Tell me this isn't true?
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TSM
Now you know I'm not normally one to agree with you but...
The Mess you were in - it was the new SNCO's Mess was it not (the OM being at Kirton)? The airmen (and officers) also dine there at lunchtime. My question therefore is - was the 'airman' in question actually an 'airman' or were you using the term generically. If the former, what on earth was the CMC thinking?
What's next, a Native American complaining about the ghostly image on Bader's portrait in College Hall because the image is described as being that of a red indian in the visitors guide? (it is Bader's isn't it - I haven't seen it for years).
Spotter
Now you know I'm not normally one to agree with you but...
The Mess you were in - it was the new SNCO's Mess was it not (the OM being at Kirton)? The airmen (and officers) also dine there at lunchtime. My question therefore is - was the 'airman' in question actually an 'airman' or were you using the term generically. If the former, what on earth was the CMC thinking?
What's next, a Native American complaining about the ghostly image on Bader's portrait in College Hall because the image is described as being that of a red indian in the visitors guide? (it is Bader's isn't it - I haven't seen it for years).
Spotter
Last edited by SpotterFC; 3rd Feb 2006 at 21:04.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: ball gazing
Posts: 296
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not sure I would agree with that rather rosy view of history
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: South of Watford
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I understand the passion held within the RAF for it's history. The "never have so few.." quote is one of the most signficant and true of WW2 and as a Brit I am proud of our "finest hour..".
However, some of these threads have turned into nationalistic rants. Let's not forget that our Queen is of German descent and Prince Philip's a Greek. This country has been built on imigration and it's success is down to this - this is well documented too.
The term "Nigger" is offensive, however the portrait is of historical importance and relevance to the squadron it was displayed in. Maybe the RAF should be looking at how it interprets some of the objects and paintings within it's historical collections that are now seen as non-PC. I would suggest that instead of taking the picture down as a knee-jerk reaction the Mess manager should speak to the RAF Museum in Hendon and ask them how they get round displaying aspects of the RAF's history which today may sit uncomfortably with the general pubic.
This isn't political correctness gone mad. If you were in a Mess in another country and saw a portrait of a significant airforce officer with his beloved dog "British Scum" or perhaps "White Bastard" it may make you feel uncomfortable as the white British person there.
It's important that as serving RAF officers you feel proud of your heros and fallen commrades and as someone who's Jewish immigrant Uncle died in a Lancaster over Berlin in WW2 I applaud this whole-heartedly (he was in 8 Squadron).
For the record - the term "Black" isn't offensive. It's one of the Census categories along with "White".
Keeping the Concentration Camps as a memorial to the 6,000,000 who died isn't offensive - it's a reminder and a warning from history, but displaying portraits of Hitler and celebrating Nazism is.
It's about how we interpret/display the past and I mean this in a visual context. It's not about covering it up but being open, honest and prepared to accept that there are differing views, all of which are valid and should be given consideration. Museums are displaying sensitive material all the time. The RAF Museum and the Imperial War Museum are good examples of this.
However, some of these threads have turned into nationalistic rants. Let's not forget that our Queen is of German descent and Prince Philip's a Greek. This country has been built on imigration and it's success is down to this - this is well documented too.
The term "Nigger" is offensive, however the portrait is of historical importance and relevance to the squadron it was displayed in. Maybe the RAF should be looking at how it interprets some of the objects and paintings within it's historical collections that are now seen as non-PC. I would suggest that instead of taking the picture down as a knee-jerk reaction the Mess manager should speak to the RAF Museum in Hendon and ask them how they get round displaying aspects of the RAF's history which today may sit uncomfortably with the general pubic.
This isn't political correctness gone mad. If you were in a Mess in another country and saw a portrait of a significant airforce officer with his beloved dog "British Scum" or perhaps "White Bastard" it may make you feel uncomfortable as the white British person there.
It's important that as serving RAF officers you feel proud of your heros and fallen commrades and as someone who's Jewish immigrant Uncle died in a Lancaster over Berlin in WW2 I applaud this whole-heartedly (he was in 8 Squadron).
For the record - the term "Black" isn't offensive. It's one of the Census categories along with "White".
Keeping the Concentration Camps as a memorial to the 6,000,000 who died isn't offensive - it's a reminder and a warning from history, but displaying portraits of Hitler and celebrating Nazism is.
It's about how we interpret/display the past and I mean this in a visual context. It's not about covering it up but being open, honest and prepared to accept that there are differing views, all of which are valid and should be given consideration. Museums are displaying sensitive material all the time. The RAF Museum and the Imperial War Museum are good examples of this.
I'matightbastard
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,747
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
are you seriously suggesting that Gibson's choice of name for his dog was deliberately chosen to offend such people?
characters added to appease the character count police. "There will be characters in our time".
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Sydney
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
England - The Right to Leave Our Country - YOU have the right, the right to leave anytime you want!
If you are claiming off the Social Services just cancel your GIRO.
If you are claiming off the Social Services just cancel your GIRO.
I hope you are not a serving member of the armed forces!
One would presume that the person in question was british (regardless of his/her colour) and I would assume not claiming off the social!
IMMIGRANTS, NOT BRITISH, MUST ADAPT.
This is OUR COUNTRY, OUR LAND, and OUR LIFESTYLE, and we will allow you every opportunity to enjoy all this.
But once you are done complaining, whining, and griping about Our Flag, Our Pledge, Our National Motto, or Our Way of Life, I highly encourage you take advantage of one other great British freedom, "THE RIGHT TO LEAVE".
But once you are done complaining, whining, and griping about Our Flag, Our Pledge, Our National Motto, or Our Way of Life, I highly encourage you take advantage of one other great British freedom, "THE RIGHT TO LEAVE".
We speak ENGLISH, not Spanish, Lebanese, Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, Russian, or any other language. Therefore, if you wish to become part of our society, Learn the Language!
This thread seems to have hit on something a lot deeper and darker. I am shocked to hear some of these statements, especially as a large majority of the people on this forum are serving personnel and officers!!
Yes, you can't (and shouldn't) wipe out history because parts of it you don't agree with or like.....but it was the name of his dog! The dog wasn't the hero, the dog didn't do anything meritous as far as I know (and i'm sure there will be someone who will correct me) apart from wait for his master to come back!
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 619
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why is the painting offensive? Is the detail so good that you can read the dogs name on his collar disk? Or is it that W/Cdr Gibson was a known racist, proven by the name he gave to his dog? Whatever next? Will all pictures of Nelson be removed from RN establishments because he was an adulterer and not very fond of the French? Is there stiil a bust of Hitler in the scruffs bar at Bently Priory, I think we should be told!
So what would happen if 20 or 30 mess members complained that the removal of the picture was offensive to them and they demanded its reinstatement?
Perhaps the alleged complainant has no idea who this Gibson bloke was and needs a dose of Paul Brickhill coupled with an excellent old film.
Sorry, but inane shat like this, should it be true, really gets my goat. It displays self-indulgence and a total lack of respect for RAF history.
Perhaps the alleged complainant has no idea who this Gibson bloke was and needs a dose of Paul Brickhill coupled with an excellent old film.
Sorry, but inane shat like this, should it be true, really gets my goat. It displays self-indulgence and a total lack of respect for RAF history.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: London
Posts: 190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Never having had the privilege of dining at Scampton I've never seen the painting. Anyone got a photo of it to post?
Incidentally, am I still allowed to mention that Montgomery had a cocker spaniel called Hitler, I believe...
Incidentally, am I still allowed to mention that Montgomery had a cocker spaniel called Hitler, I believe...
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Sydney
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jobza Guddun,
The dog was never in the RAF!
I would imagine the dogs name was written underneath the picture, in which case surely just removing the name plaque would have alleviated the situation
The dog was never in the RAF!
I would imagine the dogs name was written underneath the picture, in which case surely just removing the name plaque would have alleviated the situation
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: South of Watford
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cash Machine - a lone voice of reason.
The rest of you - why can't you see that there are two sides to this? Surely the military can't have completely beaten out of you the ability for individual thought or are you all secret journos from the Daily Mail venting your spleen. Or maybe you're all secret undercover BBC reporters trying to reveal latent insitutional racism in the RAF - don't panic Sir Jock - there is still time to deleate this thread before News 24 catches wind of it.
For goodness sake can't you see what you are saying. You are supposed to be officers in the British Armed Forces - that's the 'British Armed Forces', not Oswald Mosely's Black shirts or the BNP. You're here to protect your country and serve your Queen and thank God you do. But Britain is made up of many cultures - we're not all white males - and has been for 1000's of years. The RAF as an organisation is an equal opportunities employer - therefore it rightly has to take on board the views of all it's personnel. In fact the most senior serving Black officer in the British Armed Forces is a very senior RAF officer.
As I said in my previous thread, by talking to other organisations about how they display sensitive material this nationalistic tirade could have been avoided.
Yes, I do find the term in question and not the said dog offensive. With proper interpretation, which takes the views of both sides on board this painting may not have needed to have been taken down.
No I don't read the Guardian. I just have a balanced view of our world.
The ghost of Lord Melchett is alive and well in the RAF - eh Darling?
The rest of you - why can't you see that there are two sides to this? Surely the military can't have completely beaten out of you the ability for individual thought or are you all secret journos from the Daily Mail venting your spleen. Or maybe you're all secret undercover BBC reporters trying to reveal latent insitutional racism in the RAF - don't panic Sir Jock - there is still time to deleate this thread before News 24 catches wind of it.
For goodness sake can't you see what you are saying. You are supposed to be officers in the British Armed Forces - that's the 'British Armed Forces', not Oswald Mosely's Black shirts or the BNP. You're here to protect your country and serve your Queen and thank God you do. But Britain is made up of many cultures - we're not all white males - and has been for 1000's of years. The RAF as an organisation is an equal opportunities employer - therefore it rightly has to take on board the views of all it's personnel. In fact the most senior serving Black officer in the British Armed Forces is a very senior RAF officer.
As I said in my previous thread, by talking to other organisations about how they display sensitive material this nationalistic tirade could have been avoided.
Yes, I do find the term in question and not the said dog offensive. With proper interpretation, which takes the views of both sides on board this painting may not have needed to have been taken down.
No I don't read the Guardian. I just have a balanced view of our world.
The ghost of Lord Melchett is alive and well in the RAF - eh Darling?
Originally Posted by CashMachine
Jobza Guddun,
The dog was never in the RAF!
I would imagine the dogs name was written underneath the picture, in which case surely just removing the name plaque would have alleviated the situation
The dog was never in the RAF!
I would imagine the dogs name was written underneath the picture, in which case surely just removing the name plaque would have alleviated the situation
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Over there, behind that tree.
Posts: 581
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Didn't Gibson name his dog Nigger because it was a dark brown labrador? In days of old nigger brown was the name of a colour just as burnt sienna or crimson lake.
With regard to the painting . . . if the tale is true then it can best be described by the Pink Floyd song - All in all, it's just another brick in the wall.
And surely the word nigger is only offensive if declaimed offensively.
.
With regard to the painting . . . if the tale is true then it can best be described by the Pink Floyd song - All in all, it's just another brick in the wall.
And surely the word nigger is only offensive if declaimed offensively.
.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Umm, where did I put the Garmin?
Posts: 346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cash Machine, Merlin, I consider myself an eglatarian that means I treat everyone equally regardless of origin or religion. But....
And this is just another aspect of the problem.
It's alright to be proud to be black and complain about percieved racism. (This is considered Equal Opportunities)
Ergo: Black Culture = PC
It's alright to be a devout muslim and complain about certain danish cartoons recently published, (Those cartoon ARE insulting and crass).
Ergo; Islamic culture = PC
YET, It's NOT alright to be english and be proud of it, (You're accused of being nationalist) and complain about political correctness, (You're accused of being racist).
Ergo White culture = NOT PC
See the discrepancy?
I'm all in favour of treating everyone equally (full stop and not a single caveate)
That does mean I also believe in giving white people the ability to complain too, without resorting to slapping labels on them. We're told again and again that 'we' as white nominally christian people, should show tolerance to others.
How about others showing some tolerance to us?
And this is just another aspect of the problem.
It's alright to be proud to be black and complain about percieved racism. (This is considered Equal Opportunities)
Ergo: Black Culture = PC
It's alright to be a devout muslim and complain about certain danish cartoons recently published, (Those cartoon ARE insulting and crass).
Ergo; Islamic culture = PC
YET, It's NOT alright to be english and be proud of it, (You're accused of being nationalist) and complain about political correctness, (You're accused of being racist).
Ergo White culture = NOT PC
See the discrepancy?
I'm all in favour of treating everyone equally (full stop and not a single caveate)
That does mean I also believe in giving white people the ability to complain too, without resorting to slapping labels on them. We're told again and again that 'we' as white nominally christian people, should show tolerance to others.
How about others showing some tolerance to us?
The subject matter of the painting cannot, de facto, be racist. It is a portrait of a VC winner and his dog, which happened to be a black labrador.
With the benefit of politically correct hindsight, we can today see that it would have been far better had Gibson chosen a gold labrador. But he didn't. It would have been far better, from today's perspective, if having failed to realise the excoriation the name would attract 60 years on, he'd called the dog 'Blackie' or 'Sooty' or something along those lines. He didn't. It would have been preferable, again from today's perspective, had Gibson not (in a slightly sentimental tribute to his dear friend) chosen his dog's name as the codeword for a successful breaching of the dam.
But he chose a black labrador, called it by a name that is now regarded as racist, and he did choose the name as the code for the breaching of the Mohne Dam.
So the dog is integral to the story, whether we like it or not.
The argument that the portrait itself is intrinsically racist and offensive because Gibson unwittingly chose what is now regarded as an unacceptable word as the name for his dog is bunkum.
Also, as B(I)8 notes, the phrase 'N-brown' was in use generically for the colour dark brown; it was also used to describe a shade of a propreitory brand of shoe polish. Although the etymology had racist connotations, they are far weaker in the case of the naming of the dog.
The RAF Musuem policy on artefacts actually raises the issue of the name, and concludes that it is of micro-historical importance (i.e. it is germane to the context of the historical event), and notes that the dog has assumed an popular emotional and historical significance. (That's from memory, but the gist is accurate)
If the problem is the name plate, then change it.
Removing the dog's name from the plate would not be a shameful piece of revisionism, it would surely be nothing more than recognition that to have the name on display may cause offence, and to cause such offence would be impolite. Not change out of political correctness, but change out of basic courtesy and good manners.
Better yet, omit the name plate entirely. Any new arrival to the mess unable to identify the portrait's subjects could be returned to training to rectify their shameful lack of historical knowledge.
But to remove the picture entirely would be crass. (Again, assuming that the story is true and TSM hasn't been subjected to the most successful wind up in recent history thought up while the mess members await the picture's return from the restorers....)
With the benefit of politically correct hindsight, we can today see that it would have been far better had Gibson chosen a gold labrador. But he didn't. It would have been far better, from today's perspective, if having failed to realise the excoriation the name would attract 60 years on, he'd called the dog 'Blackie' or 'Sooty' or something along those lines. He didn't. It would have been preferable, again from today's perspective, had Gibson not (in a slightly sentimental tribute to his dear friend) chosen his dog's name as the codeword for a successful breaching of the dam.
But he chose a black labrador, called it by a name that is now regarded as racist, and he did choose the name as the code for the breaching of the Mohne Dam.
So the dog is integral to the story, whether we like it or not.
The argument that the portrait itself is intrinsically racist and offensive because Gibson unwittingly chose what is now regarded as an unacceptable word as the name for his dog is bunkum.
Also, as B(I)8 notes, the phrase 'N-brown' was in use generically for the colour dark brown; it was also used to describe a shade of a propreitory brand of shoe polish. Although the etymology had racist connotations, they are far weaker in the case of the naming of the dog.
The RAF Musuem policy on artefacts actually raises the issue of the name, and concludes that it is of micro-historical importance (i.e. it is germane to the context of the historical event), and notes that the dog has assumed an popular emotional and historical significance. (That's from memory, but the gist is accurate)
If the problem is the name plate, then change it.
Removing the dog's name from the plate would not be a shameful piece of revisionism, it would surely be nothing more than recognition that to have the name on display may cause offence, and to cause such offence would be impolite. Not change out of political correctness, but change out of basic courtesy and good manners.
Better yet, omit the name plate entirely. Any new arrival to the mess unable to identify the portrait's subjects could be returned to training to rectify their shameful lack of historical knowledge.
But to remove the picture entirely would be crass. (Again, assuming that the story is true and TSM hasn't been subjected to the most successful wind up in recent history thought up while the mess members await the picture's return from the restorers....)
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: England
Posts: 297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by CashMachine
Tarten Giant
I hope you are not a serving member of the armed forces!
I hope you are not a serving member of the armed forces!
Look at my Public Profile.
How do you normally spell "tartan"?
One would presume that the person in question was british (regardless of his/her colour)
and I would assume not claiming off the social!
I think if you look into it the English language imported a great many words from those bloody foreigners.
This thread seems to have hit on something a lot deeper and darker. I am shocked to hear some of these statements, especially as a large majority of the people on this forum are serving personnel and officers!!
Are you saying serving personnel and Officers cannot have the gift of free speech? You must be one of the PC brigade? Coffee, one, no milk......... rather than the historic....... coffee, one, black.
Yes, you can't (and shouldn't) wipe out history because parts of it you don't agree with or like.....but it was the name of his dog! The dog wasn't the hero, the dog didn't do anything meritous as far as I know (and i'm sure there will be someone who will correct me) apart from wait for his master to come back!
If it were not for GG and his fellow heroes, the clown who was offended might not have been born.
There are many things that offend and they must be put in proportion and sometimes just 'let go'.
It offends me that there's a nude statue of a woman in Trafalgar Square sharing that arena with REAL heroes like Lord Nelson.
All my singular bitching will never get that nude removed. But that one "somebody" gets his way and off the wall comes that famous painting, whilst there is perhaps thousands that don't want that nude statue where it is either but our PC loving dictators ignore good taste!
Freedom of speech and artistic licence for some egh.
TG
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: earth
Posts: 1,397
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A very well thought posting, Archimedes, but why not call a spade a spade.
The dog's name is important - the offended need to accept that reality and accept responsibility for their own unreasonable sensitivity instead of blaming society for our respect of history.
I suspect we will eventually sink under the weight of all this PC bullsh*t and cast aside all our glorious history of triumphs and endeavours lest we offend some halfwit.
The dog's name is important - the offended need to accept that reality and accept responsibility for their own unreasonable sensitivity instead of blaming society for our respect of history.
I suspect we will eventually sink under the weight of all this PC bullsh*t and cast aside all our glorious history of triumphs and endeavours lest we offend some halfwit.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 383
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm afraid I have to take both sides, to an extent, in this argument.
It has exposed a worrying - not to say racist - trend among some posters to impose a British superculture on immigrants. Now, I do not believe in the policy of multiculturalism; it has diluted and reduced British culture in many ways. The ideal of multiculturalism, however, could have proved more effective at absorbing other cultures.
We have a language that is both Romance and Germanic. Our classical music is based predominantly on French and Italian influences. Our modern music (and much of our pop culture) is based on its American equivalent. By any standard, we are multicultural; why design policies to force such an evolution, when all those policies do is create jealousy and xenophobia? Yes, immigrants should learn to speak English as a first language, because it IS our language; yes, they should learn about our history, both good and bad. Germany doesn't shrink from telling the history of Nazism, nor does it shrink from telling this German side of the Industrial Revolution. Why are we so bothered about teaching "wannabee" British subjects about our history?
We have adapted the best parts of our immigrant cultures. We are the most diverse "melting-pot" in the world. Young people admire black artists for R&B and hip hop as much as they admire white artists for acting and comedy. We are better as a nation that accepts immigrants.
Were we to allow immigrant cultures to "swamp" us (David Blunkett's words, pr00ne, not mine
), we would be going the wrong way. I say, celebrate the benefits of immigration, since it is a fact. When it becomes a problem, it needs to be sorted out.
I find it hard to justify my objections to the removal of the portrait, since I fear it would link me with some of the more dubious comments here. The simple fact is that when we revise history to suit the present, we are taking a significant step down that Orwellian road to the Ministry of Truth. For God's sake, black, white, asian or otherwise, Christian, Muslim, Sikh or Jew, can't we just accept our differences and enjoy each other's company?
Oops... lapsed into Utopian mode there!
It has exposed a worrying - not to say racist - trend among some posters to impose a British superculture on immigrants. Now, I do not believe in the policy of multiculturalism; it has diluted and reduced British culture in many ways. The ideal of multiculturalism, however, could have proved more effective at absorbing other cultures.
We have a language that is both Romance and Germanic. Our classical music is based predominantly on French and Italian influences. Our modern music (and much of our pop culture) is based on its American equivalent. By any standard, we are multicultural; why design policies to force such an evolution, when all those policies do is create jealousy and xenophobia? Yes, immigrants should learn to speak English as a first language, because it IS our language; yes, they should learn about our history, both good and bad. Germany doesn't shrink from telling the history of Nazism, nor does it shrink from telling this German side of the Industrial Revolution. Why are we so bothered about teaching "wannabee" British subjects about our history?
We have adapted the best parts of our immigrant cultures. We are the most diverse "melting-pot" in the world. Young people admire black artists for R&B and hip hop as much as they admire white artists for acting and comedy. We are better as a nation that accepts immigrants.
Were we to allow immigrant cultures to "swamp" us (David Blunkett's words, pr00ne, not mine
), we would be going the wrong way. I say, celebrate the benefits of immigration, since it is a fact. When it becomes a problem, it needs to be sorted out.I find it hard to justify my objections to the removal of the portrait, since I fear it would link me with some of the more dubious comments here. The simple fact is that when we revise history to suit the present, we are taking a significant step down that Orwellian road to the Ministry of Truth. For God's sake, black, white, asian or otherwise, Christian, Muslim, Sikh or Jew, can't we just accept our differences and enjoy each other's company?
Oops... lapsed into Utopian mode there!
I'matightbastard
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,747
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Warning (Status Red) Caption: thread drift.
Not so with the Seppos though. They have all sorts of foreigners serving. In fact, had I got my permanent residence status before I turned 26, I would have had to sign up for Selective Service, (ie the Draft)
Oddly, women don't have to do this, just men. Gender discrimination enshrined in the law of the land.
Warning: (Status Green)
Unless the rules have changed, you MUST be "British" to join HM Forces here.
Oddly, women don't have to do this, just men. Gender discrimination enshrined in the law of the land.
Warning: (Status Green)
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Island of Aphrodite
Age: 75
Posts: 530
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is Nigger's Grave still at Scampton and being properly tended? Or has that too succumbed to the PC lobby.I remember being told that there used to be a post (secondary duty) at Scampton - Officer i/c Nigger's Grave.