MoD WEBSITE - History of the Int Corps

#1
Dear Directorate,

Okay, okay, perhaps it's me. Perhaps these days spelling, grammar and accuracy aren't important in the Int Corps. I'm talking about:

www.army.mod.uk/documents/general/history_of_intelligence_corps.pdf

I know I complained about the previous "History of the Int Corps" on the MoD website. But this latest one is still not acceptable. Grammar, spelling, capitalisation, misuse of the apostrophe and basic inaccuracy etc. is prevalent. Who checked it before it was published? No-one, by the look of it.

Publishing this is making us all look like a bunch of semi-literate idiots. If anyone in my section(s) had published this rubbish I'd have bounced them off the walls before handing them over to my section Sgt Maj. who would have done the same just to reinforce the lesson. In fact, my section Sgt Maj(s) wouldn't have even let me see this because they would have been embarrassed.

Please can we ask the MoD to remove this document from their website and save us all embarrassment....... If we just leave it there we let everyone think that that is the standard that the Corps is happy with. I hope it isn't.
 
#3
Not only poor, gramatically, but I note more than a few inaccuracies, including mixing fact with fiction. For example, in the case of the Monocled Mutineer, a drama specifically made for the small screen, it was never proved that Percy Toplis was a ringleader of the mutineers at Etaples during the First World War, nor indeed are there any records of a so called Private soldier dressed as a monocled officer leading the mutineers.

And incidentally, I believe the correct name for the Boer War of 1899-1902, was the Second South African War. I can say this with some certainty, having researched the conflict as part of my family history, because my late Grandfather, then a Private in the Highland Light Infantry, served as a mounted infantryman with the 12th (Scottish) Battalion, Mounted Infantry.
 
#5
Hmmmmmmmm

First dam sentance is bad grammar

Could have done with some proper proof reading before publishing
Snigger.

Followed by a superfluous sentence to make it past the ten character mark.....
 
#6
#8
I originally started to list the mistakes and inaccuracies in the opening post but edited them out because it was getting too long and would further the embarrassment factor if shown here.

However, if there is one thing I'd like to do before I die, it's to delete every reference in official documents to Enigma being a code. It wasn't !

Let's see how long it takes before the article is removed from the MoD website. Any guesses?
 
#15
You can never find an NTTT when you need one,.........................then three come along together.

( If only)

You might get more response if you post this on armynet ................



I'm off, Has anyone seen the keys to the black mini?
 
#16
I am astounded; as much as I'd like to, I can't even bring myself to accuse a dim-sider of being able to write something as poor as that. However, on the point of codes versus ciphers; outside of a technical discussion (which this piece most definitely is!!) then code is a perfectly acceptable term to use. It is only when discussion is in the technical realm that the difference needs to be made. :)
 
#17
Yes I remember ciphering some petrol from a Bedford RL one February in Germany and the weather was bloody code.

Is this the correct usage ?
 
#19
no it's not. correct usage would be something like "Liverpool goalkeeper Pepe Reina denied he was going to cipher another club."
as he thinks he's caught a code !

I think we've established now why I never made it through the interview stage at Loughborough during basic training
 
#20
I am astounded; as much as I'd like to, I can't even bring myself to accuse a dim-sider of being able to write something as poor as that. However, on the point of codes versus ciphers; outside of a technical discussion (which this piece most definitely is!!) then code is a perfectly acceptable term to use. It is only when discussion is in the technical realm that the difference needs to be made. :)
Not it isn't. Enigma was a machine. Not a code or a cypher.
 

Latest Threads

Top