Glory Hole to Disappear?

[sjustice]

What has the Glory Hole got to do with the Thiepval/Ulster Tower/36th Division/Irish politics?

I thought Marien was referring to the politicking around Albert

Kind Regards,

SMJ

[Guest KevinEndon]

I have certainly never heard any of the people involved in Thiepval Wood discussing modern politics in the context of the Wood or the 36th Division. A Division who's memory is rightly honoured. All of the tours and access is inclusive to everyone no matter what ther persuasions or faith or nationality.

Mick

Here here, maybe Ted's daughter will tell the forum of my trip to the woods on the day that Celtic played Rangers. The craic, the banter, the sorrows of the site the photographs the whole day was shared and the only bit of modern politics mentioned was the fact that a cross has been placed to McFaddzen VC from a band of people from Derry and the orangemen there on the day were pleased to see the cross. If only that moment in Thiepval wood could have spread throughout Ireland and Scotland the world would be a much better place.

[irishmen1916]

Have spent most of the morning reading this complete post( I do have work to do as well ) with great interest, as this started back in Jan 2006, what is the situation re the land around the "Glory Hole" now ?

I presume that the house has been completed, but what of the other sites along the same road?

Kevin, your sentiments where well said, we're getting there.................

Regards

Peter

[truthergw]

.....................we're getting there.................

Regards

Peter

It would be nice to think so, and I know that sterling efforts have been made in that direction but there are many stumbling blocks along the way. Evidence of that has arisen recently, here on the forum. I am pleased to say that on the occasions I am aware of, it was swiftly dealt with by the Mods.

[Simon Jones]

... what is the situation re the land around the "Glory Hole" now ?

I hope it is still as stated by Philippe:

for your information

the owners of the Glory hole have decided to stop any new constructions and to classify the land as a historical site to protect it.

with the help of the Somme Remembrance Association the owners have deposed the dossier of demand included the research results ( from 1914 to 1916) a few months ago.

we do hope that the French administration will accept the proposal but it will take no less than a year or two.

if it is positif we will have to think how bring this site as an educational and remembrance land.

by the way!

if you go on the glory hole the house which is under construction and stoped for now does not affect the site at all but it was worth alerting the authorities to add any more project of building.

S

[Uyraell]

Hi Paul and others. Paul, as a resident, you do indeed have a perfect right to voice your opinion and try your d****est to make it heard . One of the points I was making was that people who do not live in France have very little right to any say on what the French do with their land. Cemeteries and monuments excepted. I should have added that this right extends to all residents. The other point which I made was that, given the problems and expense of developing a plot of land in an area like this, anyone who did must be absolutely determined to do so and have the means to carry out their plans. I am at a loss as to why this land should be developed when you say that there is no pressure to do so. Perhaps it is to be a chambre d'hote for battlefield visitors?

As a new member to this forum, with a relative who's undiscovered and unrecovered remains are within the area, I say however much commerical interest in building there, or even selling the land is irrelevant. Would those same "developers" seek planning permission to build on the sites of their own ancestors' Graves? I think not.

As such, commerce should rightly take a back seat, out of simple respect for those who did fight and die for a seemingly perpetually ungrateful France, that happened to be unable and unwilling (French Army Mutiny, etc) to fight it's own battles, despite them being on Belgian soil.

I cannot see it as legitmate to desecrate the resting places of so many, for mere commerciality. The rest of the western world, especially New Zealand, Australia, and the UK have paid a high human price to ensure France retained her freedom, which freedom after two world wars has sought to then beggar those same nations economically, via the EU.

In short, France, and by default Belgium (whose land it actually is, it would seem), Owe the Allied dead still within that ground the undisturbed eternal Peace they surely earned, and the only decency left to them : that of rest.

[Ken Lees]

What a load of nonsense!

What 'graves'? There are no graves there, are there?

The French Army and the French people suffered immeasurably more than any of the British/Commonwealth nations and I find your comments about them being "unable and unwilling" to fight their own battles, grossly offensive.

This thread has nothing to do with Belgian land, so perhaps your comments are made through ignorance rather than being deliberately offensive. And since you don't seem to know which country we are discussing, how do you know your relative's remains are "within the area"?

If the French were not to disturb any of the land where a soldier of any nationality may lay there would be thousands of square miles of untouchable land.

[keithmroberts]

My understanding from previous discussion is that there a significant number of unrecovered bodies, German, French and British lost in the mining in that area. Its also one of the few sites that has been left undisturbed for 90 years.

I am very pleased that the main part of the site is to be left undeveloped.

Keith

[Ken Lees]

That is my understanding, too.

Ken

[Uyraell]

What a load of nonsense!

What 'graves'? There are no graves there, are there?

The French Army and the French people suffered immeasurably more than any of the British/Commonwealth nations and I find your comments about them being "unable and unwilling" to fight their own battles, grossly offensive.

This thread has nothing to do with Belgian land, so perhaps your comments are made through ignorance rather than being deliberately offensive. And since you don't seem to know which country we are discussing, how do you know your relative's remains are "within the area"?

If the French were not to disturb any of the land where a soldier of any nationality may lay there would be thousands of square miles of untouchable land.

I have a relative unrecovered in Belgium, and another unrecovered in France. I wrote in the singular for simplicity's sake, which perhaps I should not have done.

As to My comment on France : I stand by it. Though I'll discuss the reasoning further in "Off Topic" later should you wish to do so.

As to the land: while I might in general terms agree with you, the fact is presented that there are unrecovered human remains in the area, since the thread itself contains off-forum references which point that out.

While I meant no offence, my opinion is based on a large amount of research compiled over roughly three decades, and given what that research has revealed, I am no fan of France, nor buy into the modernist historical apologist stance that is prevalent these days, in regard to France. Beyond this paragraph, I will say no further on that within this thread, but will go to "Off Topic" to discuss it.

Uyraell.

[KIRKY]

Uyraell,

You mention a large amount of research into this topic, perhaps it would be good if you backed up your statement about the French with some of these facts which would also be of great interest to us on this WW1 forum? It is a vehicle for exchange of knowledge as has been shown over and over? If your research shows your opinions to be true then it would be of great interest to us.

Tony