Arlington (National Cemetery) unveils a new unknown soldier

[sabra]

Source: Salon

The first headstone stamped "Unknown" since 1984 is the result not of war's chaos, but of human error

Oct. 7, 2009 | For the first time in a generation, Arlington National Cemetery has marked the burial of an unknown on its storied grounds. Only this time, 25 years since the last interment at the Tomb of the Unknowns, the identity of the body remains a mystery not because the ravages of war made identification impossible, but because in a bureaucratic error the cemetery lost the paperwork showing the identity of the remains.

Arlington recently installed a headstone marked "Unknown" above grave 449 in section 68 of the cemetery. "A grave marker has been placed at grave 449 in section 68 noting the remains as Unknown," Army spokesman Dave Foster confirmed to Salon in a statement.

This is the first time the cemetery has marked an unknown since 1984, when Arlington entombed the remains of a Vietnam veteran in the Tomb of the Unknowns in a ceremony rife with pomp and circumstance. Former President Reagan presided, posthumously awarding that service member the Medal of Honor. And that unknown soldier was supposed to be the last unknown interred in any U.S. military cemetery, given advances in DNA technology and a multimillion dollar effort to account for every soldier and identify all remains. A body that could not be identified was supposed to be a thing of the past.

But Arlington's newest unknown, buried without special ceremony, is the exception to what was intended to be the rule. The cemetery buried someone in grave 449 -- likely relatively recently, since that section is an active part of the cemetery -- and then lost track of the paperwork showing the identity of the remains. In 2003, workers went to bury a newly deceased service member in that plot, only to find unmarked remains in the ground. Paper records had listed the plot as vacant.

Read more: http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2009/10/07/arlington_cemetery/

[Libertas1776]

1. That's disgraceful

that such a thing can still happen.

[Soylent Brice]

2. .

[Solly Mack]

3. Damn

[harmonicon]

4. jesus fucking christ!

And we're supposed to trust these knuckleheads to run a war?!

[muriel_volestrangler]

5. So why can't they do DNA testing on the unknown body?

Does this imply that somewhere there, there's another marked, named grave that has turned out to contain no casket at all? Or an empty casket?

[dflprincess]

6. DNA won't do any good if they don't have another sample

from the deceased or a relative to compare it to.

[jeff47]

7. DNA degrades

Despite what we see on TV, DNA tends to degrade in a body that's buried in moist soil (such as at Arlington).

In addition, DNA samples were only taken en-mass for our soldiers relatively recently. If the body is of an older vet, then there would be no DNA on record anyway.