seven years old) along with my dad and we ended up going through twice.  The exhibits are "immersive" in that several try to place you in the event (the trench, the mud of Passchendaele, the house in Ortona, the landing craft, the deck of the ship, etc). 

I did not detect an agenda.  

My seven year old son watched the short slide show at the end which contained rather graphic images of Rwanda, Bosnia, Sep 11 and other places/events.  He was very thoughtful and as we started to go through the museum for our second go-around he asked:  "Is that why you might have to go back to Ganistan after Christmas?"

Cheers,

2B


----------



## geo

2B
Nice

Chimo!


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse

2B,
You will find most who suggest that the museum has an "agenda" havn't actually been there.


----------



## BruceinAlberta

I have to head to Ottawa for business this week (nothing like the week before Christmas).  Would you recommend the War Museum there?


----------



## GregC

Absolutely....I went there with my platoon a month back during week 3 of basic training, and it was an amazing place. The only advice I can give is to set aside most of a day for the museum, there is ALOT to do and see, we were there for around 5 or 6 hours, and I felt like I needed an additional 5 or 6 hours in order to truly take it all in.

After going through the museum I feel like it's something everyone should see if they are in the Ottawa area, and despite some of the controversy in the museum many members here have commented on, I feel it's a very positive place that puts the CF in a good light overall.


----------



## George Wallace

Yes....and if you wish....there are a few in Ottawa that could host/guide on a Tour of the CWM.....You'll require a minimum of three hours to tour it at a quick pace.


----------



## geo

war museum is a good place to spend a day

air museum would be the place to fill in the following day


----------



## the 48th regulator

If you have the time, a very good thread to peruse is the War Museum Controversy.


dileas

tess


----------



## BruceinAlberta

I'm catching an early flight to Ottawa and closing a transaction early.  I'm flying back by early evening so I won't have a chance to get to the museum this time.  My wife let me know in no uncertain terms that I was not to spend extra time in Ottawa this close to Christmas since her family is coming in Thursday night from Hamilton for the holiday.  It looks like I'll take you up on the tour next trip.  Thanks for the offer, and I will take you up on it.


----------



## geo

whups... sorry dear - meeting ran late and I missed my flight.
Will catch one in the morning  (JK)

then there is the other option:
Don't call, just go and face the music when you get home.... "why get into two arguments when you can get away with just one"


----------



## cdnsignaller

Most definately,

you gotta check out Rommel's shot up staff car.


----------



## Bartok5

I visited in October, and despite the ongoing controversy over the Matchee and Brown "portraits", I found it to be a worthwhile expenditure of my limited time.  The museum is quite evidently "pitched" at the average "know-nothing" (and quite likely deluded) Canadian citizen.  As such, a serving or retired military member may find the displays to be somewhat superficial, dumbed-down, and politically-correct - with a definite bent in the modern galleries towards the now-defunct notion of "peacekeeping".  Such is the nature of the beast, and if you pause to consider/acknowledge the much larger audience that the museum is pitched at?  I expect that you will agree it is a terrific venue/attraction.  Depending on your military experience and historical knowledge, you may find the written material in the contemporary gallieries to be "suspect".  That is a minor detraction from the power of the visual displays, which are universally excellent and quite proportionately representative of our entire military history.  

I had many personal "quibbles" with what was physically portrayed or how it was described.  But at the end of the day?  I found that the overall experience was very positive and well worth my time.  Quite frankly, the structure itself is perhaps the most impressive feature of the new installation.  You need a guided tour to fully appreciate the design genius - from the concrete castings based on the walls of the U-Boat pens, to the slit in the Hall of Remembrance that casts a ray of sunshine on the grave-marker of the Unknown Soldiers at 1100 hrs, 11 Nov every year - but at no time otherwise.   The building itself is truly remarkable, and fitting tribute in and of itself.  

By all means, take the time to visit.  Give yourself a minimum of five hours to do it reasonable justice.  Well worth your time.


----------



## civvy3840

I was there in July and found it excellent. Tons of information. The only thing I didn't like was a painting of a member of the airborne tourturing a Somalian. There is absolutley no need to put that up there.

But other than that it is great I hope you enjoy yourself!


----------



## geo

so... they are showing the good..... and the bad.

and that's not too bad - IMHO


----------



## Nieghorn

Made my third visit last weekend - gotta love half price Sundays and free Thursday nights.   I still need one more visit to finish reading and to go alone this time so I can do what I need to do without my non-history-nerd friends along.  I like the new building, the combined content, and even try and get down for the free movies and lectures.

On this last trip, I started to remember the things I missed in the old museum:
- the display on the Canadian POWs held by Japanese
- the display showing the crossroads in Italy (I think that's where it was, had a motorcycle)
- the French Resistance display (okay, not Can military, but it was interesting)
- the German border guard who screams 'Halt' when you go by . . . (unless I missed it, I start to suffer from sensory over-load by the time the Cold War comes around)
- and I wish the planes were down at ground level so you can get a better view - the Spitfire at least!
 . . . and the old Hall of Honour with the VC winners.  That was my favourite in the old museum.  The new Hall of Honour is good, but I liked the personal stories and uniforms in the old one.

That said, I like the variety of content in the new one, more educational, even cultural content to show what life was like during the times displayed.  Also like seeing a little more info on the Boer War, and the cool display of the fallen soldier.  Having more weapons and armour is great as well . . . though I've been in the weapons vault when the vehicles were stored in the old parking garage down by Chinatown.  It was fantastic!  The curator, upon learning I had an interest in weapons, began showing me all the rare and interesting guns they had.  Even got to hold an MG42 and an MP44.  Access to that again would be brilliant!


ps . . . I think the staff car was Hitler's (one of many, I assume), and am sure the window was broken in transport, not actually shot.


----------



## Conquistador

I visited the museum 2 years ago, it was absolutley fantastic. We were there for 3 and 1/2 hours, and had to head back home before we got past the Korean war history, I would really like to go there again someday.


----------



## Zartan

My family's visit was similar - we had to rush through the cold war to leave (we had places to be, etc.). Didn't stop us from the gift shop though - which is somewhat overpriced, so be wary of your purchases. Books are good, they respect the suggested retail, but the miniatures can be had for much less in the market south of the American Embassy. That aside, the museum is amazing and wonderful. I second the cultural parts of the museum, it makes a great effort to show things at home, and the effects on soldiers, and to a smaller extent the soldier culture (for example, find the helmet that says "f*** peace" for a laugh). It is also very emotionally powerful. The displays on the battle of Beaumont-Hamel and and Thomas Ricketts were particularly moving for my mom and I. An excellent experience.


----------



## Dog

Conquistador said:
			
		

> I visited the museum 2 years ago, it was absolutley fantastic. We were there for 3 and 1/2 hours, and had to head back home before we got past the Korean war history, I would really like to go there again someday.



Funny, the Canadian War Museum only opened in June of this year.....

If you are speaking in such glowing terms about the old war museum in Ottawa, then you have to go to the new one. The old one looks like some guys garage compared to this one.


----------



## geo

Dog,
Regardless of what the Old War Museum looked like, it was a great place to visit... too many things to display in too small a place was their only problem. The curators then (and now) continue to do a wonderful job...
Am just very happy that they have been given better resources to present our history (warts and all).


----------



## geo

well.......
Finaly got around to visiting the new Cdn War Museum... 
All in all, I think they did a bang up job of assembling the material and presenting it in a coherent manner.... Had my 13 yr old in tow and he was fascinated, captivated and drinking up the knowledge.

Came across Pte Brown's painting...... how could I miss it?  While I do not begrudge the Museum displaying the painting, I would rather have had it as part of an area that could be dubbed our "wall of shame"......

All in all,  I LIKE IT!

Chimo!


----------



## Infanteer

Yes, I've been their on multiple occasions and it seems this thread was for naught - I think the place does a great job of telling our story.  I will be interested in seeing them update the fourth section with a Yugo section.


----------



## geo

... and let us not forget an Afghanistan section


----------



## Bartok5

Geo,

An "Afghanistan Exposition" is forthcoming.  The current Afghanistan "display" is limted to a C3 sniper rifle in a plexi case, with a brief mention of the world record shot during Op APOLLO.  My unit is in the process of turning in the actual MacMillan Tac 50 that made the shot to DLR, who will then hand it over to the Canadian War Museum as the centerpiece of the exposition.  We will also be providing the modified Brit Desert DPM smock worn by the sniper who made "the shot".  The rifle is shot out, and will be condemned/dewatted by DLR prior to the hand-over.

According to my DWAN e-mail traffic, the Afghanistan display will run from Dec 06 to Sep 07.

FWIW,


----------



## geo

Excellent!
Thks much Mark

CHIMO!


----------



## George Wallace

Mark C said:
			
		

> .......  My unit is in the process of turning in the actual MacMillan Tac 50 that made the shot to DLR, who will then hand it over to the Canadian War Museum as the centerpiece of the exposition.  We will also be providing the modified Brit Desert DPM smock worn by the sniper who made "the shot".  The rifle is shot out, and will be condemned/dewatted by DLR prior to the hand-over...



It is really a shame that the MP's, and also the Gun Plumbers, are following their own Regulations, and not those published by DHH (from a Higher Level), when it comes to preservation of Historic Weapons Artifacts.  They insist in destroying both the historic and monetary value of the piece, making it basically nothing more than worthless junk iron.


----------



## geo

Geworge, I hear ya.  To have a working weapon in hand is something that is ............ Priceless - regardless of never firing it.


----------



## Bartok5

George,

Although I wholeheartedly agree with your aversion to the "deactivation" of historical weapons, I think that you may be missing the point in this particular case.  The firearm in question is big-time BLR.  It is shot out.  None of the component parts are salvageable.  In fact, it has been  suggested that to fire the rifle further would be to invite an eventual catastropic structural failure.  It is simply not user-safe.  In such cases, it is actually prudent to render the firearm inactive.

Just a thought from the peanut gallery.....


----------



## Slim

Mark C said:
			
		

> George,
> 
> Although I wholeheartedly agree with your aversion to the "deactivation" of historical weapons, I think that you may be missing the point in this particular case.  The firearm in question is big-time BLR.  It is shot out.  None of the component parts are salvageable.  In fact, it has been  suggested that to fire the rifle further would be to invite an eventual catastropic structural failure.  It is simply not user-safe.  In such cases, it is actually prudent to render the firearm inactive.
> 
> Just a thought from the peanut gallery.....



I think what matters case is that the CF is willing to turn the thing over to be preserved...and not destroyed. The fact that it no longer works is of little consequence to my mind, especially if its now been pronounced unsafe to fire. Now when people walk through the CWM they can actually see the rifle that made that incredible shot!   Kind of like another Lord Nelson's coat in a way...

More peanut gallery squeaking ;D

Slim


----------



## exercist

The Americans have indeed neglected to feature My Lai in their museums and in their recollections of Vietnam. The result of this neglect may arguably include Guantanamo Bay, Abu Graib, and other recent violations of the Law of Armed Conflict. And the result of that has arguably been a decline in global US influence and credibility. 

On the War Museum, I was interested to see that there was a small display recognizing the Canadians who - for whatever reasons - volunteered to join the US armed forces during Vietnam. There was not however any recognition of the Canadians who served with the MacKenzie-Papineau Battalion in the International Brigade during the Spanish Civil War. (Ironically, Canada did end up fighting Fascism in Europe a few years later....)


----------



## warrickdll

exercist said:
			
		

> ...
> On the War Museum, I was interested to see that there was a small display recognizing the Canadians who - for whatever reasons - volunteered to join the US armed forces during Vietnam. There was not however any recognition of the Canadians who served with the MacKenzie-Papineau Battalion in the International Brigade during the Spanish Civil War. (Ironically, Canada did end up fighting Fascism in Europe a few years later....)



Good point (about non-Canadian History, not about your apparent anti-Americanism), it shouldn't have either. Just because a person serving in a foreign military happens to be Canadian doesn't make the event a part of Canadian military history. Though Canadians who served in British forces, prior to Canadian Citizenship (in the late 1940s), are rightfully a part of Canadian military history.

_Edit: Apparent_


----------



## exercist

I am sorry that is appears anti-American either to wonder why Canadians would volunteer to fight in a foreign war, or to highlight some recent problems - which most US service personnel I have spoken with also find deeply repugnant.  Michael Ignatieff and I both know that there is some risk in using the term "war crime" in the same breath as an ally; however, just as "friends don't let friends drive drunk", I would argue that "friends don't let friends violate the Laws of Armed Conflict".

Or are you criticizing my comments on US credibility and influence? Do you really think the US has as much of either as it did even in the immediate days after 9/11, when the entire world (including N Korea) was expressing support? And if not, why not? Cowboy tactics? Human rights violations? Kleptocracy? Illegal wars? Electoral fraud? Strategic and operational myopia? 

Americans are my friends; America is our ally. I weep for them.


----------



## the 48th regulator

exercist said:
			
		

> I am sorry that is appears anti-American either to wonder why Canadians would volunteer to fight in a foreign war, or to highlight some recent problems - which most US service personnel I have spoken with also find deeply repugnant.  Michael Ignatieff and I both know that there is some risk in using the term "war crime" in the same breath as an ally; however, just as "friends don't let friends drive drunk", I would argue that "friends don't let friends violate the Laws of Armed Conflict".
> 
> Or are you criticizing my comments on US credibility and influence? Do you really think the US has as much of either as it did even in the immediate days after 9/11, when the entire world (including N Korea) was expressing support? And if not, why not? Cowboy tactics? Human rights violations? Kleptocracy? Illegal wars? Electoral fraud? Strategic and operational myopia?
> 
> Americans are my friends; America is our ally. I weep for them.



Like we did the two major time earlier this century, we are a global community.  And maybe by us volunteering to fight "foreign" wars, we can stop "repugnant" regimes from committing atrocities.

I just plain weep for people who do not understand.

dileas

tess


----------



## warrickdll

exercist said:
			
		

> The Americans have indeed neglected to feature My Lai in their museums and in their recollections of Vietnam. The result of this neglect may arguably include Guantanamo Bay, Abu Graib, and other recent violations of the Law of Armed Conflict. And the result of that has arguably been a decline in global US influence and credibility.





			
				exercist said:
			
		

> I am sorry that is appears anti-American either to wonder why Canadians would volunteer to fight in a foreign war, or to highlight some recent problems - which most US service personnel I have spoken with also find deeply repugnant.  Michael Ignatieff and I both know that there is some risk in using the term "war crime" in the same breath as an ally; however, just as "friends don't let friends drive drunk", I would argue that "friends don't let friends violate the Laws of Armed Conflict".
> 
> Or are you criticizing my comments on US credibility and influence? Do you really think the US has as much of either as it did even in the immediate days after 9/11, when the entire world (including N Korea) was expressing support? And if not, why not? Cowboy tactics? Human rights violations? Kleptocracy? Illegal wars? Electoral fraud? Strategic and operational myopia?
> 
> Americans are my friends; America is our ally. I weep for them.




I will stick to saying that you appear to have an anti-American bias, but I'd like to stick with the topic we're in.



			
				exercist said:
			
		

> ...to wonder why Canadians would volunteer to fight in a foreign war...



The point being, as an example, a Canadian who joined the US army and fought in Vietnam is an American War veteran who happens to be a Canadian - not a Canadian War veteran. This makes a difference in what is and isn't Canadian Military history. This same principle would apply to your Spanish veterans.


----------



## exercist

48 Highrs - Please re-read my post carefully. If you are talking about the two times I think you are talking about, Canada went to war. Canadians, also and by exception, fought with allied units and formations, with the authority of the Canadian government. That is not fighting in a foreign war; that is fighting in a Canadian war. 

Joining the US Armed Forces in order to fight in Vietnam is fighting in a foreign war. Isn't it? 

Perhaps I would be a little less cynical if our allies were a little less idiosyncratic about which repugnant regimes they support and which ones they attack.


----------



## GAP

Iterator said:
			
		

> The point being, as an example, a Canadian who joined the US army and fought in Vietnam is an American War veteran who happens to be a Canadian - not a Canadian War veteran.



Being one... +1


----------



## GAP

exercist said:
			
		

> 48 Highrs - Please re-read my post carefully. If you are talking about the two times I think you are talking about, Canada went to war. Canadians, also and by exception, fought with allied units and formations, with the authority of the Canadian government. That is not fighting in a foreign war; that is fighting in a Canadian war.
> 
> Joining the US Armed Forces in order to fight in Vietnam is fighting in a foreign war. Isn't it?
> 
> Perhaps I would be a little less cynical if our allies were a little less idiosyncratic about which repugnant regimes they support and which ones they attack.



I don't know how you arriving at your conclusions.....but all Canadian Viet Nam Vets all fought for a foreign armed force. Viet Nam never was a Canadian Conflict, even though 30,000 Canadian served in foreign forces that fought over there. The only time the CF was represented in Viet Nam was as UN members at the end of the conflict.

You lack of profile lends you NO credibility, so if you do not know what you are talking about....stay in your lane.


----------



## exercist

A couple of points:

First, my initial post simply noted an anomaly in the War Museum's policy on "Canadians in foreign wars" - one got in, the other didn't. Any comment?

Second, any remarks about My Lai do not reflect on the overwhelming majority of US service personnel who have fought honourably in Vietnam and in other conflicts before and since. My remarks about Abu Graib, Guantanamo and repugnant regimes stand. 

Finally, I am perfectly comfortable in this lane, thank you.


----------



## geo

The anomaly of not recognizing one's nasty little secrets is not exclusive to the US.

Japan still does not recognize what it did in WW2 as being wrong & doesn't really understand why someone would drop an A Bomb on them.... 

Russia / Soviet Union never really acknowledged wrong in the invasion of Poland in the early days of WW2, the occupation of Czeckoslovakia, Hungary, etc, etc, etc..... 

So to point to the US and saying "bad dog" without doing so to the others is based on biased values IMHO

I should also point out that the US is more or less the only world super power left standing.  Whenever the feces hits the fan, we all turn to them & ask, what are you going to do about this mess?... is it OK to roundly criticize them immediately after they have acted upon "our" requests?


----------



## exercist

Please review the previous posts. The issue was raised in the context of whether Canada should place its dirty little secrets in museums or quietly forget about them. My Lai was mentioned - and nobody ever claimed that the US was alone in having blots on its historical escutcheon. Let us indeed take a moment to condemn the evil, whether institutionalized or otherwise, that led to Auschwitz, the Katyn Forest, the Burma Railway, My Lai and Belet Huen. 

I do however not recall Canada asking the US to invade Iraq, or indeed endorsing the claims about weapons of mass destruction that have, I think, been generally demonstrated to have been false. As the annual number of dead Iraqis (estimated conservatively) begins to exceed the number killed by Saddam Hussein (estimated liberally), I think it is fair to question an illegal war, prosecuted badly. 

Finally, that the US is the "only superpower left standing" does not exonerate anything. The image of a benign global policeman doing the right thing for the world despite continued vilification wears a bit thin. If the town policeman was the best-paid guy in town, owned much of the local business, applied the law with favoritism, and at the end of the day argued that he was above the law, the town might well wonder. Policing, like soldiering, requires an abandonment of self-interest. 

The United States has been, and has an amazing ability to be a force of good in the world, as a result of its many positive attributes. Does anyone see that happening right now?


----------



## Danjanou

exercist said:
			
		

> Please review the previous posts. The issue was raised in the context of whether Canada should place its dirty little secrets in museums or quietly forget about them. My Lai was mentioned - and nobody ever claimed that the US was alone in having blots on its historical escutcheon. Let us indeed take a moment to condemn the evil, whether institutionalized or otherwise, that led to Auschwitz, the Katyn Forest, the Burma Railway, My Lai and Belet Huen.



Excuse me did you just compare  Belet Huen to Auschwitz, the Katyn Forest and the  Burma Railway?  

Man that’s a stretch even for the "Troops Out" Birkenstock brigade regulars that occasional infest this place with their post and run trolling, care to elaborate. On second thought don't bother I've reached my quota of self righteous drivel for the day.  :


----------



## muskrat89

> The United States has been, and has an amazing ability to be a force of good in the world, as a result of its many positive attributes. Does anyone see that happening right now?




www.usaid.gov

Some of these folks might be grateful...


----------



## warrickdll

exercist said:
			
		

> Please review the previous posts. The issue was raised in the context of whether Canada should place its dirty little secrets in museums or quietly forget about them....




Well, I'm not a Topic Wrangler, so sticking with that then: 

The Somalia Incident had only a limited impact on Canada and Canadians. Even the course of Canada's efforts in Somalia probably wasn't affected. There is little to learn from the incident that we didn't already know. Its comparison to other Canadian military events is insignificant. The Somalia Incident is a form of Tabloid History: there are some shocking photos and a political dust-up about documents - that's all.

The scale and connectedness of the atrocity should dictate how it is displayed. Knowing about the Somalia Incident, or not, will not change anything about Canada, and very little in the CF (in the CF you would probably see an effort made to not recreate similar conditions).


There was the other issue you brought up:


			
				exercist said:
			
		

> ...On the War Museum, I was interested to see that there was a small display recognizing the Canadians who - for whatever reasons - volunteered to join the US armed forces during Vietnam. There was not however any recognition of the Canadians who served with the MacKenzie-Papineau Battalion in the International Brigade during the Spanish Civil War. ...



My opinion, as mentioned before, Canadians joining the US army and serving in Vietnam are a part of American military history. Canadians joining Stalin's Communist Spanish Republican forces serving in Spain are a part of the USSR's Spanish military history.


----------



## a_majoor

exercist said:
			
		

> The United States has been, and has an amazing ability to be a force of good in the world, as a result of its many positive attributes. Does anyone see that happening right now?



*Yes.*, no qualifiers needed.


----------



## exercist

Each of the incidents referred to above differs in scale and character. I did not compare them, I merely included them in the same sentence. (Each would meet the criteria of the Rome Treaty regarding war crimes/crimes against humanity - they have that much in common.) 

Given the fallout of Belet Huen, it is hard to argue that it was not a historically significant event. Whether or not one agrees with the actions taken by the government (and I do not), it perhaps merits objective mention in any museum chronicalling our recent military history. We use the term "strategic corporal" - Clayton Matchee et al would seem to fit the bill, albeit in a rather negative way. I go back to the argument that a museum may interpret history from more than one perspective, and our War Museum should be able to include the good and the bad.

On which, the tragedy of Belet Huen (apart from the loss of life etc.) was that it distracted atention from a relatively successful UN mandate (measuring effects against objectives), as well as a good example of inter-service cooperation or "jointness" in a period when our doctrine was not strong on that sort of thing. The success of this should undoubtedly be recorded. 

And my feet are in boots, not Birkenstocks.


----------



## PetawawaMama

Chop said:
			
		

> What is hapenning is an outrage, there are 2 paintings depicting Clayton Matchee and Kyle Brown beating and torturing and killing that Somalian that will be in the new museum of Cliff Chadderton is livid. He is well known in the veteran community as well as head of War Amps Canada.
> 
> http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2005/05/03/war-musuem050503.html
> 
> This is just an awful shame, Joe Geurts and Gertrude Kears should be ashamed. for even thinking of putting such a painting in the museum, I will never step foot in that building ever in my life, some 10,000 Canadian Airborne Regiment men have been put to shame because of the disbandment because of the action of two men, it was all political due the fact they had to shrink the budget at the time, but it looks like the shame will continue.




Chop you should not feel that way...I just recently visited that museum with my family and of course this was one of the last things we saw during our visit.  I didn't see it as shaming the Airbourne Regiment .   My actual first thought was " Damn, I have forgotten about that "  I guess my point is....I never forget the Airbourne, as so many of you still wear your t-shirts, and sweatshirts with pride, and so you should.  Who I forgot was Clayton Matchee and Kyle Browne and their cowardliness. 

Not going to to war museum is a personal choice...One of which I hope you someday will change...Especially if you have children.  I think it would bea shame for them to miss out on such history as well as you.

PetawawaMama


----------



## The Bread Guy

It'll be interesting to see what art comes out of this proposed study of another facet of war (edited to clarify subject line that she doesn't appear to be painting the wounded themselves).

 Shared in accordance with the "fair dealing" provisions, Section 29, of the Copyright Act.

*A brush with war's horror*
EARL McRAE, Ottawa Sun, 15 Feb 07
Article Link - [http://www.karenbailey.ca/|Karen Bailey's web page, including some of her work]

Three floors up the creaky, wide, wooden staircase of the old and long-closed school, the wintry northern light flooding through her studio windows, the artist works surrounded by her paintings, waiting every day for the news that part of her hopes she won't hear.

"I know it does sound macabre," she says about waiting for the significant incident -- as they metaphorically put it to her -- but she knows, too, it's a possible reality, and as an artist it speaks to her soul, as an artist it's what she would want to do, so she watches the TV, and she listens to the radio, and she reads the papers, she awaits the news.

"They told me to keep my bags packed," she says, pouring a cup of coffee. "I have clearance to fly out right away. They're paying all my expenses."

Ottawa's Karen Bailey.

At 46, one of this country's finest painters, and soon to join -- if the news comes -- the honourable list of those who, down through the past century, preceded her when Canada answered the highest call. Karen Bailey, War Painter. Karen Bailey who, at 46, has never been with soldiers in combat, has never seen a soldier wounded, a soldier maimed, a soldier dying. Nor painted any. Karen Bailey who is ready to go at any time.

But it won't be to Afghanistan, it won't be to the Canadian theatre of war.

*The military would not provide the liability insurance for a civilian painter. It will be, should it happen, to where the wounded, the maimed, the brave Canadian soldiers are taken, to where they either survive or die, to where Canadian doctors and nurses await them. It will be to the giant American military hospital at Landstuhl, Germany.*
*
"I'll be there at least a week. I'll take photographs and make sketches, not only focusing on the soldiers, but the doctors and nurses, the medical personnel. I'm also interested in the behind-the-scenes people, the caterers, those who provide and prepare the food. They're important, too. People have to eat.*

"This is not like where you have somebody coming into your studio for the purpose of letting you paint them. It can't be that. Nor do you have that time. I'm hoping to be allowed to be in an operating room. But this is about trying to be a fly on the wall. I'll complete the paintings after I get home."

When she heard through the artists' community that the Department of National Defence was looking for artists, for war painters, she applied -- her body of work, her credentials, so impressive that she got the job. Her style is somewhat impressionistic, but all her own. "I prefer to call it Bailey's Way," she says with a laugh. Her paintings range in price from $500 to $4,000. Much of her wide-ranging subject matter is displayed on her website.

She's been painting full-time for 25 years, an honours graduate of the Reigate School of Art and Design in England. She's illustrated numerous books, both at home and abroad. Twice she's received the acclaimed Elizabeth Greenshields Grant for drawing and painting. She was artist-in-residence at the private girls' school Elmwood from 2003 to 2005. She was the designer of the portraits on former governor-general Adrienne Clarkson's medal of academic excellence.

Undoubtedly, for Karen Bailey, War Painter, it could be an emotional experience at Landstuhl, but she is honoured to have been chosen.

"I want people to look at the paintings and understand the military experience, the emotion of it. It's about capturing emotion. It will be left to me, it will be how I myself see and feel it as an artist."

Should -- as she waits day by day listening, watching, reading -- the "significant incident" come.


----------



## Donut

I'll certainly be interested to see what comes out of it, but I'm a little perturbed that DND isn't letting our war artists into theater...isn't that the point of war artists?  Park their easels in an FOB, and paint away?

I know we've got our image techs out and about (not enough, we're still seeing Kestersen's (sp?) video as the only CTV TFA video clip) but what about the other mediums?  I've been awed by some of Canada's war art, lets make sure Afghanistan is represented in the same body of work.

DF


----------



## PPCLI Guy

TFA Roto 0 hired a War Artist, commissioning 4 large pieces and 8 small pieces.  Three artists competed, and Ms Gertrude Kearns was chosen (her work hangs in the War Museum, including some slightly controversial pieces on Cpl Matchee and Pte Brown).  She spent 4 or 4 weeks in theatre.

The results are stunning - I have been involved in the project from the beginning, and discussed and viewed the 4 pieces in her studio in Toronto throughout the process.

War artists are an important part odf the countries military and artistic heritage - and one that we must not forget.  The insurance problem was solved by offering enough renumeration that the artist could purchase their own policy.


----------



## The Bread Guy

ParaMedTech said:
			
		

> I'll certainly be interested to see what comes out of it, but I'm a little perturbed that DND isn't letting our war artists into theater...isn't that the point of war artists?  Park their easels in an FOB, and paint away?
> 
> I know we've got our image techs out and about (not enough, we're still seeing Kestersen's (sp?) video as the only CTV TFA video clip) but what about the other mediums?  I've been awed by some of Canada's war art, lets make sure Afghanistan is represented in the same body of work.
> 
> DF



The green-eyed liability monster - I'm guessing she wouldn't be able to get her own insurance, and if the CF doesn't want to cover her, not too many more options....

Gotta wonder, though (minor tangent), how the university anthropologist who studied the "Grunts in the Mist" in AFG was covered?  If she was untrained, but with the troops, couldn't an artist be covered in some way?


----------



## Donut

I had heard of Ms Kearn's work, through members here.  I wonder what the shift was between Roto 0 and Roto 3(?). Salary alone?

There was a recent MSM piece on a physician who wanted to work in KAF, and was surprised to discover he couldn't get insurance.  Same issue?  Is insurance simply not avail to Canadian with the CF?  Who underwrites the contracted support staff in theater?

DF


----------



## PPCLI Guy

ParaMedTech said:
			
		

> I had heard of Ms Kearn's work, through members here.  I wonder what the shift was between Roto 0 and Roto 3(?). Salary alone?



I'm not there, so not sure what the difference is - I do know that this was quite hard to ram through - but as it was important, ram it thru we did.


----------



## 3rd Herd

ParaMedTech said:
			
		

> but I'm a little perturbed that DND isn't letting our war artists into theater...isn't that the point of war artists?  Park their easels in an FOB, and paint away?
> 
> I know we've got our image techs out and about (not enough, we're still seeing Kestersen's (sp?) video as the only CTV TFA video clip) but what about the other mediums?  I've been awed by some of Canada's war art, lets make sure Afghanistan is represented in the same body of work.
> 
> DF



Believe me they are just as perturbed. My kid brother is in the same boat. Has been pleading with DND for over two years now. Given that he is the only Canadian artist to make it into Taschen's The Polaroid Book and has had his work grace the walls of the National. I just tell him he has not starved enough yet and still has both ears attached.


----------



## Edward Campbell

This, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act, is from today’s _Globe and Mail_:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070219.wxafghan19/BNStory/Entertainment/home


> The Afghan War, through our eyes
> *Val Ross visits a riveting new exhibit at the Canadian War Museum that, instead of artifacts, relies on video and photographs to tell its stories*
> 
> VAL ROSS
> From Monday's Globe and Mail
> 
> OTTAWA — Like the conflict it chronicles, Afghanistan: A Glimpse of War, which opened this month at the Canadian War Museum in Ottawa, is unfinished. The exhibition begins very precisely, with the events of Sept. 11, 2001, when al-Qaeda terrorists smashed planes into the World Trade Center in New York City, and of Sept. 20, when Canada officially decided to join the mission against al-Qaeda in Afghanistan.
> 
> But the final rooms of the show dwindle down to blank walls -- because who knows how the story ends?
> 
> A Glimpse of War fascinates on several levels. Compared to a typical exhibition, it has been created from precious few artifacts. Mostly it is made up of videos by documentary filmmaker Garth Pritchard, who's been over to Afghanistan five times since 2002, and the photos of Stephen Thorne, a Canadian Press photographer who accompanied the Canadian forces on their first helicopter assault in March 2002; he stayed for nine months between 2003-2004. It was because Thorne's son was dating the daughter of a war museum employee that the museum first learned of the trove of visual material available.
> 
> After contacting Thorne and Pritchard, staff assembled the show in 18 months -- breakneck by museological standards (last year's Clash of Empires show took more than a decade to organize).
> 
> Still, the few artifacts in this show have a powerful impact. Sept. 11, for example, is evoked not only through photos and texts but also $10,000 worth of Canadian $100 bills, crushed into a solid brick by the buildings' collapse (did they belong to one of the doomed Canadians working in the towers?). There's also a crumpled piece from one of the killer planes.
> 
> Nearby are the last messages from the doomed people inside the buildings, and newspapers blaring day-of-infamy headlines. But the museum's own low-key curatorial texts avoid editorializing. "We're sensitive that people will say this show is nothing more than propaganda for the government," says Dean Oliver, the War Museum's director of research and exhibitions. "We want the participants to speak more to you than I or the historian."
> 
> Indeed, the show is a case study in how to be as apolitical as possible -- a wise decision given the divisions in this country over Canada's involvement. Besides, as Oliver points out, "We don't have Cabinet records, we don't know why key decisions were made." Instead, the exhibition invites the public to editorialize by posting their comments on boards at key junctures.
> 
> By the 9/11 portion of the show, a young visitor has posted, "I was five and all I can remember is watching a plane flying into two towers and lots of blak [sic] dust." A more adult hand has written: "I am a firefighter. I lost close personal friends."
> 
> Another station poses the question: How should Canada have responded? "Exactly as they did!" responds someone signing herself "Widow of CF member." But another response is: "Le Canada devrait agir comme lui-même, non pas comme les Etats Unis" [in our own way, not the Americans']. In organizing Afghanistan, curators bypassed the region's history; there's only a glancing reference to U.S. funding of rebels in the 1990s, or about insurgents who proved eager to bomb a hand that fed them. However, a tantalizing sense of how some in the region regard al-Qaeda is evidenced by a box of a popular children's candy, which bears the startling label Osama Bin Laden Kulfa Balls.
> 
> In this show, Afghans sometimes are shown as rebuilders of their ruined country and its political institutions (my favourite footage shows women at a polling booth lifting their burkas to kiss each other in congratulation after voting). But mostly the locals are depicted as enigmatic allies or implacable adversaries -- in other words, as Canadian soldiers see them. Fundamentally, this is a show about Canadians: what we have done and endured since our troops officially arrived on Feb. 2, 2002.
> 
> We have shot -- a MacMillan Tac .50 long-range rifle is displayed under a rather proud reminder of the prowess of Canadian snipers. We have been shot at -- Pritchard's footage shows a U.S. surgeon slicing through the Canadian flag tattoo on a soldier's shoulder, and then removing shrapnel. We have killed and been killed -- a U.S. officer threw Thorne off the Kandahar military base on April 15, 2002 for taking photos of dead U.S. soldiers. Two days later Thorne was allowed back -- to cover the deaths of four Canadians killed by friendly fire.
> 
> The final elements of the show are the twisted wreckage of an armoured G-wagon destroyed by a roadside bomb, and the museum's video assemblage of photos sent by the families of 44 Canadian soldiers who have died in the conflict. It takes 15 minutes to see the whole thing. Many visitors stay for the duration, out of respect and because it's difficult to look away.
> 
> When I do look away, I discover one extra artifact that has been added to Afghanistan, a family snapshot of a young man taped to the museum wall. A Remembrance Day poppy and a black ribbon are pinned to the photo.
> 
> For now the curators are leaving it there. "It's the people's museum," says Oliver.



It will a month or more before I’m back in Ottawa and have an opportunity to see this exhibit.


----------



## geo

Methinks I'll be driving down to Ottawa in the near future....

Chimo!


----------



## observor 69

Good point of view, especially the "And was you there Charlie?"
http://www.canada.com/components/print.aspx?id=a21fe40c-759b-4553-9244-52f57e4df3b5

Criticism of airmen is unjust
  
The Ottawa Citizen 


Saturday, March 24, 2007


Re: War and controversy, March 23.

I read with great interest Dean Oliver's opinion article about the controversy over the Bomber Command display and the policies of the Canadian War Museum. It is all very worthy, but he left out one vital element: an offer to change the wording of the disputed panel. That's the crux of this whole affair. This will not end until that issue has been resolved.

The Bomber Boys, including myself, will continue their revolt against the museum's offensive and inaccurate description of Bomber Command's role in the Second World War.

The panel makes three main points: That "the morality and value" of the air offensive both remain contested, and that the campaign had few results until late into the war.

When exactly was that late date? Would it have been around D-Day, June 5, 1944? Before that, Bomber Command had already participated in the fight for air superiority, finally achieved in March and April of 1944. Normandy hinged on this victory.

Six hundred thousand German civilians dead? A useless statement. Bombing was taking place all over Europe -- a major part of the Second World War. The Russians suffered 20 million or more dead.

Was the morality of the bombing campaign contested? Not with the aircrews of Bomber Command. Our main concern was to keep our butts intact and survive. Every trip was a First World War-style "over the top" experience.

Such bombing was introduced by the Luftwaffe against London in the fall of 1940 and every night in the winter of 1941.

Maybe for some regrets are deeply held that it was deemed necessary to carry out the bombing raids in Germany. For the aircrews, though, morality was saved for the postwar years, when the armchair quarterbacks would be free to speak up and criticize our efforts.

Even Albert Speer, the czar of Germany's war industry, wrote of the bombing after the war that had the Allies "continued the attacks of March/April 1944 with the same energy, we quickly would have been at our last gasp."

I believe we can safely surmise that in any big, long, drawn-out war there will be many ifs, ands or buts. But I would hate to have future generations see this panel as an epitaph as it now reads. Because Bomber Command's losses were so terrible, many airmen to this day remain highly sensitive to any unjust criticism. The panel's authors should have realized this.

I am reminded of a popular buzzword of that era. For the benefit of those who so zealously guard the panel's words about our questionable war effort, I will quote it now: "And was you there, Charlie?"

King Finnie, Ottawa


----------



## formerarmybrat23

James Gordon, CanWest News Service
Published: Tuesday, June 12, 2007
http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=c23b8d76-3f9b-4772-8f61-81fd79ff1e61&k=25244



> OTTAWA -- A special Senate subcommittee is asking the Canadian War Museum to change part of a controversial display some veterans have claimed makes them look like "war criminals."
> 
> At issue is a Second World War exhibit that contains a single panel describing an "Enduring Controversy" and raises moral issues over the role of Canadian bombing squadrons that attacked German cities in an attempt to wipe out the Nazi war machine.
> 
> Liberal Senator Joseph Day, chair of the subcommittee on veterans affairs, suggested the museum has a responsibility to recognize it has offended some people, and should change the display. There were no suggestions as to how the museum should go about doing that, even as the politicians raised no qualms about the accuracy of the facts and information presented.
> 
> 
> Don't try to change history. We're not into rewriting history," Day said. Tell the story and tell the facts, but tell it in a way that you're not offending, unintentionally, a large segment of the Canadian public."
> 
> The facility's president, Victor Rabinovitch, wasn't available Tuesday and wasn't expected to offer any comment until there was time to further review the senators' recommendation.
> 
> The display panel, accompanied by photos, including one of dead civilians on the street following an allied bombing, notes the mass raids against Germany resulted in vast destruction and heavy loss of life.
> 
> 
> "The value and morality of the strategic bomber offensive against Germany remains bitterly contested. Bomber Command's aim was to crush civilian morale and force Germany to surrender by destroying its cities and industrial installations," it says. "Although Bomber Command and American attacks left 600,000 Germans dead, and more than five million homeless, the raids resulted in only small reductions of German war production until late in the war."
> 
> 
> Day said the subcommittee was troubled by the fact much of the exhibit was dedicated to the heroic activities of individual airmen and crews, "and then you get in an academic debate on the last panel, which calls into question all of these exploits of the individuals that were highlighted in the rest of the display."
> 
> Asked whether he believed a museum was a place for academic debate, Day agreed it was.
> 
> "I think that's all part of the museum's responsibility," he said. "It was just that the juxtaposition of various facts and pictures seemed to confuse the two. I don't think it was intended, but that seems to be the case."
> 
> Complaints from veterans about the tone of the panel first surfaced in 2005, soon after the museum opened. Following threats of boycott from a coalition of veterans' groups, the facility undertook what it called the "exceptional step" of seeking input from external, expert historians.
> 
> Four of them filed reports the museum said agreed with the contention that the display, in its entirety, presented an accurate view of the air war in Europe. Two raised concerns about the "tone" and "balance" of the one panel. The museum said in March that it would not change the panel, adding its decision was final.
> 
> Veterans' groups renewed their call for a boycott and asked the Senate to intervene, resulting in Tuesday's report.


----------



## The Bread Guy

Apologies for reviving a narcothread, but it appears she DID go overseas (mods, if you feel this rates a break-away re-start, please feel free) - photos below....

*The accidental war artist*
Ottawa's Karen Bailey transforms sketches from Afghanistan into powerful paintings
Paul Gessell, The Ottawa Citizen, 7 Nov 08
Article link - Karen Bailey's art from AFG

The painting is small but powerful, with religious overtones. It reveals a man, with a halo around his head, lying in bed. Three people are crowded around him. A miracle is about to happen.

The scene could be borrowed from some old painting of disciples watching a saint about to be cured of some fatal illness. Actually, the scene is contemporary, depicting a wounded Afghan man, with a halo-like metal frame around his head to keep his skull intact. The "disciples" are three Canadian military medical workers at a hospital in Kandahar. 

This painting by Karen Bailey, Ottawa's accidental war artist, is called X-Ray Technicians With Halo Traction. Bailey had signed up for a Defence Department art program, expecting to be sent to nothing more dangerous than some military canteen in Ottawa. Instead, she went to Afghanistan for a week last year to sketch patients and staff at a largely Canadian military hospital in Kandahar.

Bailey is finally ready to unveil some of the paintings completed in the past year from the hurried sketches she had to make in the middle of medical turmoil .....

More on link



Xray Technicians with Halo Traction Patient
Acrylic, 20 " x 20 ", 2007







Kandahar Girl Patient 1
Graphite, 11 ” x 14 ”, 2007






Morning Rounds 2
Acrylic on canvas, 30" x 30", 2008


----------



## 3rd Horseman

War artists have always been an important part of Canadas battle history. In the past we have inducted them into the CF. If we just look to our past and the "War Arts Program" we have all the solutions to the current problems.......oh ya they would have to join......guess they would not so that's out. Maybe we should recruit them from school or the ranks like Miller Brittin was. Too bad we dd no start this in the 70s so we would have had great art from the past battles we fought. The separation of 50 years will be sad in the National Museum and will give Canada a false view of Canada at war.

3rd Horseman


----------



## gun runner

I guess we can thank the governments of the day for pinching the pennies that would keep these artists away from the exploits of the C.F. . It would really be interesting to walk the halls of the war memorial and see all the artworks that were produced and the stories behind them. For shame. Ubique


----------



## George Wallace

Just another one of the controversies that plague the new Canadian War Museum:

Reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act.

Move raises ghosts of Bomber Command
By Paul Gessell, The Ottawa Citizen                                                                            January 31, 2009

The Canadian War Museum quietly imposed a moratorium on the acquisition of all contemporary art about 10 months ago amid a debate over what is appropriate for the federal institution's collection.

"We are asking a series of questions of ourselves, things like: What is contemporary art, why are we collecting it and what is the relationship to our mandate as a history museum?" Mark O'Neill, the museum's director general, said.

These are all big questions that have left some artists who specialize in contemporary military matters scratching their heads. Others have offered cautious approval. Still others fear the museum is in the early stages of another battle similar to the Bomber Command controversy, when war veterans, federal politicians and the museum's own board pressured reluctant museum officials to rewrite an exhibition text panel that was perceived as too critical of Canadian airmen bombing German civilians during the Second World War.

The art debate comes as military-themed artists are increasingly deviating from traditional, documentary depictions of heroic battlefield scenes to create works far more critical of military activities.

The art debate comes as military-themed artists are increasingly deviating from traditional, documentary depictions of heroic battlefield scenes to create works far more critical and questioning of military activities. An example of the new trend is the work of Ottawa artist Elaine Goble, who explores the problems military life causes soldiers and their families.

Mr. O'Neill agrees contemporary military art is often different from that of the two world wars. "It does represent a departure from the art the war museum is used to collecting and displaying."

That does not mean, however, that the museum is trying to silence artists critical of the military, he adds.

Mr. O'Neill specifically cites a painting in the museum's collection by Gertrude Kearns, depicting the torture of a Somali youth by a Canadian soldier. That painting, titled Somalia 2, Without Conscience, "is an excellent example of how contemporary art has helped to interpret an important aspect of military history."

The Toronto-based Kearns has other works in the collection, including a controversial portrait of Gen. Romeo Dallaire in the throes of post-traumatic stress syndrome caused by his soldiering during the Rwandan genocide. Some veterans have complained it is disrespectful.

Ms. Kearns says she had been aware of the moratorium because it has delayed the promised acquisition by the museum of a more traditional portrait she did of Lt. Col. Dwayne Hobbs, commanding officer of the Toronto Scottish Regiment.

However, Ms. Kearns does not seem to be concerned: "I think they have some very smart people at the war museum."

The Kearns painting, Somalia 2, is part of an exhibition of Canadian war art covering the period from Korea to Afghanistan that has just been installed at the McMichael Canadian Art Collection at Kleinburg, near Toronto. Paintings by two other non-traditional war artists, Allan Harding MacKay and Scott Waters, are also in that show, which was jointly organized by the war museum and the Defence Department.

Mr. MacKay was generally supportive of the museum's decision to formulate guidelines for acquiring contemporary art. But he also raised some red flags.

"Look at the whole dilemma that happened with the interpretive label in Bomber Command," Mr. MacKay said in an interview from Kitchener. "There are certain positions that people take through their own experiences and certain myths that they want to continue and to perpetuate when history continues to get revised, revisited, relooked-at."

In other words, contemporary artists may create art that challenges previously held views of history and those new views can not be excluded simply because they are different.

Strict guidelines could result in important military art being excluded from the museum's collection, Mr. MacKay suggested. "What might you lose in favour of setting up a very defined limit of what you can collect?"

Mr. Waters is a Toronto-based artist and a former soldier. In an e-mail, he said he supported the museum in its attempts to establish guidelines for contemporary art acquisitions and he praised Laura Brandon, the museum historian in charge of contemporary art, for initiating a more "disciplined" approach to acquiring work.

But Mr. Waters also said he would like to see more art in the collection from Afghanistan and more controversial works.

"The other issue is what we might call the Legion lobby, those reluctant to let the Canadian War Museum take a revisionist or critical role so far as art and conflict are concerned. I don't believe that Canadian War Museum makes decisions based on conservative reactions, but I am sure the Legion lobby is taken into account."

Mr. O'Neill was installed as museum director general after his predecessor, Joe Geurts, left unceremoniously in 2007 amid the Bomber Command controversy initiated by veterans' complaints. Mr. O'Neill says the art moratorium was his decision, not that of the museum board.

In deciding what art is to be acquired, the museum must look at its historical value, its potential for display and research and "how will this art help the museum continue to be a centre of informed discussion of difficult issues related to war and conflict," Mr. O'Neill said.

In the past, some additions to the art collection were rather "ad hoc," Mr. O'Neill said. A clear set of priorities and criteria are needed, he added.

That process will likely take a few months more to complete. Discussions have been in-house although they may, at some point, include outsiders before the guidelines are drafted.

"They're not meant at all to limit discussions and considerations for proposals," said Mr. O'Neill, "but just to help us understand that we know that what we are collecting is in line with the mandate of the museum as a history museum and as a military history museum."

© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen


http://www.ottawacitizen.com/Travel/Move+raises+ghosts+Bomber+Command/1237669/story.html


----------



## Journeyman

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Ms. Kearns says she had been aware of the moratorium because it has delayed the promised *acquisition by the museum of a more traditional portrait she did of Lt. Col. Dwayne Hobbs, commanding officer of the Toronto Scottish Regiment*.



I'm curious as to the justification of having some militia CO's portrait in the War Museum. Did he accomplish something operational in a Currie-esque manner that escaped my attention?


----------



## the 48th regulator

Image of the painting.  Also details can be found here.

dileas

tess


----------



## Michael OLeary

Journeyman said:
			
		

> I'm curious as to the justification of having some militia CO's portrait in the War Museum. Did he accomplish something operational in a Currie-esque manner that escaped my attention?



Well, he does look ready to summon the clans and burn your village, will that do?


----------



## Journeyman

Mere curiousity.


----------



## Michael OLeary

I do like the style of the portrait.  Perhaps General Rick in FFO would be a good subject for a modern portrait.


----------



## Journeyman

That was sort of the gist of my question. A portrait of Hillier would be appropriate. Walking through the museum, you see the likes of Currie, Simmonds, de Chastelain -- notable commanders. Hell, even Tess' shot-up Iltis is suitable to display. But a portrait of some Reservist from Toronto? What's the criteria? Are our operational commanders not pretty enough?


----------



## mariomike

Quote:
> the Bomber Command controversy, when war veterans, federal politicians and the museum's own board pressured reluctant museum officials to > rewrite an exhibition text panel that was perceived as too critical of Canadian airmen bombing German civilians during the Second World War.
End Quote.

Bomber Command opened the Second Front long before D-Day. Russia demanded a Second Front in 1943. No one had forgotten the near catastrophe that follwed the Bolsheviks negotiated peace with Germany in 1917. Nor had they forgotten the stalemate of the Western Front in 1914-18. The Lanacaster could fly over Germany's front line muscle and reach Berlin long before anyone else could. And incidentally, show the Russians when they arrived what Bomber Command could do.
Bomber Command's 56,000 dead allowed Churchill to delay aggressively, while the Red and German armies destroyed each other on the Eastern Front.  Albert Speer called this "the greatest lost battle on the German side".  Speer also said in a 1971 TV interview that the bombing campaign ruled out Germany's efforts to produce an atomic bomb.


----------



## observor 69

Journeyman said:
			
		

> That was sort of the gist of my question. A portrait of Hillier would be appropriate. Walking through the museum, you see the likes of Currie, Simmonds, de Chastelain -- notable commanders. Hell, even Tess' shot-up Iltis is suitable to display. But a portrait of some Reservist from Toronto? What's the criteria? Are our operational commanders not pretty enough?



de Chastelain, did I miss something? Currie and Simmonds dam straight, but de Chastelain I am not aware of anything outstanding unless maybe something in Ireland?


----------



## geo

Journeyman said:
			
		

> That was sort of the gist of my question. But a portrait of some Reservist from Toronto? What's the criteria? Are our operational commanders not pretty enough?



The Canadian war effort in WW1 and WW2 was "done" by some reservist from all over Canada - so please don't get hung up on the concept of the Canadian War Museum being the repository of everything that is Regular Army, Navy & Airforce.

The Canadian War Museum should be a reflection of what the Canadian military is - both at war AND at peace.  A portrait of a Reserve LCol is just as appropriate as one of a Regular LCol... or General.  It's all part of our history...


----------



## George Wallace

George Wallace said:
			
		

> "We are asking a series of questions of ourselves, things like: What is contemporary art, why are we collecting it and what is the relationship to our mandate as a history museum?" Mark O'Neill, the museum's director general, said.
> 
> These are all big questions that have left some artists who specialize in contemporary military matters scratching their heads. Others have offered cautious approval. .............
> 
> The art debate comes as military-themed artists are increasingly deviating from traditional, documentary depictions of heroic battlefield scenes to create works far more critical of military activities.
> 
> The art debate comes as military-themed artists are increasingly deviating from traditional, documentary depictions of heroic battlefield scenes to create works far more critical and questioning of military activities. An example of the new trend is the work of Ottawa artist Elaine Goble, who explores the problems military life causes soldiers and their families.



I might call BS to the Directors of the Museum of Civilization, under which the CWM falls.  If one looks at the gigantic spider in front of the National Art Gallery, opposite the Peacekeeping Memorial, or some of the other "works of Art" that the government has purchased, I really have to question the reason for this.   What would the current curators say to the works of the Group of Seven who documented the First World War in art?  What would they say of Zuber's depictions of Korea, and many other Canadian military deployments?  What is their opinion of some of the artwork they have from Somalia?  The Kyle Brown portraits and the Dallaire portraits are garbage in my opinion, but again they are contemporary art of the day.  

Personally, I don't trust the senior bureaucrats hired to run these museums.  I believe they have ulterior motives in their personal agendas to run these museums.


----------



## ltmaverick25

We need Jack Granatstein back in the war museam


----------



## Kirkhill

Anciently, when I went museums like the British Museum of History or of Science I seem to recall NOT seeing a bunch of labels or interpreters telling me a story.   I just saw interesting artifacts.  If I wanted to see portraits I went to a portrait gallery.

Problem solved if the Museum reverts to being a library of artifacts and stops worrying about the story it has to tell.  Get rid of the story, get rid of the editors.  As far as the interpretive portraits are concerned they fall under the head of "opinion pieces" and not "news".  For the "library" photographs and videoclips meet the requirement of maintaining a record of the people in question.

Now whether it is appropriate to have a separate gallery of interpretive portraits that describe NOT the subjects but the attitudes of the artists that paint them, the governments that pay them and the public that supports them, that is another matter.  Those attitudes are, legitimately, part of our "war" history and arguably are worth collecting and preserving.  But they should have nothing to do with story telling in the museum just as the museum should have nothing to do with story telling.

Government sponsored story telling is propaganda.


----------



## Danjanou

Journeyman said:
			
		

> That was sort of the gist of my question. A portrait of Hillier would be appropriate. Walking through the museum, you see the likes of Currie, Simmonds, de Chastelain -- notable commanders. Hell, even Tess' shot-up Iltis is suitable to display. But a portrait of some Reservist from Toronto? What's the criteria? Are our operational commanders not pretty enough?



Well waay back when Dwayne was my rad op, the then CO thought he was pretty enough for a planned recruiting poster, but otherwise I'm with the Harley rider, WTF, Tess' jeep yes this nada.  8)

Then again I know the present head high muckety muck of the CWM from our undergrad days, so this don't surprise me at all.


----------



## Infanteer

Kirkhill said:
			
		

> Problem solved if the Museum reverts to being a library of artifacts and stops worrying about the story it has to tell.  Get rid of the story, get rid of the editors.  As far as the interpretive portraits are concerned they fall under the head of "opinion pieces" and not "news".  For the "library" photographs and videoclips meet the requirement of maintaining a record of the people in question.



+1.

I had the pleasure of spending the better part of the afternoon in the British National Army Museum in Chelsea - I can't believe my wife let me!  Anyways, I was absolutely blown away by the artifacts and the interactive nature on many of these pieces (including a very famous diorama of Waterloo).  Just telling history and giving some personal narrative, nothing much more.

By far the best museum I have ever been in - and free to boot!

The "Historial" in Peronne was an excellent WWI museum somewhat focused on the Somme.  Took an interesting spin on things, but it definitely provoked thought.

iper: (I just wanted to use this smiley)


----------



## ltmaverick25

I have to disagree.  Telling the story is the single most important role a museam has to offer.  Museams are not, and should not be, just about the artifacts.  What good is an artifact if you dont understand any historical context?  What good is the artifiact if you dont know a thing about it?  Museams are a form of public history and they serve a vital role.  In my opinion our national war museam is one of the few that actually tells the story and brings the patron into the historical context that is ever so important.

I had the pleasure of speaking with Tim Cook last week (First World War Historian at the National War Museam) and got to hear his take on all of this.  He was involved in the museam overhaul in the early part of the decade.  He made it very clear that their mandate and their vision was to create a musem that told the story and did not limit itself to just the artifacts.  To that end, I think they did a great job of it.

On the matter of controversial paintings...  I dont know that I have developed an opinion of that yet.  I can see both sides of the argument there.


----------



## ModlrMike

Baden  Guy said:
			
		

> de Chastelain, did I miss something? Currie and Simmonds dam straight, but de Chastelain I am not aware of anything outstanding unless maybe something in Ireland?



Hmm... joined as a Private, left as CDS. Qualifies in my book.


----------



## observor 69

Nine months a reserve private then into RMC. What is so unusual about that?
Yes he became CDS but we are talking about "notable " military figures. I can't see how he compares to the record of Currie and Simmonds.

Bio ref. http://www.cda-cdai.ca/CDAI/de%20CHASTELAIN.htm


----------



## Michael OLeary

Inclusion in the CWM shouldn't be based on popular vote, nor on the degree of public angst generated over how a story gets told to the exclusion of others.  That's how the Bomber Command fiasco happened, because some refused to admit to interpretations other than their "approved" editions.

If the CWM is to be limited to favourable opinions, popular generals and VC heroes, it will leave us with a thin and unbalanced overview of our military history.  If anyone wants that approach, stick to reading regimental histories, because no regiment ever played a small part in its own written history and all those little embarrassing parts can be left out when you control the content.


----------



## Kirkhill

ltmaverick25 said:
			
		

> I have to disagree.  Telling the story is the single most important role a museam has to offer.  Museams are not, and should not be, just about the artifacts.  What good is an artifact if you dont understand any historical context?  What good is the artifiact if you dont know a thing about it?  Museams are a form of public history and they serve a vital role.  In my opinion our national war museam is one of the few that actually tells the story and brings the patron into the historical context that is ever so important.
> 
> I had the pleasure of speaking with Tim Cook last week (First World War Historian at the National War Museam) and got to hear his take on all of this.  He was involved in the museam overhaul in the early part of the decade.  He made it very clear that their mandate and their vision was to create a musem that told the story and did not limit itself to just the artifacts.  To that end, I think they did a great job of it.
> 
> On the matter of controversial paintings...  I dont know that I have developed an opinion of that yet.  I can see both sides of the argument there.



My problem is in defining "THE STORY".

In a free society there is nothing wrong with those that wish to demean the soldier having the same opportunity as those that wish to respect him to have their say.

There is no single story.  There can never be.

From my point of view, again, place the artifacts on display.  Open up a library on site that carries all the books relevant to the subject.  Open up a multimedia presentation room where all the videos, films etc can be viewed.  Open up a gallery of paintings and show those that both object to and praise the actions of Canadians.

The result will be a clutter of information.....but the individual will be forced to find their own story.  There won't be consensus.

It serves national pride to be told a tale.  That is propaganda.  It doesn't serve truth..... however you perceive that.

I am very much opposed to the notion of received Truth.

When dealing with history it is curious as to how often who, when and where are debated,  let alone the what and the how.....and as to the why, there you get to right volumes with little to differentiate the text from the novel.


----------



## ltmaverick25

Have you been to the war museam or spoken to any of the historians that work there?  I am quite convinced that they have managed to tell a propoganda free story.  The story lists the facts, it does not provide interpretation, the interpretation is left to the individual patron.  Story and interpretation are two totally different things.


----------



## Kirkhill

I regret that I have not yet had the opportunity to visit the museum, or to talk to the historians involved.

My sense of it, though, is that with the best will in the world, with the best of intentions, you can not get two people to agree on very much at all.....especially when discussing history.  Otherwise there would only be one history of world war 1 and everybody would accept the British Official History.

Apparently that isn't the case.


----------



## the 48th regulator

ltmaverick25 said:
			
		

> Have you been to the war museam or spoken to any of the historians that work there?  I am quite convinced that they have managed to tell a propoganda free story.  The story lists the facts, it does not provide interpretation, the interpretation is left to the individual patron.  Story and interpretation are two totally different things.




Until, someone  opposes them.

Please read through the thread, and you will opposition to various exhibits that have been challenged.  Some successfule, some not, with regards to history being interpreted by a chosen few.

dileas

tess


----------



## ltmaverick25

I have read through the thread.  The point was already made by someone else, that the war museam should be able to do its job without being subject to the whim of popular opinion at the time.  You cant make everyone happy, nor should you try.  That is something Canadian society needs to come to terms with, or we can just be offended people...


----------



## the 48th regulator

ltmaverick25 said:
			
		

> I have read through the thread.  The point was already made by someone else, that the war museam should be able to do its job without being subject to the whim of popular opinion at the time.  You cant make everyone happy, nor should you try.  That is something Canadian society needs to come to terms with, or we can just be offended people...



As long as political views do not infiltrate, and infest, the descision of the WM.  AS we have seen in the recent past.....


dileas

tess


----------



## ltmaverick25

That is debatable weather politics played a role with some recent controversy.  There are some historians out there that will play that game, but, based on who we have working in the museam right now I am very confident that politics is a four letter word to these guys.  They want to tell the truth, the good with the ugly, and that sometimes upsets people.


----------



## Danjanou

ltmaverick25 said:
			
		

> Have you been to the war museam or spoken to any of the historians that work there?  I am quite convinced that they have managed to tell a propoganda free story.  The story lists the facts, it does not provide interpretation, the interpretation is left to the individual patron.  Story and interpretation are two totally different things.



And I call BS on that one. Read some of the signage there. Words have specific meanings.


----------



## the 48th regulator

ltmaverick25 said:
			
		

> That is debatable weather politics played a role with some recent controversy.  There are some historians out there that will play that game, but, based on who we have working in the museam right now I am very confident that politics is a four letter word to these guys.  They want to tell the truth, the good with the ugly, and that sometimes upsets people.




Well I surely hope that this is the case.  The past has proven that political agendas, were the norm in the past.  Just view some previous debacles at the new museum.


Korean Veteran Insult


War museum to reword controversial WWII display

The Paintings

Glad that you can assure us that the new people in place, have a different outlook on how the museum should be run.

dileas

tess


----------



## ltmaverick25

Well no, those guys are the same guys.  When I say new guys, I mean the last decades worth of guys.

Lets look at the Second World War example you posted though.  In this case, the museam was not taking a stand one way or the other as to the ethics of the bombing campaign.  Rather they were acknowledging the fact that there are indeed different interpretations about the morality of the campaign.  If you ask the guys there what they think, and I have, they will tell you they think that the controversy is BS, and that films like Valour and Horror treat the bombers unfairly.  So they werent trying to play politics, in fact in this case, Im sure those historians are on the veterans side.  What they were trying to do with that is present the two sides of that controversy.  The veterans of course didnt like that at all and the rest is history.

In fact, unless I am mistaken, in each case that was the issue.  The veterans took exception to something and all hell broke lose.  Dont get me wrong, I always find myself siding with the vets on these things but I dont think the intent of the war museam guys is to ruin their reputations or to present some sort of political agenda.

There are people, and some historians out there that have very different interpretations about some of these wars.  That is where the problem starts.  The guys at the war museam try to allow a bit of that into the museam to show that in some cases there are differing viewpoints, however, one of those viewpoints is often very insulting to veterans.  That is one of the hardest things about doing war history about people that are still alive.

Despite all of this, I still really think it is much more valuable to try and provide narrative instead of just relying on artifacts.  The people attending will get alot more out of it.  The think we have to remeber is that alot of the comon folks that go through that place dont have any historical background, they dont know much of anything and this provides them with a great chance to pick some up.


----------



## mariomike

ltmaverick25 said:
			
		

> Quote:
> "In this case, the museam was not taking a stand one way or the other as to the ethics of the bombing campaign.  Rather they were acknowledging the fact that there are indeed different interpretations about the morality of the campaign."



Surviving aircrew felt betrayed by criticism of the strategic air offensive. It is disgraceful that they never received their own Campaign Medal. The pitiful prospects of surviving a tour in Bomber Command were only matched in hazard on either side by the German U-boat crews.
What they wanted, as far as I can tell, was a categorical assurance that the work they did was militarily and strategically justified. 
I am certain that it was.


----------



## ltmaverick25

Thats the other problem.  Those who are not busy questioning the morality of the bombing campaign are busy questioning the strategic effectiveness.  I personally think both criticisms are unfounded.  Its often easy to judge from ivory towers, id like to see what alot of these naysayers would have done in similar situations.  As for the effectiveness.  There is no doubt that the campaign had an effect on German ability to prosecute the war.


----------



## mariomike

ltmaverick25 said:
			
		

> There is no doubt that the campaign had an effect on German ability to prosecute the war.



Albert Speer said Bomber Command "created an armaments emergency in Germany which ruled out a major program to develop the atomic bomb".


----------



## ltmaverick25

mariomike said:
			
		

> Albert Speer said Bomber Command "created an armaments emergency in Germany which ruled out a major program to develop the atomic bomb".



That is definitly one of the arguments out there.  One of the other arguments floating around is that, although German industrial capacity continued to steadily increase at a very modest pace throughout the war, had the bombing campaign not been conducted, the German industrial capacity would have skyrocketed exponentially.

The big mistake that critics make is confusing the role of the bombers at the time.  They were never designed to win wars all by themselves.  They were just one more arm in a whole hockey sock full of assets available to the allies for use against the Germans.  Today we look at US air power in the Gulf War for example, and automatically assume that air power alone can win wars.  That simply is not the case, and it certainly isnt the case when you are dealing with two oponents that are cabaple of putting up a relatively equal fight.


----------



## the 48th regulator

ltmaverick25 said:
			
		

> That is definitly one of the arguments out there.  One of the other arguments floating around is that, although German industrial capacity continued to steadily increase at a very modest pace throughout the war, had the bombing campaign not been conducted, the German industrial capacity would have skyrocketed exponentially.
> 
> The big mistake that critics make is confusing the role of the bombers at the time.  They were never designed to win wars all by themselves.  They were just one more arm in a whole hockey sock full of assets available to the allies for use against the Germans.  Today we look at US air power in the Gulf War for example, and automatically assume that air power alone can win wars.  That simply is not the case, and it certainly isnt the case when you are dealing with two oponents that are cabaple of putting up a relatively equal fight.



What is your opinion, with regards to the statistics on Venereal disease with Canadian Soldiers during the Korean campagne, being broadcasted in the museum?

dileas

tess


----------



## ltmaverick25

the 48th regulator said:
			
		

> What is your opinion, with regards to the statistics on Venereal disease with Canadian Soldiers during the Korean campagne, being broadcasted in the museum?
> 
> dileas
> 
> tess



Its funny you should ask that.  Tim Cook was giving us a presentation just last week and that was a question that was asked of him.  In responce, he was telling us a story about a complaint he received from a veteran of the Korean war about this.  The veteran had conceded to Cook that the information was likely accurate, but asked why it needed to be there.  The veteran had brought his grand children into the museam on a tour and mentioned that the venereal disease issue was a tad embarrasing...

I dont know what to say about that honestly.  Sure it happened, but, its got to be awfully akward for the veteran in that situation.  The question I would ask about this type of issue is, how relevent is it to the display that they have up there?  Is it a central part of the story they are telling?  Does it add any value?  I dont have the answers to those questions.

But, what I can say is, one of the first things we learn as historians is, the practice of history is just as much about what to leave out, as it is to decide what to include.  Even when you are writing a book about the Korean War for example.  You just cant squeeze the entire war into one book so you have to decide what your intent is, what your central theme or argument is, and then vet each detail and ask the above questions.  Essentially, how does this tidbit of info fit into my thesis?  If it doesnt really fit, maybe its best left for a future book.

I realize I just said a whole lot without answering the question directly.  But hopefully the above creates a bit of an understanding as to the process historians try to go through.

The positive to this is, there are different approaches and room for different interpretations to our history, and these interpretations will tend to change from generation to generation, even though the facts remain the same (baring a discovery of new evidence that is).  This allows for a discourse and debate which is healthy.  However, when you are writting something like the "official history" or producing the national war musuem, all of which are initiatives undertaken by the state, things get very touchy.

Tim Cook's _Clio's Warriors_ is a good read and addresses these issues in a much better way than I can offer here.


----------



## the 48th regulator

ltmaverick25 said:
			
		

> Its funny you should ask that.  Tim Cook was giving us a presentation just last week and that was a question that was asked of him.  In responce, he was telling us a story about a complaint he received from a veteran of the Korean war about this.  The veteran had conceded to Cook that the information was likely accurate, but asked why it needed to be there.  The veteran had brought his grand children into the museam on a tour and mentioned that the venereal disease issue was a tad embarrasing...
> 
> I dont know what to say about that honestly.  Sure it happened, but, its got to be awfully akward for the veteran in that situation.  The question I would ask about this type of issue is, how relevent is it to the display that they have up there?  Is it a central part of the story they are telling?  Does it add any value?  I dont have the answers to those questions.
> 
> But, what I can say is, one of the first things we learn as historians is, the practice of history is just as much about what to leave out, as it is to decide what to include.  Even when you are writing a book about the Korean War for example.  You just cant squeeze the entire war into one book so you have to decide what your intent is, what your central theme or argument is, and then vet each detail and ask the above questions.  Essentially, how does this tidbit of info fit into my thesis?  If it doesnt really fit, maybe its best left for a future book.
> 
> I realize I just said a whole lot without answering the question directly.  But hopefully the above creates a bit of an understanding as to the process historians try to go through.
> 
> The positive to this is, there are different approaches and room for different interpretations to our history, and these interpretations will tend to change from generation to generation, even though the facts remain the same (baring a discovery of new evidence that is).  This allows for a discourse and debate which is healthy.  However, when you are writting something like the "official history" or producing the national war musuem, all of which are initiatives undertaken by the state, things get very touchy.
> 
> Tim Cook's _Clio's Warriors_ is a good read and addresses these issues in a much better way than I can offer here.




I did not think  you would have an answer.  I do appreciate the nice story, about the vet with his grandkids that would bring an upbeat, and positive slant to the argument.

How about I do the same.

Had you read this thread, you would have seen some very passionate posts from a fella by the name of Art Johnson.  He is a plank owner of this site actually (one of the original members from way back in the day when Mike B had an Apple Seed before the Mac  )

He was a good ole fella.  A 48th legend if you will.  (Yep, a member of my regiment) He went overseas as a member of The RCR (Hup Hup and Pro Patria to Mike O’ and that Motorman/slash whatever his name is this week ).  Arty Shell blew half his body away, so when he walked with his Grand Kiddies or us Highlanders, there was bit of a limp.

Being a Korean Vet he was peeved.  

http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/30591/post-218138.html#msg218138


Heck, he admitted that he was man and one of the boys.  But, for him to walk in the museum, and see a statistic put up on a plaque about how many pee pees were hurt, over the amount of troops that left behind half of their bodies overseas, just did not sit well with him.  It did not sit well with me.  I was a pit bull about it, and I had the honour of receiving this post from Art:



			
				Art Johnson said:
			
		

> Hey Tess, flug them all. You and I have been there we know what *BATTLE* is all about. We don't have to take a back seat to anyone. Stay the course mate and we will stomp all over these posers and wannabes.
> 
> Aye Dileas
> 
> Pro Patrtia
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Art J



I am not making this a feel good post, but you pulled out the cute tear jerker story.  You see, every post I finish off it ends as this;

dileas

tess.

Wanna know why?  Because I honour Art Johsnon.  I honour My Regiment.  It is the way we 48th end our missives.

You see, that is how we continue tradition.  Not in your nice feely good, political way.  That is the way we can tech our future about what it is to be Canadian.  Not some politically motivated Scholastic interpretation, that you embrace.  So Tim Cook's Clio's Warriors will be part of my Library very soon, I advise Art Johnsons posts will part of yours.

Aye Dileas

tess


----------



## ltmaverick25

I dont think I subscribe to this "feel good" embrace that you are talking about.  As I mentioned before in this thread, I find myself always siding with the veterans on these issues.  I think it is safe to say you are preaching to the choir on this.  Perhaps the only thing we may really differ on is the idea of telling a story rather then letting the artifacts stand on their own.  I dont think the artifacts by themselves could ever do justice to the veterans.  What does the artifact mean to people that dont understand what they are?  If you dont tell the story, im my opinion the artifact becomes moot.  But either way, an artifact by itself, or an artifact with a narrative attached to it, can never do these veterans justice.

The other thing I think people should keep in mind is that the historians who work at the war musueam, or the ones that have in recent history, are the veterans and soldiers biggest fans and champions.

Were talking about guys like Jack Granatstein, Roger Sarty, Tim Cook, and many others.  They really really do have the veterans back on these issues.  There are plenty of historians out there that would not see things the way Granatstein, Sarty and Cook do.  In fact there are too many, but you wont find them at the war museam.


----------



## mariomike

ltmaverick25 said:
			
		

> They were never designed to win wars all by themselves.



The lesson learned is that what happened to the cities of Germany and Japan were best to be avoided.
Wars are now fought, whenever possible, in remote places.


----------



## Journeyman

mariomike said:
			
		

> The lesson learned is that what happened to the cities of Germany and Japan were best to be avoided.
> Wars are now fought, whenever possible, in remote places.


OK, I've got to throw a _massive_ *WTF* in here.

We military folks have recently gone to Belet Huen, Kosovo Polje, Shah Wal-e-Kot, etc, etc.... because of angst over Dresden, Hiroshima, Nagasaki?

The political leadership that decides where, and against whom, we fight is so wracked with guilt, they've collectively said, "no more Germanies or Japans...or any other country with stained-glass and china cupboards -- from now on, we're just going to trash remote third-world countries; our only policy decision is the coin-toss for jungle or desert" ??

I'm guessing we went to different schools.


----------



## Scott

mariomike, have you not already been warned about the manner in which you post? Methinks you've been told to avoid posting as the final authority on subjects of which you really are not. Please follow that direction.

Scott
Army.ca Staff


----------



## mariomike

I hope this helps. Have a great day.

"The great aerial bombardments of the Second World War were not forgotten by the postwar generation. Today, wars only crop up in remote places where both sides know there is no threat of annihilation from the skies. That, in a nutshell, is the lesson Bomber Command taught the world."
Source: "Battlefields in the air: Canadians in Bomber Command." by Dan McCaffery 1995. 

"The city area raids have left their mark on the German people as well as on their cities. Far more than any other military action that preceded the actual occupation of Germany itself, these attacks left the German people with a solid lesson in the disadvantages of war. It was a terrible lesson; conceivably that lesson, both in Germany and abroad, could be the most lasting single effect of the air war.
This is fully supported by the example of the devastated cities of Japan and their unhappy and hungry surviving inhabitants."
United States Strategic Bombing Survey


----------



## ltmaverick25

Hes just making interpretations now.  Its pretty hard to be declared wrong on an interpretation.

However, I do disagree with that interpretation.

The massive air war in the Gulf and the Iraq war that focused on Bagdad demonstrate that allies are not afraid to go near large cities if it makes military sence to do so.  Mogadishu is another example.  But we also arent dealing with the same carpet bombing tactics of the Second World War.


----------



## George Wallace

mariomike said:
			
		

> "The great aerial bombardments of the Second World War were not forgotten by the postwar generation. Today, wars only crop up in remote places where both sides know there is no threat of annihilation from the skies. That, in a nutshell, is the lesson Bomber Command taught the world."
> Source: "Battlefields in the air: Canadians in Bomber Command." by Dan McCaffery 1995.
> 
> "The city area raids have left their mark on the German people as well as on their cities. Far more than any other military action that preceded the actual occupation of Germany itself, these attacks left the German people with a solid lesson in the disadvantages of war. It was a terrible lesson; conceivably that lesson, both in Germany and abroad, could be the most lasting single effect of the air war.
> This is fully supported by the example of the devastated cities of Japan and their unhappy and hungry surviving inhabitants."
> United States Strategic Bombing Survey



I wonder if Dan McCaffery forgot all about Hanoi, and numerous other North Vietnamese cities.


----------



## Michael OLeary

George Wallace said:
			
		

> I wonder if Dan McCaffery forgot all about Hanoi, and numerous other North Vietnamese cities.



Perhaps his definition of "remote places" hinges on a requirement for the local language not being of European origin.


----------



## mariomike

George Wallace said:
			
		

> I wonder if Dan McCaffery forgot all about Hanoi, and numerous other North Vietnamese cities.



The bombing of Vietnam was restricted.
The bombing Germany and Japan was unrestricted. As soon as the a-bombs were ready, they used them.


----------



## George Wallace

mariomike said:
			
		

> The bombing of Vietnam was restricted.



I'm not quite sure how "restricted" the "CARPET Bombing" of North Vietnamese cities was.  Could you take some time to clarify this?


----------



## ltmaverick25

It was resticted in that Lyndon Johnson insisted on reviewing every bombing target before a bombing mission was carried out.  His staff would rate each potential target in terms of military value and potential for civilian or collateral damage.  Because of this policy several targets were removed from the bombing list.

The policy was not uniformly implemented from the start of the war until the end though.  Domestic politics played a significant role in the type of bombing that was available to the military.  From that point of view it is very safe to say that compared to bombing carried out in the Second World War, the Vietnam bombings were indeed restricted.

But I would argue that this is more a factor of revolutionairy media technology then as a result of Germany/Japan.


----------



## Journeyman

OK, Reader's Digest response:
I'd suggest having a look at Gen. Rupert Smith's Utility of Force in the Modern World. War isn't about "remoteness," or "people sufficiently different from us, so they're safe to attack" -- as always, it's about power, perceptions of threat to national/tribal interest, and calculations of perceived losses and gains by acting with force. 
Have a read, then get back to us.

-------------------------
Long-winded response:



			
				mariomike said:
			
		

> "The great aerial bombardments of the Second World War were not forgotten by the postwar generation. Today, wars only crop up in remote places where both sides know there is no threat of annihilation from the skies. That, in a nutshell, is the lesson Bomber Command taught the world."
> Source: "Battlefields in the air: Canadians in Bomber Command." by Dan McCaffery


You choose a quote which states clearly that "both sides know there is no threat of annihilation from the skies." In your initial 'scenario' (Dresden/Hiroshima), was there any threat of Washington or Ottawa being of annihilated from the skies? No; so the initial premise is wrong. 

Overlooking the flawed premise, was the west (US in particular) _capable_ of of annihilating Belet Huen, Kosovo Polje, Shah Wal-i-Kot? Yes. Very much so. Even in Vietnam, could the US have annihilated very developed cities, such as Hanoi and Haiphong (arguably equivalent to Dresden or Nagasaki)? Yes, but as noted, they _chose_ restraint for international political reasons. This does nothing to diminish the capability of one side facing "annihilation from the sky." With North Vietnam (Somalia, Kosovo, Afghanistan) having no capability for striking back in an equivalent manner, I suggest that McCaffery is wrong, which therefore does nothing to further your argument.



			
				mariomike said:
			
		

> "The city area raids have left their mark on the German people as well as on their cities. Far more than any other military action that preceded the actual occupation of Germany itself, these attacks left the German people with a solid lesson in the disadvantages of war. It was a terrible lesson; conceivably that lesson, both in Germany and abroad, could be the most lasting single effect of the air war."
> United States Strategic Bombing Survey


Two points here.
One, the USSBS states that the Germans learned "the disadvantages of war," not "the disadvantages of war...except in banana republics." 

Secondly, and this is more towards your choice of sources. The US Strategic Bombing Survey was conducted between 1944 and 1947. Give me a break; how could a document over 60 years freakin' old tell us what countries are thinking today about the utility of force in the current geo-strategic environment.

Neither of your quotes come close to backing your statement that wars are now fought in remote places because of what happened to German/Japanese cities. Nor have you made a compelling argument about both sides fearing death from the skies.


In today's world, "remoteness," whether physically [distance], or culturally [Christians, Muslims, Orthodox Serbs all fought in former-Yugo], isn't even scarcely a planning factor.


ps - if you'd argue the case about developed societies not going to war against one another because of intertwined global economies (another popular theory), you may have more credibility.


----------



## George Wallace

And the comparison of munitions and the destructive power of those munitions carried by B-52's compared to what was carried in Lancaster, Liberator, Halifax and other bombers of the Second World War?  

I really don't like the "Revisionist History" that some are putting forward.  The 'unknowing' writing on things that they have no comprehension of is criminal in the damage they are doing to history.  Denial of the Holocaust has already taken place in some quarters.  Now we see it in other parts of our history too.


----------



## geo

Hmmm...
IIRC, the Germans were the 1st to bomb cities - using Zeppelins - bombing London during WW1
Then the Germans bombed cities during the Spanish civil war... followed by bombing of cities of Poland, England, Russia..... well, you get the general idea.

Once total war was declared, total war was declared and nothing much was safe.  If your factories were build in residential neighborhoods - then the neighborhoods were fair game...

WRT the A bombing of Japan.... the alternative was a traditional invasion of the home islands... and considering the hundreds of thousands of people who would have died in such a fight..... dropping the bombs was a reasonnable decision.


----------



## mariomike

George Wallace said:
			
		

> I really don't like the "Revisionist History" that some are putting forward.  The 'unknowing' writing on things that they have no comprehension of is criminal in the damage they are doing to history.  Denial of the Holocaust has already taken place in some quarters.  Now we see it in other parts of our history too.



I can see where this is going. If that's the way you feel, please ban me. I won't mind a bit.
Good night.


----------



## ltmaverick25

I dont understand, why would you want to be banned based on George's opinion on revisionist history?


----------



## McG

geo said:
			
		

> Hmmm...
> IIRC, the Germans were the 1st to bomb cities - using Zeppelins - bombing London during WW1


Bombardment of cities occurred long before people ever learned to fly.  The Germans don't get the credit for this.


----------



## Michael OLeary

mariomike said:
			
		

> I can see where this is going. If that's the way you feel, please ban me. I won't mind a bit.
> Good night.



If that's the way you feel, just stop posting.  I won't mind a bit, and the thread can return to talking about the Canadian War Museum.

On the other hand, please feel free to defend your views and meet counter arguments with reasoned responses.


----------



## mariomike

Thank you, Mr O'Leary. I had an emotional reaction. 
I could have done a better job expressing my opinions on the subject. 
My apologies to Mr. Wallace and the other members.


----------



## geo

MCG said:
			
		

> Bombardment of cities occurred long before people ever learned to fly.  The Germans don't get the credit for this.


laying siege to cities is old stuff.... but, since "civilized" nations started fighting - the germans started with the Aerial bombardment.  The Allies might have chosen to do it... but the Germans were 1st IIRC


----------



## mariomike

geo said:
			
		

> the germans started with the Aerial bombardment.



A Zeppelin dropped 1800 lbs of bombs on Antwerp 26 Aug 1914. Apparently, there was an anti-bombing agreement.  Two days later a pair of airships attacked the city again. In the initial assault, a dozen people, all civilians were killed. One bomb blew apart a hospital wing. They were aiming at a military fortification on the outskirt of the city, but with no bomb sights, there wasn't much accuracy.


----------



## observor 69

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerial_bombing_of_cities
Italian-Turkish War of 1911-1912
The very first aerial act of aggression occurred during the Italian-Turkish War of 1911-1912 in North Africa. Italy had been using aircraft to monitor enemy troop movements and search for Turkish artillery positions. One Italian pilot, Lieutenant Giulio Gavotti, realized that the aircraft could be used for more than simple reconnaissance. The event occurred over a Turkish camp at Ain Zara in Libya on 1 November 1911. Lt. Gavotti was flying his Taube monoplane at an altitude of 600 ft (185 m) when he took four small 4.5 lb (2 kg) grenades from a leather pouch, screwed in the detonators he had taken aboard his aircraft in his pocket, and threw each bomb over the side by hand. Although no one was injured and little damage was done, Lt. Gavotti earned his place in history for conducting the first aerial bombing raid ever recorded.[citation needed]
[edit]


----------



## geo

Thanks Badenguy... I stand corrected.


----------



## mariomike

Baden  Guy said:
			
		

> Italian-Turkish War of 1911-1912



Italian General Guilo Douhet wrote a report on this. 
Some historians say that Gen Douhet is the godfather of air power. Ranking alongside Trenchard and Billy Mitchell as advocates of assault on the heart of a nation by self-contained, self-defending, high altitude bomber formations. 
His book, "Command of the Air" was published in in 1921:
http://www.airforcehistory.hq.af.mil/Publications/fulltext/command_of_the_air.pdf
I should have specified that although Germany was not the first to bomb in history,  they were the first to bomb in a World War.


----------



## Journeyman

Yes, airpower theorists always keep a copy of Douhet's _Command of the Air_ under their pillows -- much as naval theorists will cite Mahan's _Influence of Sea Power_, many will nod knowingly at Sun Tzu's _Art of War_, and everyone has a mandatory quote or two from Clausewitz's _On War_ (although apparently it's been read cover to cover by only eight people since being published in 1832).

None of which explains why the CWM wants to spend my tax dollars on a drawing of a militia CO for its collection.


Thought I'd forgotten the reason for resurrecting this latest CWM discussion, hadn't you?  ;D


----------



## Infanteer

Journeyman said:
			
		

> Clausewitz's _On War_ (although apparently it's been read cover to cover by only eight people since being published in 1832).



Eff me - I should get the post-nomials "R.C." being one of the 8.


----------



## Danjanou

Infanteer said:
			
		

> Eff me - I should get the post-nomials "R.C." being one of the 8.



Me too, mind it was on a mandatory reading list assigned by a rather sadistic prof. At least he didn't make me read it in the original German.  8)


----------



## MARS

Sorry for the necropost, but an update on Karen Bailey's work:

Reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from today’s Ottawa Sun

http://www.ottawasun.com/news/columnists/earl_mcrae/2009/08/26/10626951.html

Artist's Afghan works get the brush off
Military refuses to promote paintings they helped fund, of our troops in Afghanistan

By Earl McRae, Sun Media

Last Updated: 27th August 2009, 6:56am

------------------------------------------
A hurtful, cruel snub, but so bloody typical in this no-rate country symbolized by The Canadian Disease: Small, dull, dreary, half-dead minds shrivelled by a crippling apathy, inertia, and disinclination to dislodge oneself from life’s comfortable sit-but-do-nothing crapper.

Karen Bailey, war artist, has had to resort to self-exhibiting her magnificent paintings in the corridor outside her small studio in an old former school on Crichton St. because she can’t get Canada to give a damn about her work, including, most inexcusably, the Canadian military that flew her to Afghanistan because it was supposedly proud of the men and women doctors and nurses in our armed forces who’ve been attending sick, wounded, and dying soldiers and Afghan civilians at the Kandahar base hospital.

But are you ready for this? The Americans, the Americans heard of Karen Bailey’s paintings of our brave Canadian doctors, nurses, and medical technicians at work, and the Americans will be proudly exhibiting her acrylic images for an entire month next year at the University of New Orleans’ prestigious St. Claude Gallery, part of the largest museum devoted to Second World War artifacts in the United States.

“We are very much looking forward to this show,” said A. Lawrence Jenkins, professor and chair of the UNO department of fine arts, in a letter this week to Karen Bailey. And any and all costs, including Karen Bailey’s flights, meals, and accommodation, will be looked after by the gallery.

God bless you, America. 

Shame on you, Canada. 

If, however, you are not one of the apathetic, inert, Canadian dullards, you can show your caring, your pride in our soldiers, by showing up for Karen Bailey’s exhibit from the 28th of September to the 9th of October between 10 a.m. and 2 p.m. (closed Sunday) at 200 Crichton St.

“I hope people don’t mind that all I will be serving is water,” she says in her small, cramped, rented studio on the top floor of the old school, “but I’m putting it on myself and it’s all I can afford.” 

Bailey, whose paintings in various genres have been exhibited in Britain, Ireland, the U.S. and Canada, some of which are in private collections, was not at all motivated by personal profit when her application was accepted by the Canadian Forces Artists Program to go to Afghanistan; her desire to focus on the hard-working, selfless, unsung medical personnel, not the combat soldiers.

“I just wanted to create this legacy of paintings. The department of national defence gave me the impression it really cared that I was doing this. They paid my way there and back on a military plane.”

She spent a week at the base hospital in June 2007 sketching and taking photographs of our military medical doctors and nurses at work, in and out of the operating room, and what she experienced has changed her forever.

“They are such wonderful, devoted, compassionate, inspiring people,” she says, tears welling in her eyes. “They are so proud of what they do, they made me even prouder to be a Canadian. It’s so important to recognize them. No soldiers were hurt when I was there, so I saw them attending to civilians; war-injured Afghan adults and children.

“One little girl, she was only eight, they thought they might have to amputate her leg, but one of our Canadian doctors devised a skin-grafting method to save it, and I was there the day she walked out of the hospital.

“Even the Taliban would leave their injured children at the gates of the base to be taken into the hospital. Taliban fighters themselves would come, hoping to be treated. After they were, they were held captive.”

When Bailey got home she immersed herself totally in her war theatre paintings, 20 canvasses, and just recently finished the two-year project. But it wasn’t just recently that, disturbingly, she became aware of an appalling disinterest in her on-going work by the same military hierarchy that approved her trip. She was hoping it might have a desire to proudly show her work of its Canadian doctors and nurses, to proudly show Canadians, to help her in that initiative. Wrong.

“I thought the DND people would like to come and see my work, but there was no interest.”

She wrote letters, she e-mailed, she phoned, asking for its help in showcasing the paintings, maybe in military establishments. The answer was no.

“I was told that if they put them up on a wall, people might think they’re for sale. Or it’d be perceived as favouring an artist.” Thundering bureaucratic idiocy.

She spoke to a high-ranking officer at Camp Borden about showing her work. “When I told him it was contemporary art he said ‘What’s that mean?’ He said they only display tanks and weapons.” 

She asked Tim Hortons head office if it could help; it has an outlet on the Kandahar base. “They said it wasn’t the kind of thing they’re into.”

She contacted the Canadian War Museum. “They said it could maybe be considered for an exhibit in 2012.” 

She e-mailed officials of more than 60 venues across Canada, some military, that would seem appropriate for her exhibit. “Nothing positive. I’ve had 40 rejections so far, some didn’t bother responding.”

She thought for sure that the surgeon-general of the Canadian Forces, brigadier general Hilary Jaeger (who retired in July) would have an interest in seeing her work and help her in getting it displayed to Canadians. An officer with DND met with Jaeger on Bailey’s behalf.

In his subsequent letter to Bailey — which she shows me — he wrote: “My meeting with BGen Jaeger yesterday was not as productive as I’d hoped.” And Jaeger’s “insight,” he went on, “was to the effect that the CFHS (Canadian Forces Health Service) and CF (Canadian Forces) do not see the work our people do in Afghanistan as ‘extraordinary’— they are doing what they’re trained to do. Accordingly efforts to showcase or immortalize the efforts of personnel in Afghanistan will likely not resonate with the CF leadership.”

Can you believe this crock? What our military doctors and nurses do in Afghanistan is not extraordinary? It’s what “they’re trained to do?” So to hell with showcasing them? Then why did DND allow Karen Bailey to waste her time painting them if they didn’t goddam hugely matter? I’m enraged, and you out there should be too.

Karen Bailey, superior Canadian: 613-562-2497. 

Contact McRae at earl.mcrae@sunmedia.ca or leave a message at 613-739-5133, ext. 469. 

------------------------------------------------

Unfortunate...


----------



## PMedMoe

Unfortunate indeed, but just to play Devil's Advocate, here's some info on the Canadian Forces Artist Program (CFAP):

http://www.cmp-cpm.forces.gc.ca/dhh-dhp/gal/ap-pa/index-eng.asp



> The CFAP provides a range of unique opportunities to support the independent, creative work of professional Canadian artists of all cultures who wish to contribute to the history of the Canadian Forces. It is the aim of the CFAP to allow artists from across Canada, working in various mediums, to capture the daily operations, personnel, and spirit of the Canadian Forces.
> 
> Professional Canadian artists will have the opportunity to research, understand and reflect on the participation of men and women of the Canadian Forces in a wide variety of activities at home and abroad. Any professional artist who is a Canadian citizen or landed immigrant in good health will be able to participate in the Program. The Program will welcome painters, sculptors, and printers as well as other professional artists such as musicians, actors and writers.
> 
> Artists will be transported and escorted according to available resources and imposed operational limitations. National Defence will also provide food and accommodation to the artist equal to the level provided to the members of the Canadian Forces being deployed. National Defence may request from the artist a tangible artistic contribution to be negotiated at the time of selection.



http://www.artistsincanada.com/php/article.php?id=780 - Note the final paragraph.

No where does it say that DND or the CF will help the artist showcase their work.


----------



## The Bread Guy

PMedMoe said:
			
		

> No where does it say that DND or the CF will help the artist showcase their work.


That's right as far as the _*rules*_ go, but *if* this passage reflects what was actually said/written (with all the usual MSM caveats, especially in an opinion piece quoting someone third-hand from a letter):


> She thought for sure that the surgeon-general of the Canadian Forces, brigadier general Hilary Jaeger (who retired in July) would have an interest in seeing her work and help her in getting it displayed to Canadians. An officer with DND met with Jaeger on Bailey’s behalf.
> 
> In his subsequent letter to Bailey — which she shows me — he wrote: “My meeting with BGen Jaeger yesterday was not as productive as I’d hoped.” *And Jaeger’s “insight,” he went on, “was to the effect that the CFHS (Canadian Forces Health Service) and CF (Canadian Forces) do not see the work our people do in Afghanistan as ‘extraordinary’— they are doing what they’re trained to do. Accordingly efforts to showcase or immortalize the efforts of personnel in Afghanistan will likely not resonate with the CF leadership.”*


then I'm disappointed in the _*attitude*_ regarding the sharing of stories (even via artwork) on the part of some senior officers in the CF.  

To play the "Counter Devil's Advocate" , you could apply the same rationale to ANY work done by the CF anywhere - *if* that's true, there's no reason to even embed reporters with CF units in Afghanistan because, at one level, they're all doing the job they're paid for, right?  Going further, why bother having all those CF Public Affairs and other folks write up pieces about what's happening?  I believe a GREAT job is being done, and Canadians should know about the work the men and women over there are doing.

Now, is anyone in "the system" uncomfortable about seeming to sanction sharing of imagery showing the nastier parts of war?  That's a very different question....


----------



## PMedMoe

No worries, Tony, I agree with you.  It just seems to me that this opinion piece is headed more towards the "Oh, they paid me to go and paint pictures but now they won't help me sell them" direction.


----------



## Blackadder1916

Has the DHH/CFAP organized any (consolidated vice indiv artist's work) tours or exhibits of recent war art?

Some of Ms. Bailey's work can be seen here. http://www.karenbailey.ca/current_work/Afghanistan/afghanistan_index.html

Critiquing the relative merits of an artist's medium, technique, style, subject matter or message are well beyond my ". . .small, dull, dreary, half-dead mind".  But I am able to form an opinion  of what this ". . . apathetic, inert, Canadian dullard . . ." likes.  Unfortunately, Ms. Bailey's pieces (at least the ones on her site) don't get on my list.  They're okay, but not inspiring (to me, anyway). 

It would be "nice" if there were regular exhibitions of the works generated through the CFAP, but I get the sense that Ms. Bailey is seeking a more individualized (subsidized) showcase of this particular collection.  The CF (or any of its serving members in an official capacity) should not be basing decisions on an opinion of art.  They do a lot of things well, but I don't remember art criticism being a PO on any course I ever attended.  There may be an element of "don't like your work" in the lack of enthusiasm that Ms. Bailey has encountered from the military, but she should remember that the CF is not in the business of "patron of the arts".


----------



## The Bread Guy

PMedMoe said:
			
		

> No worries, Tony, I agree with you.  It just seems to me that this opinion piece is headed more towards the "Oh, they paid me to go and paint pictures but now they won't help me sell them" direction.





			
				Blackadder1916 said:
			
		

> There may be an element of "don't like your work" in the lack of enthusiasm that Ms. Bailey has encountered from the military, but she should remember that the CF is not in the business of "patron of the arts".



If the whining is indeed about "why isn't the CF marketing my pieces?" or "why isn't the CF displaying my pieces?", bang on.  In that case, a simple (but more politely/bureaucratically phrased) "sorry, we paid you to paint 'em, not to flog 'em" would have been way better than the response attributed to the Surgeon General.

_- edited to correct quote formatting -_


----------



## Blackadder1916

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> If the whining is indeed about "why isn't the CF marketing my pieces?" or "why isn't the CF displaying my pieces?", bang on.  In that case, a simple (but more politely/bureaucratically phrased) "sorry, we paid you to paint 'em, not to flog 'em" would have been way better than the response attributed to the Surgeon General.



My impression is that she received such a response earlier.



> She wrote letters, she e-mailed, she phoned, asking for its help in showcasing the paintings, maybe in military establishments. The answer was no.
> 
> “I was told that if they put them up on a wall, people might think they’re for sale. Or it’d be perceived as favouring an artist.” Thundering bureaucratic idiocy.


----------



## PMedMoe

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> If the whining is indeed about "why isn't the CF marketing my pieces?" or "why isn't the CF displaying my pieces?", bang on.  In that case, a simple (but more politely/bureaucratically phrased) "sorry, we paid you to paint 'em, not to flog 'em" would have been way better than the response attributed to the Surgeon General.



I'd not care to comment either way on the remark _supposedly_ given by BGen Jaeger, who is no longer the Surg Gen and who probably has no say in CFAP's selection of artists or subsequent dealings with them.

By the way, your second quote is Blackadder's, not mine.


----------



## Blackadder1916

Here's a 'less slanted' piece from the Ottawa Citizen that provides some more details.

DND snubs artist's portraits of medics


> By Paul Gessell, The Ottawa CitizenAugust 27, 2009 9:01 AM
> 
> OTTAWA — Ottawa artist Karen Bailey says the Defence Department is giving the cold shoulder to her attempts, in paintings and a book, to honour the work of Canadian medical personnel serving in a military hospital in Afghanistan.
> 
> "They're just not interested," Bailey says of the Canadian Forces leadership.
> 
> The issue does not appear to be the quality or content of Bailey's paintings showing Canadian military doctors, nurses and others working in the Kandahar hospital called Role 3 but the very attempt by Bailey to single out the medical crew for praise and recognition in a planned book about her paintings.
> 
> An email recently sent to Bailey from a senior military officer, purportedly quoting the views of Brigadier General Hilary Jaeger, the outgoing surgeon general and senior Canadian Forces medical officer, says headquarters does not see the work of the medical personnel in Afghanistan as "extraordinary" and consequently "efforts to showcase or immortalize the efforts of personnel in Afghanistan will likely not resonate with the CF leadership."
> 
> More on that email later. First some background.
> 
> Back in 2007, Bailey participated in a program that allows artists to be embedded with the military for brief periods to sketch, paint or photograph soldiers in action. Bailey specifically requested to be posted with some "under-recognized, behind-the-scenes" personnel because those are the kinds of people she likes to paint.
> 
> Bailey figured the military would send her to Defence headquarters to sketch cafeteria workers. Instead, she found herself strapped into a Hercules en route to Afghanistan.
> 
> For a week, Bailey sketched non-stop the activities at Role 3. She bonded with the Canadian medical personnel and their many Afghan patients and, upon returning home, started painting almost two dozen scenes of the Canadian military doctors and nurses.
> 
> Some of those medical workers, while passing through Ottawa during the subsequent two years, have stopped by Bailey's studio to pose again for her as the sketches evolved into paintings.
> 
> These workers in the paintings are not romanticized nor turned into superheroes. Instead, they look like remarkably ordinary people engaged in extraordinary circumstances, patching up horribly injured Afghans.
> 
> A few of the paintings feature an eight-year-old Afghan girl, Maztlifa, who was injured in a Taliban attack. One of her legs was so mutilated that amputation seemed necessary. But the Canadians gambled on a daring procedure that intentionally, but temporarily, fused her legs together, ultimately allowing the little girl many weeks later to walk out of the hospital on two good legs.
> 
> Canada's seven-year-old dominant position at Role 3 ends this month (September). Then the Americans take over.
> 
> Bailey thinks Canada's efforts at the hospital should be recognized. She has, therefore, decided to mount an exhibition of her paintings at the Crichton Cultural Community Centre from Sept. 28 to Oct. 9 to mark the end of Canada's leading role at the hospital.
> 
> The exhibition is called Triage. That is also the name of a book Bailey hopes to produce next year. The book would include reproductions of her paintings and personal comments from some of the medical personnel in the paintings. Laura Brandon, curator of war art for the Canadian War Museum, has already contributed an essay.
> 
> *The medical services branch of the military has refused Bailey's request to help fund the book. Bailey has received some donations elsewhere, including free graphic design expertise, to produce the 48-page bilingual book but still needs $10,000 for printing 1,000 copies. Brigadier General Jaeger did not accept an invitation to view the paintings.*
> 
> Major Andre Berdais is the director of communications for the medical services branch of the Canadian Forces. Berdais says the military has no objections to Bailey's book but has no funds that can be used for such projects because all money is reserved for patient care. Some other branch of the military might be interested in helping fund the project but Berdais was unsure which branch that might be.
> 
> Berdais said he was unable to reach Jaeger for comment on the email sent to Bailey because the general is in the midst of a transfer to Afghanistan where she will soon begin a new job that Berdais was not yet authorized to identify.
> 
> *The major seemed surprised at the tone of the comments in the email purporting to quote Jaeger. (Bailey has asked that the name of the officer who sent the email to her remain confidential.)* However, Berdais conceded that there is a culture within the medical branch that might have a tendency to shy away from public praise.
> 
> "In a sense here, it's like, shucks, we're just doing our job. That's the attitude here."
> 
> Bailey is dumbfounded by the military's refusal to participate in what she calls a "good news" story about Canada's efforts in Afghanistan. That "good news" comes at a time when public opinion polls show dwindling support at home for the Afghan adventure. Publicizing the good works done by Canadian medical personnel in a hospital could presumably result in positive public relations for the military.
> 
> The exhibition of Bailey's paintings in a corridor of the Crichton Community Centre was arranged by the artist because no other gallery in Canada seemed interested in showing the works. However, Bailey and another Ottawa artist, Karole Marois, have been invited to exhibit their Canadian war art in New Orleans.
> 
> The UNO St. Claude Gallery, which is run by the University of New Orleans, will mount an exhibition of the two Ottawa artists' war art from May 8 until June 6 next year. Marois created a series of mixed media works in 2005 marking the 60th anniversary of the end of the Second World War. The UNO gallery, Bailey says, is hoping to tour the exhibition to other university galleries in the United States.
> 
> *Canadian Forces has invited Bailey, along with other recent participants in the military art program, to exhibit a few examples of their work in a hallway at Defence headquarters for a few hours one day. The invitation came with a warning that artists were responsible for transporting works themselves to and from the building and that there were no funds even to buy "donuts" for a reception.*
> 
> Bailey is hoping some person, organization or company will purchase her Afghanistan paintings and donate them all to the war museum. The museum imposed a moratorium more than a year ago halting the acquisition, by donation or purchase, of contemporary war art until new guidelines can be written.
> 
> "There is a desire to have this completed sometime this fall," says museum spokesman Pierre Leduc.
> 
> Meanwhile, Bailey says she is optimistic her book will be published, even without help from Defence.
> 
> Berdais, the health services communications director, wishes Bailey well.
> 
> "If the book comes out, some of us are probably going to go out and buy that book," Berdais said.
> -------
> The exhibition Triage runs from Sept. 28 to Oct. 9 at Crichton Cultural Community Centre, 200 Crichton. For information phone 613-562-2497 or visit www.karenbailey.ca



While I'm still not competent to adequately critique Ms. Bailey's artistic accomplishments beyond 'like - don't like', I am developing an opinion that she does have an understanding into the "business" aspects of art and that this entire episode is solely an attempt to get funding for 'her vision'.

As to the comments attributed to BGen Jaeger - considering that Ms. Bailey is not disclosing publicizing the name of the "senior officer" who paraphrased the opinion(?) of the former Surg Gen, I suspect that there is someone keeping his/her head down because of stupidity in taking an unofficial role in furthering a private (outside the CF) agenda.


----------



## The Bread Guy

PMedMoe said:
			
		

> By the way, your second quote is Blackadder's, not mine.


My bad - fixed it.



			
				Blackadder1916 said:
			
		

> As to the comments attributed to BGen Jaeger - considering that Ms. Bailey is not disclosing publicizing the name of the "senior officer" who paraphrased the opinion(?) of the former Surg Gen, I suspected that there is someone keeping his/her head down because of the stupidity in taking an unofficial role in furthering a private (outside the CF) agenda.


Hence, my Libra-like caveats and "ifs"...


----------



## MarkOttawa

A post at _The Torch_ with two good, short, videos by John Robson of the _Ottawa Citizen_:
http://toyoufromfailinghands.blogspot.com/2009/08/canadian-war-museum-extraordinary-story.html

OK, nitpick.

Mark
Ottawa


----------



## mellian

Since the place opened, been meaning to visit the museum, yet never got around to. Probably would have been easier if I could have found someone to go with...apart from some folks who wanted to protest a particular exhibit some years ago.


----------



## mariomike

mellian said:
			
		

> ...apart from some folks who wanted to protest a particular exhibit some years ago.



They fixed that:
http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/financialpost/story.html?id=d2a2cbfa-59b0-4275-b18b-87883fb456d8&k=8217


----------



## mellian

mariomike said:
			
		

> They fixed that:
> http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/financialpost/story.html?id=d2a2cbfa-59b0-4275-b18b-87883fb456d8&k=8217



I have not heard about that one. I was referring to the Afghanistan exhibit.

http://www.warmuseum.ca/cwm/index_e.aspx?ArticleID=19362

During the planning stage of the exhibit, there was discussions of adding an anti-war domestic side of the war as someone at the museum was in contact with someone in the protest group I was involved with or vice versa to help with that aspect, but did not pan out due to disagreements, and some folks thought about protesting the exhibit which I was against. As far as I could tell, neither the anti-war thing or the protest happened.


----------



## mariomike

Thank you for posting that. I enjoy taking the train to Ottawa. Lots to see and do.


----------



## ltmaverick25

mellian said:
			
		

> I have not heard about that one. I was referring to the Afghanistan exhibit.
> 
> http://www.warmuseum.ca/cwm/index_e.aspx?ArticleID=19362
> 
> During the planning stage of the exhibit, there was discussions of adding an anti-war domestic side of the war as someone at the museum was in contact with someone in the protest group I was involved with or vice versa to help with that aspect, but did not pan out due to disagreements, and some folks thought about protesting the exhibit which I was against. As far as I could tell, neither the anti-war thing or the protest happened.



I think its good that they left the anti-war domestic side of things out of the war museum.  If they want an exhibit, they should push for their own museum.  That way the war museum does not get waterred down by politics, and every activist group and their dog.


----------



## TCBF

ltmaverick25 said:
			
		

> I think its good that they left the anti-war domestic side of things out of the war museum.  If they want an exhibit, they should push for their own museum.  That way the war museum does not get waterred down by politics, and every activist group and their dog.



- Don't go to the back room of the Juno Beach Centre, then.  It is full of stories about what WW2 means to a bunch of self-centered post-war baby-boomer slackers all caught up in their own 'cultures'.  If I was a WW2 vet and I walked through that room, I would be tempted to pull my old BREN out of the cosmoline...


----------



## Edward Campbell

I stick with my views, expressed about four years ago on or around page 5 of this thread: the "role" of a museum is *educational* and some, often a lot of controversy should be welcomed.

My problem with the Canadian War Museum, effective my most recent visit a few days ago, is the same as it was when the CWM opened: the signage, especially the technical signage is poor - so poor as to be embarrassing. When signage exists it is, too often, written at a grade school level (grade school explanations ought to be there, don't get me wrong, but that ought not to be the only explanations on view) and fails to cover key parts of the display in question. I recognize that _adequate_ and _conventional_ signage would overwhelm some displays but there are, other, better, electronic ways to allow visitors to access much more and much more pertinent and accurate information than is now on display.

My second problem is: no catalogue. The primary, educational function of the CWM remains a failure because there is no authoritative catalogue.

Some guesses:

+ Adequate, electronic signage will costs several tens of millions of dollars and I know the money isn't there; and

+ A proper catalogue can, probably, be written by a committee of distinguished historians in three or four years at a total cost of less than $2.5 Million. I know about camels being horses designed by committees, but a subject as deep and broad as Canada's military history, especially with the e.g. aboriginal and technological aspects involved, is, I suggest, beyond the ken of any one Canadian historian.


----------



## The Bread Guy

From the CF's media advisory:


> Artwork created through the Canadian Forces Artists Program (CFAP) will be on display at National Defence Headquarters on Tuesday, November 17, 2009.
> 
> CFAP will be unveiling works of art created by five artists in the program from 2005-2007: Allen Ball, *Karen Bailey*, William MacDonnell, Scott Waters and Catherine Jones. Through CFAP, these artists were provided with 7-14 day experiences with the Canadian Forces and produced exceptional art that represent the accomplishments of our men and women in uniform.
> 
> Artists will be on location throughout the morning to meet with the media and speak about their experiences with CFAP and their art.
> 
> WHEN:   Tuesday, November 17, 2009
> 
> TIME:   9:15 a.m. - 11:30 a.m.
> A presentation will be held at 9:30 a.m.
> 
> WHERE:  National Defence Headquarters Concourse (main corridor)
> 101 Colonel By Drive, Ottawa ....


----------



## Edward Campbell

More, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisons of the Copyright Act, from the _Ottawa Citizen_, in war artist Gertrude Kearns:

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/canada-in-afghanistan/takes+courage+takes+artistic+courage/5439635/story.html


> War takes courage - and war art takes artistic courage
> 
> By Elizabeth Payne, Ottawa Citizen
> 
> September 22, 2011
> 
> Gertrude Kearns is not who you might think she is. Petite, with a mass of curly hair and a fondness for black, she looks every inch the Toronto Artist. Which she is.
> 
> She is also one of Canada's leading war artists - whose work never shies away from addressing the misery, the courage and the complex moral issues embedded in the war experience. If the two roles seem at odds, they are not.
> 
> In an age in which wearing red on Fridays and watching Don Cherry wax on about military heroes is about as nuanced as most public discussion on the military gets, Kearns' work is challenging and unblinking, which is rare. Her unvarnished approach has won her respect from inside and outside the military. It has also attracted controversy.
> 
> Kearns says she has long felt there was a lack of recognition in the world of serious art for Canadian military history. She has devoted much of her career to changing that with work about war that is both officially commissioned and self-initiated. Her interest in war art has made her unusual among her peers. "I am not an automatic left-wing antiwar person, which is usually the artistic left position."
> 
> She has been on training missions with soldiers, is a member of the Royal Canadian Military Institute in Toronto where she is war artist in residence, and has chronicled the war in Afghanistan. Kearns was at the Kandahar Air Base in Afghanistan in a convoy waiting to follow other vehicles in 2005 when diplomat Glyn Berry was killed in a bomb attack. She put away the camera she always carries with her and pitched in, eventually helping to clean the bloody treatment rooms after the wounded had been evacuated from the base.
> 
> Much of the controversy involving Kearns' pieces has landed at the doorstep of the Canadian War Museum where 15 of her works are housed, nine of which are installed there. The latest of her works to hang in the museum is her portrait of Maj.-Gen. Lewis MacKenzie, who headed the UN peacekeeping force in the former Yugoslavia. The large painting of the retired general called MacKenzie/Sarajevo/1992 was placed on a wall at the museum this month.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Retired Major General Lewis Mackenzie poses beside his portrait painted by Gertrude Kearns.
> Photograph by: Wayne Cuddington, The Ottawa Citizen
> 
> When MacKenzie first saw the large drawing of him crouched on sandbags wearing a blue beret, the drawing that would form the basis of the painting in 2003, he commented: "It's saying keep the peace or I'll kill you."
> 
> Kearns later created a war poster with those words surrounding the image of MacKenzie. "It appears to be an oxymoron, but it isn't," she says of the poster. The work called Keep the Peace or I'll Kill You has been the focus of bubbling controversy, as have her series of paintings depicting a distraught Lt.-Gen.
> 
> Roméo Dallaire. Dallaire, now a senator, headed the understaffed UN mission to Rwanda during the 1994 genocide. He later suffered from post traumatic stress disorder.
> 
> MacKenzie attended Kearns' Dallaire show in 2002 and found the work interesting. He agreed to sit for Kearns for the portrait that would become one in a series of her works on military leadership. Their discussions during those sittings led to the poster.
> 
> Perhaps the most controversial of her works are her pieces depicting Canada's disastrous mission in Somalia. When the war museum opened at LeBreton Flats in 2005, the decision to prominently display her painting Somalia #2, Without Conscience led veterans groups to threaten a boycott. The painting depicts the torture of Somali teenager Shidane Arone by Canadian soldiers. The death resulted in the disbanding of the Airborne regiment.
> 
> Kearns' works highlight the war museum's own approach to depictions of war.
> 
> "War is a miserable experience," said museum historian Peter Mac-Leod when the museum opened.
> 
> "This is why we respect our veterans, because they have gone through these hideous experiences themselves. To make it something dashing and heroic, like a war movie, insults their real achievements."
> 
> The former chief of staff of Task Force Afghanistan who was instrumental in Kearns going to Afghanistan to chronicle the war, said: "Art is not supposed to match your sofa. Art is supposed to challenge you and I am perfectly OK with that."
> 
> Kearns, who takes a journalistic approach to her work, calls herself a war artist, not a military artist. Military art, she says, pays tribute to the "gallantry and the uniform and the physical accoutrements" rather than delving into psychological questions.
> 
> "War art is going to stir you up more, get a more emotional and visceral reaction than military art might."
> 
> That reaction can make people uncomfortable. But at a time when Canada's military role is changing, it serves an important purpose.
> 
> Canada needs more voices like Kearns'.
> 
> _Elizabeth Payne is a member of the Citizen's editorial board. E-mail: epayne@ottawacitizen.com_
> 
> © Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen




As (then) LCol Dave Anderson said, _"Art is not supposed to match your sofa. Art is supposed to challenge you ..."_  On that sensible basis, Kearns is a successful artist.


----------



## the 48th regulator

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> As (then) LCol Dave Anderson said, _"Art is not supposed to match your sofa. Art is supposed to challenge you ..."_  On that sensible basis, Kearns is a successful artist.



Indeed,

I had the privelage of meeting her earlier this year at the OSISS tenth anniversary conference, as she painted a portrait of LCol Stephan Grenier that was used on much material for OSISS;






And she did indeed cause cause quite a stir with these paintings, much talked about here


----------

