Louise Mendonca / The Daily Telegraph today

Not open for further replies.

Why did you close the other thread on this subject? I fully understand that there can be no public discussion of the impending CMs but surely such discussions would only be prejudicial if they concern the actual allegation rather than the more general discussion that was taking place there of political correctness and the apparent desire to prosecute any officer, for any offence, just to puts someone in court. Surely such discussions are highly necessary?

I watched the Cenotaph yesterday and was struck by how utterly cut off we are from our politicians. Not one of them laying a wreath yesterday has the slightest idea of what they are asking of us but are seemingly nonetheless happy to join in the mud slinging at the slightest opportunity. Louise Mendonca and the Telegraph have started a serious debate that MUST be held both in public and in private. The logic behind the prosecution goes to the heart of our military system - the extent of responsibility up and down the chain of command, the pact of trust between officers and soldier, between the military and the public, between the military and the politicians. When is mission command a doctrine that can be ignored by the chain of command? Are outstanding leaders responsible for every single act of every single soldier under their command at all times?

In the absence of an Army Federation and at a time when even CGS (the real one) can't speak to the media without a minder, who else is to speak up for us on such serious issues? You may have already noticed that ARRSE is beginning to fulfil a role here with the media and politicians (admittedly perhaps only a few of the latter) following our more serious discussions. Please don't cut all such discussions as an SOP without considering what is really damaging and what is important to all of us.
I did consider it, and it is closed, as per Arrse policy of discussion on pending or imminent CM's.

The problem is Von-Ryan, and has been the case in the past, people cannot resist saying "What they know" ,if you look at the thread concerning Cpl. Mates going to ET, you will see exactly what I mean. With CM's we have to be especially careful if the issue of sub-judice is to be considered .

Arrse is not some generalised talking shop. Many people here will know the Colonel and the others that face investigation. Because of that any discussion will be paid particular attention to , by the media , MoD and very possibly certain others whose first thought , is not the welfare and good names of those who are being investigated.

Closing the thread , is not a statement of support or condemnation of the individuals that stand accused.


I posted a rant first thing this morning and came under heavy fire for not reading all the posts available on ARRSE! Being a timid and sensitive soul, I apologised profusely and blanked my initial post. I notice now that the thought police have expunged all record of the thing from history, even my personal account history!

Mrs Mendonca gets a mention on the New Labour/Political Correctness thread, and it was this that I was referred to!
Queensman said:
Mrs Mendonca gets a mention on the New Labour/Political Correctness thread, and it was this that I was referred to!
Whoops. Just checked the above - they've closed that one too!
ARRSE is a member driven moderated site which I believe exists far, far less on the donations of those who contribute financially than it does on the efforts of those who moderate it. It is interesting to note the vitriol attached to the arguments which are generated when any thread is closed. In my opinion this highlights the sense with which the action was taken in as much as the moderator involved could have reasonably assumed that the thread had the potential to get out of hand.

Now that isn't a problem if the moderator is online at the time, is monitoring that particular thread and has the time and patience to continually edit and re-edit contentious, prejudicial or just plain wrong posts. But even the mighty PTP has to sleep sometime so if, in his opinion, a thread has the potential to go wrong, his principle concern must be for the protection of the site. Personally (having had posts edited and been highly active in threads which have subsequently been locked and/or deleted) I tend to take it on the chin and get on with something else.
On the 'old' thread I made remarks re this officer's award. In a Senior Moment I referred to OBE when, of course, I meant DSO.
Sorry about that good people.
I will have lots of salt on my crow pie tonight!
I can see PTP's point and haven't any problem with the locking of that thread, but as I've just PM'd to someone else, I was actually most disturbed by the implication by the DT that the officers i/c the soldiers recently being investigated were also to be investigated only in the name of political korrektness; this implied that it would only happen to placate the proletariat who considered that the officers had in some way wriggled out of their responsibilities. The fact is that officers, like directors and managers, law officers, politicians, policemen and senior officials in every organisation in the world are normally called to account for the actions of their subordinates. That's part of the contract, and it's why they get paid more than those subordinates - just as they hold authority, they hold responsibility. The DT, whose editorials I usually agree with, overstepped their loyalties here; to a 'class', an attitude I despise in them just as I do in the Mirror, Sun or Mail. And so, I believe, did the loyalties of one or more very senior officers slip, but to a political party or to a fashion, which is even more inexcusable.
An excellent overview WB , and a suitable post with which to close this thread.

Perhaps Arrse posters could express their views in the letters page of the DT?

Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Latest Threads