Some of you may have read that Lambis and Tim were banned from the Pheasant Wood Site during the exhumation process and may be permitted one visit each, only.

Well, really they failed to get permission from only one of the Stakeholders.

An Australian Defence Spokeswoman is reported to have said that Oxford Archeology were concerned about having too many people on the site during the exhumation. Great SPIN. Let's blame Oxford Archeology, it appears as though they are the spoil sports!

What she did not say was that Oxford Archeology had already said they were OK with Lambis being involved. I bet the Defence Spokeswoman told the truth as she knew it, its just that her minders forgot to tell her the whole truth.

Sorry, I prefer to have all the cards on the table and not this form of dirty politics.

Peter

Peter

Could you please explain, for those of us who are bystanders in this, what might be meant by "dirty politics"? Presumably you mean that someone is playing that game. Who is it? What are they doing or saying? What might be their motivation?

John

Agree with above. Mystified.
Calm analysis please.

Des

I am amazed that there should be any form of politics, dirty or clean, involved in such an exercise which should be dignified but efficient. Without knowing anything about any of the participants I can see that in the interests of these criteria access might have to be limited and not everyone who might wish to be there could be..
The somewhat apoplectic posting implies some underhand motive in excluding some people which as has been said is mystifying, this is a solemn event and not the Da Vinci Code after all.

I'm guessing there is the potential for a lot of money and kudos to be made here, a point I think touched on previously, plus maybe some careers made, I bet those dissertations are being typed up as a continuing process every evening. Televison rights, which member of the archaeology team will be fronting the documentary? I wonder? They certainly don't want to share the limelight.

It is my belief, and wish, that with subjects such as this, governments and senior civil servants should leave SPIN out of the processes.

It would be nice if we had a media statement such as this, "we (stakeholder's name) have decided (for the following reasons) that it is not considered appropriate that (person X) be permitted to be on site.

Ok, we can agree or disagree with the decision but at least we know who made the decision and the stated reason. We also must respect that they have the authority to make that decision and then be held publicly accountable. To me, this is open and honest.

For one stakeholder to say, it's not us, it's them over there that made us refuse Lambis access, when, according to my very reliable source, that's just not true. I call that SPIN. Naturally, one stakeholder is not going to correct the media statement of another stakeholder, especially when it is the one who signs the cheque. Not fair.

Hence my sincere and genuine disappointment.

SPIN, deliberate deflection or deliberately encouraging people to form an incorrect conclusion, by government ministers or staff, to me, is dirty politics.

Peter

I find this news enormously disappointing. As has been said, Governments are now involved so along comes the spin. Fromelles will generate a lot of column inches and international TV coverage and the politicians and officials will be very jealous about sharing it - as has been said, various careers might well if be positively affected by having a good "Fromelles".

I suspect that Lambis is a bit of embarassment to quite a number of establishment figures who will recall how they obstructed his initial inquiries and tried to downplay his investigations into the site. Much better for some that Fromelles is spun to accentuate the role of benevolent Governments rather than humbly acknowledge the efforts of one man who tirelessly worked to give burials to those "out in the cold" at Fromelles.

Ah. Another of your unnamed but "reliable sources", Peter.

I guess I'll take this thread with the same sized pinch of salt as last time you mentioned such a source.

I know nothing about the 'politics' of this situation but restricting access on the basis of potential DNA contamination seems to be a fairly p*ss poor excuse.

I may be wrong but, my understanding is that if any viable DNA is to be recovered then it will be from the pulp in the interior of teeth.

Mel

If the contamination route is really being used then that is a nonsense. These remains, however many there are, have been gently rotting and fermenting together for 90+ years. If there is any cross contamination it surely already exisits.

Lambis arrives in France on Friday.

Bright Blessings
Sandra

http://www.goldcoastmail.com.au/story/2009...s-grave-banned/

Mike

MIke

Thanks for that link. It seems to provide to balanced and informative commentary on the subject

John

A classic Government spin operation seems to be detailed in the newspaper article - velvety praise for Lambis from the Veterans Affairs Minister but the steel door then slammed on him by the site authorities. Not nice - and I wish I was 100% sure that his ethnicity didn't have something to do with this profoundly unsympathetic treatment of him.

With TV, film and book rights, academic glory and political capital all to be made from such an important discovery and project, it is no surprise at all that such things happen. It will be interesting to see to what extent Lambis is credited with the discovery when it is all written up and carved in stone.

I hope Lambis is keeping note of it all, there's a bestseller in his side of the story.

Mike

Just what I was thinking Mike!!

I will comfort myself with a belief that when those lads finally lay at rest in the new cemetery, they will know who to thank.

Politicians and officialdom will not then be able to deny him his right to walk on the green sward of that place with pride in a job seen through to a great end.

Exactly! So, unless someone is disposed to clog dance on the jaws of remains, the contamination excuse is utterly implausible.

Mel

G'day all,
I have met Lambis, Tim, Neville Kidd, Chris Bryett and many others who have been instrumental in the discovery of the 'Missing of Fromelles' and feel that they have been sorely treated.
I understand that where DNA is hoped to be extracted it is critical to prevent any cross contamination but surely the same methods used by the excavators ( eg gloves, masks, suits) could be employed by Lambis and co.!
I have been a student of archaeology and seen some tremendous egos that, unfortunately, seem to be striving for kudos in this dig at the expense of Lambis, whose baby this truly is, and his team of fellow researchers.
I hope that he will achieve his due accolades when the last of the fallen of Fromelles are hopefully identified and finally laid to rest with the dignity that they deserve.
Regards
Pop
(Sean McManus)

They should just name the new cemetery after Lambis, ensuring his name is forever associated with these men.

"Fromelles Englezos British & Australian Military Cemetery" or some variation.

G'day Stephen,
A very interesting thought! I do ask, however, is there a precedent for such a thing?
Can anyone tell me of a War Graves Cemetery that has been named after an individual?
Would it be fitting?
I agree that Lambis deserves great honour for the work he has done in locating these loat warriors but I somehow doubt that this idea would be considered.
Perhaps a plaque at the cemetery gates telling of Lambis' research and conviction would be justified?
Regards
Pop
(Sean McManus)

On reading the GWGC piece about Fromelles on their website, prior to reading this thread, I noticed an absence of recognition for Lambis Englezos's tireless work leading to this discovery. This is the exact quote:
In May 2008, after several years of painstaking research and investigation, five burial pits dating from the First World War were identified at Pheasant Wood, near Fromelles in northern France.
Why shouldn't Mr. Englezos receive a mention? He surely deserves it.

Myrtle

Perhaps it necessitates complaints from people to have the matter rectified.

Bright Blessings
Sandra

I read that too Myrtle and had exactly the same thought.

IMHO it appears to me that those who mocked Lambis in the beginning are the very same people who are now clambouring for the limelight at his expense.

Cheers,
Tim L.

The more emails questioning this omission, the better.

Myrtle

Yes, he ploughed a very lonely furrow for a number of years and was the subject of patronising reactions bordering on the derisive - but he saw it through.

Of course, in today's "corporate" world, singleminded individual activity often seems to be an embarassment to officialdom and I think that this is the case here. He should take comfort in the fact that those who really care appreciate his efforts.

Perhaps the Forum should institute a gold medal for services to the memory of the Great War. Lambis would be a worthy recipient.

In the mean time send an email to the CWGC

Myrtle

Quite happy to do that but I don't think you are going to drag a fulsome tribute to Lambis out of the CWGC. Personally, I think he might well be appreciative of an acknowledgement from this Forum.

Prowse Point Military Cemetery,Warneton.
This is the only Cemetery that i know of to have been named after a person.Major,later Brigadier General Charles Bertie Prowse,DSO,of the 1st Somerset Light Infantry,who was KIA on 01.07.16 while commanding the 11th infantry Brigade at Beaumont Hamel.

I am not sure what the relevance to this topic is, but to my knowledge there are at least two other cemeteries named after individuals on the Western Front:

Drummond Cemetery, Raillencourt
- named after Lt R. J. Drummond, R.A.F. who was the first to be buried in it.

Lowrie Cemetery, Havrincourt
- named after the 3rd Division burial officer.

Plus at Gallipoli:

Plugge's Plateau Cemetery
- Named after Lieutenant Colonel Arthur Plugge of the Auckland Regiment NZEF.

Johnston's Jolly Cemetery
- Named after Brigadier-General G. J. Johnston, C.B., C.M.G., V.D.

Courtney's And Steel's Post Cemetery
- Named after Lieutenant Colonel Richard E. Courtney, C.B., V.D. & Major T. H. Steel of the 14th Bn AIF.

Quinn's Post Cemetery
- Named after Captain Hugh Quinn, 15th Bn AIF.

Walkers Ridge Cemetery
- Named after then Brig-Gen H. B. Walker, K.C.B., K.C.M.G., D.S.O.

Hi John,

I do not put the names of sources to protect those persons (sounds a bit like a B-Grade Hollywood Dislaimer - doesn't it).

You may take my posts with "a pinch of salt" but in the end, are the sources correct and truthfull? I think that both you and the other interested Members of this Forum will find out that these are not rumours but fact, otherwise I would not waste this Forum's time with the ravings of a ratbag. Time will tell and the members will be my Judge. So far, I have been hanged by one Member without the benefit of a trial.

Regards, Peter

I hope he gets a warm welcome. I wonder when he plans to use his single entry ticket.

Perhaps his physical presence will make the powers that be realise how unfair their stance is to the "Father of the Fromelles Project".

As the story goes it is the Australian Army.

Perhaps commonsense will prevail.

Bright Blessings
Sandra

Hi Sandra,

Yes, that is the same feeling I got and there are two of them that I could put a name to. One of them behaved in a most unprofessional manner when I was at the Compound last year. I was tempted to report his childish behavior to the Australian Ambassador in Paris. He not only made me ashamed that he was an Australian but he also embarrassed the Director of the CWGC-France, to whom I was in a discussion with.

Go Lambis, go!

Peter

Depends what you feel you've been convicted of.

What you have said may be entirely accurate. Or it may not be.

How could I possibly know which is which?

All I see, on the one hand, is your story making accusations of some odd and ill-defined sort without the benfit of any substantiation. On the other hand, there is the link to what seems to be a balanced and fairly detailed account in the Australian press.

Just the sort of differing accounts juries weigh up all the time - to use your own analogy.

However, I seem to be in minority of one in questioning your assertions. Which means I must be wrong.

I am awfully sorry folks. I've become rather obsessed with Fromelles 1915 .. of course I am aware of the huge interest in the 1916 Australian (and British) actions BUT somebody fill me in (soundbite terms) .. who is Lambis? Genuine query not messing about.

General Mike O'brien's the one to talk to.
Nice bloke but,he will stop basically anyone going onto the dig site &...I get the feeling he's just following orders but,I also get the feeling that Oxford are to blame for this.New on the ground & (nearly) 1st to claim credit.
As to Gen.Mike.I can't speak more highly of him.Listen to this.It may remind some of you of an aside to Birdwood.
I'd spent a while (from a wee distance) inspecting the Generals boots (well bulled) at the Rouges Bancs mem last saturday & said to me friends & the General,"Bloody 'ell,been a long time since I've done that"(bulled boots)
Gen.Mike,as an aside,not even turning his head but,in passing,"bloody long time since I done that aswell*wink*.
Speaks volumes for the bloke.
Oz Gov. are getting more & more involved in the French WW1 stuff,& they include their military in there projects.Nothing wrong with that.
Lets get the kids buried & then we can start talking about who did what & when.
Lambis not out to seek attention to himself.Blokes a saint already so,he don't need to.
I cant see any Aussie bad input/attitude for this project.Just bloody politics at the end of the day.
Dave.

Des,just check out the long running Fromelles thread.Most of it is on there but,Lambis is the bloke that checked out the German records,did all the leg work for & found the mass burial pits at Fromelles.
It's basically the bloke who has done more for WW1 commemoration than all of us put together.

G'day Des
If you can get hold of Patrick Lindsay's "Fromelles" (Hardie Grant Books 2007) it will tell all.
Regards
Pop
(Sean McManus)

G'day all,
Thanks to those that replied to my question to Stephen Nulty's post about the Fromelles Cemetery being named after Lambis.
What I was aiming at, however, was is their a precedent for such a memorial being named after a civilian and a person who still lives?

Hi John,

You are correct in that Mike's post with the link to the story as run in the Australian press did fill a gaping hole left in my original post. I must keep that in mind in the future. Mike, thank you for posting the link.

Spending six and sometimes seven days a week out on the battlefields, I am told all sorts of things and many I reject after I have applied my own filter (hope it's a balanced one), but some strike me as valid and coming from a person I have grown to trust. Whilst I am not always sworn to secrecy, I know that if I blab it out to the world and put out their name, then they could "shut down on me". Not good for me and in a way, the members of the Forum would be denied something I feel is worthy of a Post.

I really believe in this Forum, I am at times stunned by the level of knowledge of some individuals, and I am pulled towards posting info from reliable individuals that I hear but am concered that I may disadvantage the individual. So, do I keep the info to myself and deny the other members of the Forum, or pass it on whilst protecting the source, just in case? Tough one for me to decide and yes, it does leaves me open to criticism. But, as this is a public forum I must expect it to happen occassionally.

I feel that it is appropriate to point out to those names who appear in my signature, and there are more of them yet to be listed there, and I would not deliberately sully their names by peddling lies or trying to grandstand. Should there be a time for me "to eat humble pie" on this Forum from any of my posts, then I am tough enough to do it.

Proud to be a Member, Peter

Well said, Peter. I don't envy you your choices.

Lambis took the shyte from those who said it wasn't so, and he kept on. Now his research and his word is found to be true, and what does he get?

Those that denied him, and those that ignored him, should really wipe the egg off their face, and admit to, and acknowledge who found these men.
If he hadn't kept at it, if he had shrugged his shoulders and walked away, there would be no dig at Pheasant Wood.

Lambis and the ones who believed him and who have helped him, surely deserve to be there at the end result.


Regards
Kim

I've no wish to fall out with anyone over this but, depending on one's definition of "end result" surely that will be the case.

To me, the "end result" here will be the reburial of these men including, where it has been possible, the erection of named headstones. It is inconceivable that they will not be an official ceremony of some form and it is equally inconceivable that Mr Englezos would not be an honoured invited guest.

Do I think that, in the meantime, he should have the opportunity to be escorted round to see for himself the excavation site and the "examination facility"? Well, of course, he should. And I'm sure he will be.

Do I think he might have a role to play outside of the "controlled areas" in taking the project forward? Possibly - although I don't have sufficient technical knowledge to know what this job might be, or if he would want such a role.

However, do I think that his efforts give him some right to demand access to the sites, overriding what are alleged to be the views of the professionals charged with the very delicate job of exhumation? That seems to be the basic thrust of comments on this thread, although it is wrapped up in innuendo. So, to be clear, no, I think he has absolutely no right to that.

John

I can understand Oxford being careful in not allowing access to the site, after all where do you draw the line in terms of who can and cannot be there

However, IMHO Lambis is in a class of his own, and it just looks thoroughly mean and petty not to allow him there. The giving of 1 visit seems odd.
Like they have had to do this, certainly no recognition that thanks to him they have this incredibly important task to undertake.
Surely it would not be that hard for the professionals to talk to him and come to a mutual, respectful relationship while this is all going on.

I cannot imagine he has "demanded" anything. I think we just expected he would naturally and deservedly have earned the right to have been a part of the ongoing process of finally proving this is a major burial ground, through to the stage of individual burial.
He has certainly convinced me (from afar) that he is not a stirrer, he has a heart-felt desire to see these lads properly buried and honoured.

Cheers
Shirley

I agree with Shirley's points and would ask John to consider how he would feel if he travelled half way round the world like Lambis to a place that he loves to only be given one opportunity to visit. To suggest that Lambis has demanded access seems a very harsh interpretation of what is happening here..

I would still like to know what has happened this weekend - for all we know some sort of accomodation has been made at Fromelles.

But however I look at this, I see an injustice.

Question. Did or did not Lambis fund all his research himself?

I've met the man, and he is not a star gazer, but one who believes in getting off your butt, and doing what needs to be done, even in the face of much criticism.
Surely, as Shirley said, correct forensic procedure can be carried out, while still allowing the man who started it all, on site.
Tim, you can cut in here, it is after all, one of your areas of expertise.

As I alluded to before, the man, Lambis, had the conviction to follow his gut feelings, his research through and now because of his research and his persistance, some of the lost, have been found.

C'mon, this shouldn't be about Governments, who won the contract to dig the men up, who is boss on site. It should not be about oneup-manship
This is a simple story about a man who followed through on his beliefs, convictions and his research, and found those who had been missing. So very many years after they died.

They are not missing now, they are found.

And who found them?
Why can he not be allowed to follow the process through to the end?

Kim

As one of Lambis' supporters and researchers (along with the other one) I can say that I am proud to be associated with the man. However, in recent weeks the 'hidden agenda' has become apparant and I am NOT HAPPY with that!

Bright Blessings
Sandra

"Hidden" no longer, then, Sandra.

Always best to have these things fully out in the open, I'm sure everyone would agree, wouldn't they?

John

Quite agree with John that any agenda is most certainly now not hidden - pretty transparent petty officialdom in my view.

I would be very interested in hearing what Lambis did over the weekend.