• This is a stand-to for an incoming competition, one of our most expensive yet.
    Later this week we're going to be offering the opportunity to Win £270 Rab Neutrino Pro military down jacket
    Visit the thread at that link above and Watch it to be notified as soon as the competition goes live

ARRSE mentioned on bbc news

#1
Razor61
PPRUNE

Charlie calls in the troops for a Thankyou

Watching BBC News tonight, Prince Charles has called in a Scottish regiment to Balmoral to personally say thank you for the service they did in Iraq and to give each one the Iraq medal.

The BBC News then went on to do an item on the lack of support to our troops from the general public and showed extracts from ARRSE on the matter.

This news coverage is just what is needed and more of it too from all the channels basically saying it is a disgrace that the general public have shown ignorance in welcoming the troops home. The usual former General was having his say too and quite right to say he wished for the troops coming home to be able to parade in the high street etc without feeling unwelcome.
LINK

I was also watching the B.B.C News this evening ,It nice to know at least people like Prince Charles etc cares about our soldiers.

Also the BBC News highlighted the lack of support to our troops from the general public and showed extracts from this ARRSE site
 
#3
Extracts from this site? who gets crated then?
 
#5
I can't remember which posts were shown, but the BBC were very good about only quoting the nice ones.

....it could have been nasty if they'd wanted to stab PoW in the back...
 
#6
I missed the news of this but understand that Prince Charles presented medals to the troops, this relates to a question I have asked previously, in this case would the medals be named to the recipient? or would they be named later?
 
#8
Its how i became aware of this quality site last night watching the news. If I can find my army number will see if it works on army net also.
 
#9
BarceBandit said:
I missed the news of this but understand that Prince Charles presented medals to the troops, this relates to a question I have asked previously, in this case would the medals be named to the recipient? or would they be named later?
Medals are usually presented. Why wouldn't they be engraved?
 
#10
You always here tales in the papers of troops winging about not being recognised. I always think what do they want a god damn medal or something I guess so.
 
#11
RFUK said:
BarceBandit said:
I missed the news of this but understand that Prince Charles presented medals to the troops, this relates to a question I have asked previously, in this case would the medals be named to the recipient? or would they be named later?
Medals are usually presented. Why wouldn't they be engraved?
I think that Barce is implying that he would be impressed if the MoD managed to be efficient and knock out named medals is less than the usual time!
 
#12
Gremlin said:
RFUK said:
BarceBandit said:
I missed the news of this but understand that Prince Charles presented medals to the troops, this relates to a question I have asked previously, in this case would the medals be named to the recipient? or would they be named later?
Medals are usually presented. Why wouldn't they be engraved?
I think that Barce is implying that he would be impressed if the MoD managed to be efficient and knock out named medals is less than the usual time!
Ah. Obviously they manage when someone who matters is involved! The rest of us will just have to keep waiting... And waiting... And waiting......
 
#13
BarceBandit said:
I missed the news of this but understand that Prince Charles presented medals to the troops, this relates to a question I have asked previously, in this case would the medals be named to the recipient? or would they be named later?
Medals actually presented rarely are the actual ones the recipient ends up with. They're either collected and redistributed to the named individuals following the parade or go back in to stores pending the forwarding of the actual medals from the medal office. Ensuring named medals went to the correct individuals on parade would be an enormous faff.
 
#14
BuckFelize said:
BarceBandit said:
I missed the news of this but understand that Prince Charles presented medals to the troops, this relates to a question I have asked previously, in this case would the medals be named to the recipient? or would they be named later?
Medals actually presented rarely are the actual ones the recipient ends up with. They're either collected and redistributed to the named individuals following the parade or go back in to stores pending the forwarding of the actual medals from the medal office. Ensuring named medals went to the correct individuals on parade would be an enormous faff.
Indeed, my first medal was given on a parade where they gave out the right medal to the right person. Its a good job it was a minor unit as it took a week of arrsing about just for that.
 
#15
Its all very well mentioning arrse in a good light, but sooner or later some lizard journo with a chip is going to come across something on arrse which they will use to support their own political agenda. Despite some media sources showing forces 100% support at all times, there's a few...
Can't help but notice the Beeb or the Guardians glee when reporting British 'Gunmen' have fired upon civilians, beaten up detainees, bombed civilian sites etc. etc. or despite the case being thrown out of court, falling hook line and sinker for the iraqis story that troops had attacked innocent civilians. Journos will get all sympathetic for soldiers but its only a stick to beat the gov with, most aren't just against UK's foriegn policy, but the armed forces in general.
A nice off the cuff remark on arrse about certain unapealing aspects of certain peoples behaviour, a regular rant about the state of the UK would really suit a journo looking to paint Her Maj's as a thugs, pawns of the neo cons, hooligans, blah blah.
 
#16
Both my engraved medels were presented to me correctly I would let you know






I would like to point out that was only 5 of us on my GSM parade, and the Gulf War one was posted to me in a box, but hey the system works :wink:
 
#17
Bagwell said:
Its all very well mentioning arrse in a good light, but sooner or later some lizard journo with a chip is going to come across something on arrse which they will use to support their own political agenda. Despite some media sources showing forces 100% support at all times, there's a few...
Can't help but notice the Beeb or the Guardians glee when reporting British 'Gunmen' have fired upon civilians, beaten up detainees, bombed civilian sites etc. etc. or despite the case being thrown out of court, falling hook line and sinker for the iraqis story that troops had attacked innocent civilians. Journos will get all sympathetic for soldiers but its only a stick to beat the gov with, most aren't just against UK's foriegn policy, but the armed forces in general.
A nice off the cuff remark on arrse about certain unapealing aspects of certain peoples behaviour, a regular rant about the state of the UK would really suit a journo looking to paint Her Maj's as a thugs, pawns of the neo cons, hooligans, blah blah.
My bold. Bagwell has a good point here and the whole issue shows that all sorts are viewing this site. It goes that we should be careful on some of the subjects we touch on eg ripping into a recently deceased colleague as some did last week- not something we would want a journo to see at a time when we are all bleating about covenants and 'the public just dont care'.
 
#18
762baynet said:
My bold. Bagwell has a good point here and the whole issue shows that all sorts are viewing this site. It goes that we should be careful on some of the subjects we touch on eg ripping into a recently deceased colleague as some did last week- not something we would want a journo to see at a time when we are all bleating about covenants and 'the public just dont care'.
Sorry I disagree entirely. This site is somewhere to let off steam and say what you mean. If there is anything particularly off colour or indeed legally actionable then that is what the MODS are for.

Otherwise you start self censorship and that is the start of Newspeak and Doublethink. If the Journo starts to quote out of context or to suit their own tawdry needs (are you watching TND?) then we have our right of reply on their media outlets.

Heed.
 
#20
762baynet said:
Bagwell said:
Its all very well mentioning arrse in a good light, but sooner or later some lizard journo with a chip is going to come across something on arrse which they will use to support their own political agenda. Despite some media sources showing forces 100% support at all times, there's a few...
Can't help but notice the Beeb or the Guardians glee when reporting British 'Gunmen' have fired upon civilians, beaten up detainees, bombed civilian sites etc. etc. or despite the case being thrown out of court, falling hook line and sinker for the iraqis story that troops had attacked innocent civilians. Journos will get all sympathetic for soldiers but its only a stick to beat the gov with, most aren't just against UK's foriegn policy, but the armed forces in general.
A nice off the cuff remark on arrse about certain unapealing aspects of certain peoples behaviour, a regular rant about the state of the UK would really suit a journo looking to paint Her Maj's as a thugs, pawns of the neo cons, hooligans, blah blah.
My bold. Bagwell has a good point here and the whole issue shows that all sorts are viewing this site. It goes that we should be careful on some of the subjects we touch on eg ripping into a recently deceased colleague as some did last week- not something we would want a journo to see at a time when we are all bleating about covenants and 'the public just dont care'.
Smudges posts, while well suited to the humour of this slice of life will not only go straight over the heads of a journo, but will most likely rile them along the lines of 'oh my god, you cant say that!'. And youre right; to some journo it might seem hypocritical when we say that the government shows no care for the armed forces when we be ripping it out of someone who was still warm on the slab! Also, and Bagwell is no innocent here, many of these threads, especially Current Affairs, discuss 'hot' topics...that would mean something along the line of multiculturalism, clash or not a clash of civilisation, and often specific religous/cultural groups. There is some tasty stuff on arrse, for an arrse sniffing hack. For example if yet another Iraqi (inspired by a dashing young Islingtonite human rights laywer) claims soldiers have been unlwaful...A Guardian or Beeb journo could point to arrse and use some quotes to paint soldiers as rather unsympathetic to Islamism to say the least.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top