Lest We Forget

[capricorn]

This post is dedicated to our own Army Guy and, to the other brave men and women in uniform serving our country.

Many do not know it was a Canadian soldier that penned the famous poem In Flanders Field.

Lieutenant-Colonel McCrae was born on 30 November 1872 in Guelph, Ontario. At age 14, he joined the Highfield Cadet Corps and, three years later, enlisted in the Militia field battery. While attending the University of Toronto Medical School, he was a member of the Queen’s Own Rifles of Canada.

With Britain declaring war on Germany on 4 August 1914, Canada’s involvement was automatic. John McCrae was among the first wave of Canadians who enlisted to serve and he was appointed as brigade surgeon to the First Brigade of the Canadian Forces Artillery.

In April 1915, John McCrae was stationed near Ypres, Belgium, the area traditionally called Flanders. It was there, during the Second Battle of Ypres, that some of the fiercest fighting of the First World War occurred. Working from a dressing station on the banks of the Yser Canal, dressing hundreds of wounded soldiers from wave after wave of relentless enemy attack, he observed how “we are weary in body and wearier in mind. The general impression in my mind is of a nightmare.”

In May, 1915, on the day following the death of fellow soldier Lt Alexis Helmer of Ottawa, John McCrae wrote his now famous work, an expression of his anguish over the loss of his friend and a reflection of his surroundings – wild Poppies growing amid simple wooden crosses marking makeshift graves. These 15 lines, written in 20 minutes, captured an exact description of the sights and sounds of the area around him.

Lieutenant-Colonel John McCrae left Ypres with these memorable few lines scrawled on a scrap of paper. His words were a poem which started, “In Flanders fields the poppies blow…” Little did he know then that these 15 lines would become enshrined in the innermost thoughts and hearts of all soldiers who hear them. Through his words, the scarlet Poppy quickly became the symbol for soldiers who died in battle. The poem was first published on 8 December 1915 in England, appearing in “Punch” magazine.

In Flanders fields the poppies blow

Between the crosses, row on row,

That mark our place; and in the sky

The larks, still bravely singing, fly

Scarce heard amid the guns below.

We are the Dead. Short days ago

We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,

Loved and were loved, and now we lie

In Flanders fields.

Take up our quarrel with the foe:

To you from failing hands we throw

The torch; be yours to hold it high.

If ye break faith with us who die

We shall not sleep, though poppies grow

In Flanders fields.

http://www.legion.ca/Poppy/campaign_e.cfm

As in past years, on November 11 Canadians will gather at Cenotaphs across the country to remember the sacrifices made by so many to safeguard our freedom. Many of our soldiers gave their lives in many wars in faraway places. And to honour them, here is part of the poem "For the Fallen" by Laurence Binyon (1869-1943) recited at memorial services worldwide and at Royal Canadian Legion meetings.

They shall grow not old, as we that are left grow old:

Age shall not weary them, nor the years condemn.

At the going down of the sun and in the morning

We will remember them.

LEST WE FORGET

My thanks go out to all our soldiers serving at home and abroad.

[kengs333]

Too bad that the Canada that so many of these men and women fought and died for no longer exists.

[capricorn]

Kengs, I started this thread in the interest of the true spirit of Remembrance. Please go back to your venom infested thread in "arts and culture" and spew your hatred there.

[capricorn]

Here's a quick overview of the history of the popularity of the poppy as a symbol of Remembrance.

Each November, Poppies blossom on the lapels and collars of over half of Canada’s entire population. Since 1921, the Poppy has stood as a symbol of Remembrance, our visual pledge to never forget all those Canadians who have fallen in war and military operations. The Poppy also stands internationally as a “symbol of collective reminiscence”, as other countries have also adopted its image to honour those who have paid the ultimate sacrifice.

This significance of the Poppy can be traced to international origins.

The association of the Poppy to those who had been killed in war has existed since the Napoleonic Wars in the 19th century, over 110 years before being adopted in Canada. There exists a record from that time of how thickly Poppies grew over the graves of soldiers in the area of Flanders, France. This early connection between the Poppy and battlefield deaths described how fields that were barren before the battles exploded with the blood-red flowers after the fighting ended.

Just prior to the First World War, few Poppies grew in Flanders. During the tremendous bombardments of that war, the chalk soils became rich in lime from rubble, allowing “popaver rhoes” to thrive. When the war ended, the lime was quickly absorbed and the Poppy began to disappear again.

The person who was responsible more than any other for the adoption of the Poppy as a symbol of Remembrance in Canada and the Commonwealth was Lieutenant-Colonel John McCrae, a Canadian Medical Officer during the First World War.

http://legion.ca/Poppy/campaign_e.cfm

All proceeds from the sale of poppies goes to the Royal Canadian Legion's Poppy Fund to provide assistance to veterans and their families in need, whether or not they are Legion members. This is just one more way the Legion helps our veterans. Keep this in mind wherever you see the Legion poppies available in your community.

[kengs333]

Kengs, I started this thread in the interest of the true spirit of Remembrance. Please go back to your venom infested thread in "arts and culture" and spew your hatred there.

Where's the hatred? If you don't know what those men and women fought and died for, and that it isn't the Canada that we now have, then that's your problem.

[charter.rights]

Where's the hatred? If you don't know what those men and women fought and died for, and that it isn't the Canada that we now have, then that's your problem.

It is in fact, a Canada that all those people fought and died for. It is a Canada that is free from hypocritical religious morality. It is a Canada where every individual can love whomever they choose, without judgment or persecution. It is a Canada where freedom means freedom of thought and expression - including sexual expression. While you have the right to express your opinion, you have no right to impose it on any of us. And quite frankly your pious and sinfully judgmental opinions are wearing thin. We are entitled to reject your hate, racism and misogyny and call them for the narrow and ignorant views they truly are, whether or not you falsely think you hold moral or religious superiority.

[capricorn]

Kengs, using Remembrance as the backdrop for airing what you dislike and hate about Canada is wrong. Remembrance is about honouring and thanking those that sacrificed so much to keep our country free.

How can you presume to know what those men and women would think about our country if they walked among us today? Well, I will speak for them now since they cannot. They would tell you that you don't know what you're talking about.

[kengs333]

Kengs, using Remembrance as the backdrop for airing what you dislike and hate about Canada is wrong. Remembrance is about honouring and thanking those that sacrificed so much to keep our country free.

How can you presume to know what those men and women would think about our country if they walked among us today? Well, I will speak for them now since they cannot. They would tell you that you don't know what you're talking about.

You really need to look beyond blind sentimentality to what Canada was in 1914 and 1939. There are newspapers that have been digitized that will allow you to read for yourself. Also, I would be happy to compile a list of books you should be able to still find at the local university.

[kengs333]

It is in fact, a Canada that all those people fought and died for. It is a Canada that is free from hypocritical religious morality. It is a Canada where every individual can love whomever they choose, without judgment or persecution. It is a Canada where freedom means freedom of thought and expression - including sexual expression. While you have the right to express your opinion, you have no right to impose it on any of us. And quite frankly your pious and sinfully judgmental opinions are wearing thin. We are entitled to reject your hate, racism and misogyny and call them for the narrow and ignorant views they truly are, whether or not you falsely think you hold moral or religious superiority.

Oh, I highly doubt that they fought for the right of "sexual expression" and the "right" of gays to engage in pederasty. Most of these men came from strictly conservative, Anglo-Saxon households.

[noahbody]

It is in fact, a Canada that all those people fought and died for. It is a Canada that is free from hypocritical religious morality. It is a Canada where every individual can love whomever they choose, without judgment or persecution.

I assume you're referring to the world wars, neither of which were fought for the reasons you mentioned. They did fight out of duty, for freedom, for family, for neighbours, for you, for me and for Kengs.

What Kengs fails to realize is that many of those who fought also voted for Trudeau, who changed Canada forever through multiculturalism.

I don't totally disagree with Kengs. There are certain characteristics of Canada that would have most war veterans rolling over in their graves. We don't stand up against the Elmasrys and the Khadrs of Canada. Heck, we can't even get a non-Canadian gangster ordered deported four years ago out of the country. Instead we put him back on the street.

Things like these endanger our freedoms, families, neighbours, you and me. We need to confront them with courage instead of hiding behind the Charter when it can only be considered cowardly.

[Griz]

One things that is rarely acknowledged is the Navajo Language and the Code-Talkers. If it wasn't for those indians who knows what would've happened. ABoriginal Veterans like all veterans were proud to have went overseas and fight for the freedom of all the people in Canada like some of the dim-wit rightwingers who despise natives

[charter.rights]

I assume you're referring to the world wars, neither of which were fought for the reasons you mentioned. They did fight out of duty, for freedom, for family, for neighbours, for you, for me and for Kengs.

What Kengs fails to realize is that many of those who fought also voted for Trudeau, who changed Canada forever through multiculturalism.

I don't totally disagree with Kengs. There are certain characteristics of Canada that would have most war veterans rolling over in their graves. We don't stand up against the Elmasrys and the Khadrs of Canada. Heck, we can't even get a non-Canadian gangster ordered deported four years ago out of the country. Instead we put him back on the street.

Things like these endanger our freedoms, families, neighbours, you and me. We need to confront them with courage instead of hiding behind the Charter when it can only be considered cowardly.

No, World War soldiers fought against the oppression of thought and body. They fought to guarantee our freedom and whatever that freedom that would evolve to, including those who would be free to love freely. It is impossible for us to judge according to World War soldier's thoughts, since they were based on earlier prejudices. Instead we accept that society has evolved to a point where religious nuts no longer control morality, nor do we accept condemnation by pious nutbars. Sin does not exists and has never existed. It is a myth place on the human psyche as a means of control and conditioning. It has no basis in truth or under the realm of God - even a Christian God.

Freedom has no external controls, despite what law makers and guys trying to be priests say.

On Freedom

And an orator said, "Speak to us of Freedom."

And he answered:

At the city gate and by your fireside I have seen you prostrate yourself and worship your own freedom,

Even as slaves humble themselves before a tyrant and praise him though he slays them.

Ay, in the grove of the temple and in the shadow of the citadel I have seen the freest among you wear their freedom as a yoke and a handcuff.

And my heart bled within me; for you can only be free when even the desire of seeking freedom becomes a harness to you, and when you cease to speak of freedom as a goal and a fulfillment.

You shall be free indeed when your days are not without a care nor your nights without a want and a grief,

But rather when these things girdle your life and yet you rise above them naked and unbound.

And how shall you rise beyond your days and nights unless you break the chains which you at the dawn of your understanding have fastened around your noon hour?

In truth that which you call freedom is the strongest of these chains, though its links glitter in the sun and dazzle the eyes.

And what is it but fragments of your own self you would discard that you may become free?

If it is an unjust law you would abolish, that law was written with your own hand upon your own forehead.

You cannot erase it by burning your law books nor by washing the foreheads of your judges, though you pour the sea upon them.

And if it is a despot you would dethrone, see first that his throne erected within you is destroyed.

For how can a tyrant rule the free and the proud, but for a tyranny in their own freedom and a shame in their won pride?

And if it is a care you would cast off, that care has been chosen by you rather than imposed upon you.

And if it is a fear you would dispel, the seat of that fear is in your heart and not in the hand of the feared.

Verily all things move within your being in constant half embrace, the desired and the dreaded, the repugnant and the cherished, the pursued and that which you would escape.

These things move within you as lights and shadows in pairs that cling.

And when the shadow fades and is no more, the light that lingers becomes a shadow to another light.

And thus your freedom when it loses its fetters becomes itself the fetter of a greater freedom.

Kahlil Gibran, The Prophet

[Wild Bill]

One things that is rarely acknowledged is the Navajo Language and the Code-Talkers. If it wasn't for those indians who knows what would've happened. ABoriginal Veterans like all veterans were proud to have went overseas and fight for the freedom of all the people in Canada like some of the dim-wit rightwingers who despise natives

Despising any generalized group is illogical. People are individuals and shared guilt is a ridiculous notion.

That being said, while not a right winger I do despise SOME aboriginals, just as I despise SOME other individuals. It depends on the actions of those SPECIFIC individuals.

For example, I despise some of the protesters from Six Nations at Caledonia, specifically for their TACTICS in their protest. It has nothing to do with them being aboriginals. It's all in their individual deeds. Yet I have no such feelings for any other aboriginals and in general support other bands rights claims.

From talking to my granddad and uncles who had served in WWII, they voiced no quarrel with peoples as a group. There was no Hollywood talk like "Them dirty Nazis!" They totally understood that the "other guy" was likely not a fanatic but just fighting for his country the same as them. Their leadership was our real enemy. They had no generalized hate for the enemy soldier. They reserved that only for those who committed atrocities and war crimes. It was a dirty job but they didn't want the Germans or the Japanese to be able to impose their will on free peoples. They fought for our freedom and then they came home.

Every Remembrance Day I'm reminded of an example right here in my own town. One of our former Mayors had been captured at Dieppe and became POW. While there he had struck up a "friendship" with one of the guards.

Mind you, the fact that he was a guard still meant that you couldn't entirely be open with him but they got along. This guard was Austrian and like many such had never wanted to be taken over by Germany. One day Hitler's troops marched into town and declared "You are no longer Austrian but German!" The next day he had been singled out for his electronic knowledge and he was drafted! He wound up fixing tank radios for Rommel in the desert. He hated it and eventually managed to score the job as a prison guard.

After the war the future mayor came home and got a job at National Steel Car. They were organized into 2 man teams to electrically wire up railroad cars. Much to his surprise he found his partner to be his former camp guard! They spent the next year or so working together. The guard helped him wire and he taught him better English.

Eventually they ended up going into business together, starting one of the first cable tv companies in Canada. They remained great friends until they both grew old and died some years ago.

I was mightily impressed when I first heard their story. It taught me that we should always look at each other as individuals and not as some faceless enemy. I could understand why some Legion branches would welcome veterans from "the other side" as members today!

Tomorrow I will open some of my expensive scotch (not the stuff I keep around for unwanted relatives!) and raise a toast to these two men, my relatives who had fought and to ALL the people who had striven even to the point of losing their lives in defense of what they thought was best for themselves, their loved ones and their country!

[Rue]

Well wild Bill knows I appreciated his comments.

As for you Capricorn, I second your effort and salute Army Guy and all the others tommorrow and wil never forget.

That is all that needs to be said. Respect sometimes comes from being silent and bowing.

[Sir Bandelot]

And thus your freedom when it loses its fetters becomes itself the fetter of a greater freedom.

Thats right, a criticism of unbridled liberalism. Freedom does not mean that everything is permissible. Some times it is necessary to be un-free, as when we are obligated to fulfill our duty.

Now as to Lest we forget, I don't mind honouring those who put themselves in harms way to fight oppression and tyranny. But tyranny has many faces, and it takes more than one man to start a war. While I appreciate such events as remembrance day, we should teach our kids about the history of the world wars, about the sacrifices made by their grandparents. What we should not do, is use it as a vehicle to promote renewed militarism. War should be used to protect and defend, as a last option when no other reasonable means to resolve a conflict exists, not pre-emptive or first strikes.

Today there is a push to revise some of the laws that came about as a consequence of the world wars. In some cases to ignore what was agreed upon in those days. I believe our grandparents would have us remember those things too.

Edited November 10, 2008 by Sir Bandelot

[Army Guy]

First i just wanted to say thanks. it means alot to me and the rest of the people here, that we are in your thoughts.

As much as i would like to steal all the lime light there are some more names on this board we should also remember,

Names of people who are serving now or who have served before us,

Angus Thermopyle

Argus

M Dancer

Weoponeer.

I know there are more, feel free to add on more if you like, i apologize if i got my info incorrect, all these are the guys i'd like to salute....

Edited November 10, 2008 by Army Guy

[charter.rights]

Thats right, a criticism of unbridled liberalism. Freedom does not mean that everything is permissible. Some times it is necessary to be un-free, as when we are obligated to fulfill our duty.

Now as to Lest we forget, I don't mind honouring those who put themselves in harms way to fight oppression and tyranny. But tyranny has many faces, and it takes more than one man to start a war. While I appreciate such events as remembrance day, we should teach our kids about the history of the world wars, about the sacrifices made by their grandparents. What we should not do, is use it as a vehicle to promote renewed militarism. War should be used to protect and defend, as a last option when no other reasonable means to resolve a conflict exists, not pre-emptive or first strikes.

Today there is a push to revise some of the laws that came about as a consequence of the world wars. In some cases to ignore what was agreed upon in those days. I believe our grandparents would have us remember those things too.

Freedom IS about anything being permissible and possible. That said one's freedom cannot infringe on another. So if a guy wants to screw a donkey in the privacy of his own barn, that is not anyone's business in a truly free society. However, imposing one's sexual gratification on another person is not freedom. It is oppression and there is a huge difference.

So to truly be free we needn't worry about being free at all. We just live our lives on the principle that all men and women are free and govern ourselves accordingly.

[eyeball]

From talking to my granddad and uncles who had served in WWII, they voiced no quarrel with peoples as a group. There was no Hollywood talk like "Them dirty Nazis!" They totally understood that the "other guy" was likely not a fanatic but just fighting for his country the same as them. Their leadership was our real enemy. They had no generalized hate for the enemy soldier. They reserved that only for those who committed atrocities and war crimes. It was a dirty job but they didn't want the Germans or the Japanese to be able to impose their will on free peoples. They fought for our freedom and then they came home.

They didn't want the German or Japanese leadership to impose their will on free people. Your story makes me think about those rare times when soldiers in a battlefield would stop fighting and be at peace amongst one another, around Christmas or to gather their wounded and dead. The story Enemy Mine also comes to mind.

Enemies because they were taught to be.

Allies because they were forced to be.

Brothers because they dared to be.

I wonder if somewhere in Afghansistan there are friendships budding and developing between enemies? If there aren't I think that's what should make soldiers buried under Flanders Fields roll in their graves. It would suggest a victory of Gods Kings and Countries over humanity if people are less able to rise above these long enough to see the face of their own humanity reflected in the face of the enemy. It would mean that war really is a misadventure in vanity.

Who's fighting for humanity and where would I go to enlist?

[Griz]

Despising any generalized group is illogical. People are individuals and shared guilt is a ridiculous notion.

That being said, while not a right winger I do despise SOME aboriginals, just as I despise SOME other individuals. It depends on the actions of those SPECIFIC individuals.

For example, I despise some of the protesters from Six Nations at Caledonia, specifically for their TACTICS in their protest. It has nothing to do with them being aboriginals. It's all in their individual deeds. Yet I have no such feelings for any other aboriginals and in general support other bands rights claims.

From talking to my granddad and uncles who had served in WWII, they voiced no quarrel with peoples as a group. There was no Hollywood talk like "Them dirty Nazis!" They totally understood that the "other guy" was likely not a fanatic but just fighting for his country the same as them. Their leadership was our real enemy. They had no generalized hate for the enemy soldier. They reserved that only for those who committed atrocities and war crimes. It was a dirty job but they didn't want the Germans or the Japanese to be able to impose their will on free peoples. They fought for our freedom and then they came home.

Every Remembrance Day I'm reminded of an example right here in my own town. One of our former Mayors had been captured at Dieppe and became POW. While there he had struck up a "friendship" with one of the guards.

Mind you, the fact that he was a guard still meant that you couldn't entirely be open with him but they got along. This guard was Austrian and like many such had never wanted to be taken over by Germany. One day Hitler's troops marched into town and declared "You are no longer Austrian but German!" The next day he had been singled out for his electronic knowledge and he was drafted! He wound up fixing tank radios for Rommel in the desert. He hated it and eventually managed to score the job as a prison guard.

After the war the future mayor came home and got a job at National Steel Car. They were organized into 2 man teams to electrically wire up railroad cars. Much to his surprise he found his partner to be his former camp guard! They spent the next year or so working together. The guard helped him wire and he taught him better English.

Eventually they ended up going into business together, starting one of the first cable tv companies in Canada. They remained great friends until they both grew old and died some years ago.

I was mightily impressed when I first heard their story. It taught me that we should always look at each other as individuals and not as some faceless enemy. I could understand why some Legion branches would welcome veterans from "the other side" as members today!

Tomorrow I will open some of my expensive scotch (not the stuff I keep around for unwanted relatives!) and raise a toast to these two men, my relatives who had fought and to ALL the people who had striven even to the point of losing their lives in defense of what they thought was best for themselves, their loved ones and their country!

I knew several Aboriginal War Vets --now passed on--and they didn't get the same benefits as non-aboriginal veterans when they returned back to civilian life. And these men fought for the freedom of all the whiners in our society today--like keng and DogonPorch --hear that? They fought for their freedom to whine about the indians all the other things they can take for granted in Canada

[kengs333]

I knew several Aboriginal War Vets --now passed on--and they didn't get the same benefits as non-aboriginal veterans when they returned back to civilian life. And these men fought for the freedom of all the whiners in our society today--like keng and DogonPorch --hear that? They fought for their freedom to whine about the indians all the other things they can take for granted in Canada

Yeah, and I guess they fought for your right to label anyone with an opposing viewpoint "whiners"--in other words, to be an intellectual half-wit and dyed-in-the-wool middling ignoramous.

You talk about a few aboriginal veterans as if they won the war--all the rage nowadays making a disprorportionately huge stink over a trivial aspect of the war. Oh what would the Americans have done in the South Pacific had it note been for their Navaho "code talkers"? Well, they still would have won--that's for sure. They just would have had to have devised some codes and spent time training a bunch of non-Indian radio operators how to use it. No big deal considering the enormity of the American war effort. Please, let's kepp things in perspective...

And for the record, my father, grandfathers, great-grandfathers, great-great-grandfathers, etc. served or fought for home and family, and certainly not so that I would have to be subjected to your postcolonialist blowhard revisionist drivel.

[noahbody]

No, World War soldiers fought against the oppression of thought and body. They fought to guarantee our freedom

I agree.

and whatever that freedom that would evolve to, including those who would be free to love freely.

I disagree. Given the times, the last thing they would be fighting for would be 'to love freely.' I'm not personally against it, I just don't believe it's an accurate statement. Just like I don't think freedom meant the freedom to express extremest views such as the case was with Elmasry.

Edited November 10, 2008 by noahbody

[charter.rights]

I agree.

I disagree. Given the times, the last thing they would be fighting for would be 'to love freely.' I'm not personally against it, I just don't believe it's an accurate statement. Just like I don't think freedom meant the freedom to express extremest views such as the case was with Elmasry.

[charter.rights]

I agree.

I disagree. Given the times, the last thing they would be fighting for would be 'to love freely.' I'm not personally against it, I just don't believe it's an accurate statement. Just like I don't think freedom meant the freedom to express extremest views such as the case was with Elmasry.

Wrong. They fought for freedom and what that meant at that time. They were interested in predicting what that freedom would evolve to because they were too busy fighting for the cause.

Regardless of what one defends they hold no proprietary rights on what it becomes. In this case our freedoms involve loving whomever you wish. And so the soldiers died for our right today to include gays and women as equal partners in society.

[Black Dog]

Too bad that the Canada that so many of these men and women fought and died for no longer exists.

It's been 60 years since the last world war: would you have expected nothing to change since then?

[Sir Bandelot]

So if a guy wants to screw a donkey in the privacy of his own barn, that is not anyone's business in a truly free society.

So to truly be free we needn't worry about being free at all. We just live our lives on the principle that all men and women are free and govern ourselves accordingly.

Well that's hardly the example I was thinking of. Freedom of speech, or more broadly the freedom to express ideas should have certain limits. Ideas that portray groups of people in a negative way, like ideas that show women as inferior objects, ideas about races being subordinate to others, those are examples where freedom is not always good. Although I do not oppose freedom of expression or freedom of activities where it does not affect the liberty of others, I also would not say, all such forms of freedom are always good.

A society sets standards of decency, moral values. When somone expresses ideas that are contrary to the values of the majority, I mean ideas that would undermine freedom of others to grow into complete human beings, as with subordination of women or minorities beng portrayed in the media, society must determine what is acceptable and sometimes limit those forms of freedom.

It comes down to, nothing we do happens in isolation. Actions you take do in certain ways affect others.

For your example, think about that poor donkey...

In others, children who have not yet learned about equality might get negative impressions, ideas such as lead to a Hitler jugend, or take away the dignity of our elders, media that perverts the minds of those who observe it by planting perverted ideas.

Second example in light if this thread is, we sometimes give up freedom for our obligations. When society is threatened in wars, it is necessary to draft soldiers... and those that refuse for personal reasons, personal objection to war are either forced to go or imprisoned. If everybody refused, the enemy would win. There is a time when its necessary to give up on lassaise fair freedoms, because of obligations set by society. Freedom is not the greatest achievement of the individual... total freedom cannot be maintained and leads to ones own collapse, leads to the demise of freedom.