MoD staff who misled the public should be exposed

Discussion in 'The Intelligence Cell' started by armchair_jihad, Feb 8, 2007.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Yes they work for us

  2. No it would be bad for the morale of troops in the field

  3. No the MoD allways makes the best decisions

    0 vote(s)
  4. Yes lets be un British about this for once

  5. Enforcing full accountablity means that BAE would be unhappy

  6. They should be monstered by The Sun

  7. All MoD civil servants should do 6 months front line duty in Iraq

  8. Knighthoods yes exposure no

  1. Mathew Parris writes concerning Matty Hull.

    There is no substitute for personal experience. Here are some areas where as a media commentator I’ve felt conscious of its lack this week as I followed the news about the death of Lance Corporal of Horse Matty Hull: I do not know what it is like to man the cockpit of a US fighter jet seeking to attack and disable hostile forces in Iraq. I do not know what it is like to be part of a British armoured convoy on the ground, as two American Thunderbolt missiles strike. I do not know how operationally important it is to US security that videos like this should not be made public. It follows that I cannot judge the degree of incompetence that led to that strike, or the wrongfulness or otherwise of trying to stop the video being shown.

    But of one thing I do have experience. I do know what it is like to be a civil servant in Whitehall, because for two years I was one. There is a culture there that sees the public as a damn nuisance. The culture is endemic and needs to be stamped on very hard indeed.

    Civil servants in this case now appear to be playing with a Jesuitical distinction between saying that there was not a video, and not saying that there was one. This is immaterial. A video existed, the MoD knew about it and had seen it, and they kept this knowledge from Matty Hull’s family.

    What would have been wrong with telling the truth: that the video existed and had been studied before judgments were reached; but that the Americans did not permit the release of such material. Someone in Whitehall decided not to admit this. This comes close to perpetrating a lie. A decision to mislead was taken. It will have been taken by a real person or persons. There will be names. There will be faces.

    Who were they? Where are their photographs in the newspapers? Why do we protect the identities of civil servants when we would never do so in commercial institutions? Let them be identified, drawn through the streets of London in an open cart, and pelted by the families of Service personnel.
  2. I can understand your concern - but the real damage here is not regarding our relationship with Civil Servants - but with the public, the parents of our recruits and young soldiers. Again this year the MOD have been found wanting, scandal, following scandal - breaking point is near, we know already that recruiting figures are well below quota, add to this dilemma the outflow of quality trained personnel (many SNCO & Offrs). How much can we endure. Confidence is taking a bashing. Unrepearable damage is being done!!!
  3. agree that the MOD have been found wanting and the lack of understanding of the Forces needs in general, but the MOD is run, in large, by Civil Servants who try and run the Forces like a business which has an extremely negative effect on the fighting man.

    It is unfair to criticise the MOD on numbers in the Armed Forces. This is the one area that a great deal of money, time and effort is poured into. The trouble is, however, that the Armed Forces are viewed by many as a last option when it comes to a career. Britain as a whole is also less patriotic than it was a generation or two ago the MOD can hardly be blamed for these factors.
  4. I absolutely and totally agree with Mathew Parris that the liars at the MoD should be exposed and held accountable. The damage being done is palpable and the hurt done to the families involved is immense.

    The people at the MoD who think this is the right way to proceed are scum and they are holing the fighting ability of this country below the waterline. As long as this kind of thinking remains remains extant, joining the Armed Forces will not be an option I will be recommending for my own children and I would guess, for the children of many others.

    The dignity demonstrated by the widow of Matty Hull, is, on the other hand, something to behold.
  5. I believe that those responsible for denying the existence of the video should be made to explain their reasons. I also agree with Mathew Parris that civil servants tend to regard the public as a nuisance. However, increasingly in Bliar's 'Modern' Britain, all providers of 'services' regard those they 'serve' as a nuisance.
  6. msr

    msr LE

    To the Regs or TA? Or both? That'll be the one army policy I suppose :(

  7. Are we 100% cast iron certain that CS were responsible for covering this up? People are very quick to blame the CS at every opportunity, conveniently forgetting the very large number of military personnel in the MOD who make policy decisions. I would not be remotely surprised if it turned out that a military person had made the wrong call in this case.

    Put in perspective, despite popular images of Whitehall being a CS dominated arena, of the 4500ish MOD posts there, at least half are military, and the majority of CS are in finance, admin, civil HR and a few niche areas.
  8. Ord_Sgt

    Ord_Sgt RIP

    WTF has reg or TA got to do with it?
  9. msr

    msr LE

    Because all you hear about in the press is how the army is over-stretched - no-one has highlighted the fact that the TA is in crisis too...

  10. Ord_Sgt

    Ord_Sgt RIP

    And your point is? Sorry but I just don't see this as a TA Regs issue at all!!
  11. At the very least in the next interview with the minister the reporter should very aggressively ask why no one has been fired over this.
  12. Surely this INCLUDES the TA?
  13. So lets get this right. You dont think the TA are part of the Army?
  14. Everyone seems happy to believe that civil serpents were responsible for this.

    Would the recording not have been received/reviewed/held by the military wing?.
  15. What remains shrouded in mystery is who gave the original copy to the coroner. Was it officially provided by the MoD or was it handed over unofficially? Could be someone has a conscience. If this is true they have done a great service.

    And my criticism of the MoD includes ministers, civil servants and uniformed personnel who, in my opinion, are failing in their basic duties as an officer.