Resend my activation email : Register : Log in 
BCF: Bike Chat Forums


Win/Fail in one story

Reply to topic
Bike Chat Forums Index -> Politics & Current Affairs
View previous topic : View next topic  
Author Message

Mister James
I want to believe!



Joined: 10 Aug 2004
Karma :

PostPosted: 00:15 - 05 Aug 2009    Post subject: Win/Fail in one story Reply with quote

https://www.metro.co.uk/news/article.html?War_lies_gave_me_post-traumatic_stress&in_article_id=714517&in_page_id=34


Win Arrow Admitting that the MoD persistently lied about equipment being adequate.

Fail Arrow Trying to make money out of that fact, despite being culpable yourself.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

Raffles
World Chat Champion



Joined: 14 Apr 2009
Karma :

PostPosted: 08:42 - 05 Aug 2009    Post subject: Re: Win/Fail in one story Reply with quote

Mister James wrote:


Fail Arrow Trying to make money, despite being culpable yourself.


Sadly, claims like this are quite common nowadays.
I'm sure that if ambulance-chasing lawyers had been around in the 1940's that many of the Waffen-SS would have been suing Hitler's estate for the psychological damage suffered during the lmplementation of the final solution to the Jewish problem.
____________________
A good loser will always be a loser.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Hetzer
Super Spammer



Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Karma :

PostPosted: 09:25 - 05 Aug 2009    Post subject: Re: Win/Fail in one story Reply with quote

raffles wrote:
Mister James wrote:


Fail Arrow Trying to make money, despite being culpable yourself.


Sadly, claims like this are quite common nowadays.
I'm sure that if ambulance-chasing lawyers had been around in the 1940's that many of the Waffen-SS would have been suing Hitler's estate for the psychological damage suffered during the lmplementation of the final solution to the Jewish problem.


Except that the Waffen-SS weren't involved in that shit, they were combat-soldiers. The Allgemeine-SS are the ones you want. Wink
____________________
"There's the horizon! Ride hard, ride fast and cut down all who stand in your way!"
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

pa_broon74
World Chat Champion



Joined: 28 Mar 2006
Karma :

PostPosted: 11:02 - 05 Aug 2009    Post subject: Reply with quote

Metro wrote:
His partner Christine Brooke, 65, said: 'John is an honest, sensitive and moral person and having to peddle Government lies that soldiers in vehicles such as the Snatch Land Rovers were safe from roadside bombs has made him stressed.'



If that was true, he'd never have engaged in the lies in the first place.

I give the hang-dog look in the picture they printed 10 out of 10 for effort though.

Thumbs Up
____________________
Didn't catch anything.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

superstacker
Traffic Copper



Joined: 20 Feb 2005
Karma :

PostPosted: 13:55 - 05 Aug 2009    Post subject: Reply with quote

Anyone who believed that Snatch landrovers were bomb proof need their head checking anyway.

They are small landrovers with minimal armour, but at the beginning of the conflict roadside bombs weren't much of a problem.

I drove a few times through Iraq in a white Toyota Hilux (Basra to Kuwait) and the worst i saw back then (2004) was a taxi driving the wrong way up the highway towards me.

Then as the Shietes (sp) and the Sunni's grouped together and wanted British Forces out of Basra (near the end of my first tour), the need for armoured vehicles was apparent. However the civilian industry that provides them doesnt move as quick, and quite simply they weren't available.

However at least now its getting better and the kit is slowly coming through the system..
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

sickpup
Old Timer



Joined: 21 Apr 2004
Karma :

PostPosted: 09:59 - 06 Aug 2009    Post subject: Reply with quote

I find this an interesting story and Mister James response to it equally interesting.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

OssY
Nearly there...



Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Karma :

PostPosted: 12:58 - 06 Aug 2009    Post subject: Reply with quote

Erm freedom of choice. If i get told to lie about something i have got the choice to fight or falter. He could have said no, what would they have done?? fired him??

Common sense should have taken over when he gets told to tell lies that will kill many of our troops. But as with all these cases the green eyed monster took over and he was blinded by the money, then when the money stopped coming he see's the light through the darkness of his lies....... And sues the government for more cash.
Class 1 pr1ck.

https://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a82/O55T3R1K3R/happy_face_money_in_eyes_hg_clr.gif
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

Mister James
I want to believe!



Joined: 10 Aug 2004
Karma :

PostPosted: 23:02 - 06 Aug 2009    Post subject: Reply with quote

sickpup wrote:
I find this an interesting story and Mister James response to it equally interesting.


How so?

I would've thought you smarter than the average bunch of BCF dribblers who assume that because I don't subscribe to their sub-Daily Express rantings, I must support everything the police/government/M12 say/do/think/joke about.

If I believe something is wrong, I say so. That applies to the government and Bike Conspiracy Forum-goers alike. People just choose to ignore that because it suits their prejudices.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

sickpup
Old Timer



Joined: 21 Apr 2004
Karma :

PostPosted: 23:14 - 06 Aug 2009    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mister James wrote:
I would've thought you smarter than the average bunch of BCF dribblers who assume that because I don't subscribe to their sub-Daily Express rantings, I must support everything the police/government/M12 say/do/think/joke about.

If I believe something is wrong, I say so. That applies to the government and Bike Conspiracy Forum-goers alike. People just choose to ignore that because it suits their prejudices.


Because I believe you with your military background failed to notice something of import.

Quote:
A Ministry of Defence press officer is suing his bosses for suffering 'post-traumatic stress' from having to peddle 'lies' about the war in Iraq.


As such he could have been and certainly appears to have been under orders to lie. As a civil servant (of one kind or another) he would have been required to sign the Official Secrets act contract and as such couldn't have released the truth at the time so it is entirely possible that he could be suffering from PTSD and wouldn't have been culpable.

I only said your response was interesting. In fact I was surprised that you appear to have not considered the above.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Mister James
I want to believe!



Joined: 10 Aug 2004
Karma :

PostPosted: 23:47 - 06 Aug 2009    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm fully aware of the OSA - however it only places a duty on you to withhold information that could damage national security if released - it does not require you to lie. If he felt so strongly about the whole thing he could've refused to carry on doing so - in fact, it's technically a legal obligation for him to do so. While there is no longer any 'public interest' defence for breaching the OSA, there was certainly nothing compellingly in the national interest to compel him to lie about Afghan equipment - it was only in New Labour's interest, which isn't the civil service's concern.

I'm not too bothered about the fact that he continued to do his job and knowingly tell porkies about the war; I'm more concerned with his rank hypocrisy in blubbing about the poor, dear ill-equipped troops while sticking his hands out for a share of the MoD's shrinking budget in kompensayshun. His actions are mercenary and imply that he believes his 'suffering' is on a par with the people getting blown limb from limb in a dusty shit hole on the other side of the world.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

sickpup
Old Timer



Joined: 21 Apr 2004
Karma :

PostPosted: 00:09 - 07 Aug 2009    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mister James wrote:
I'm fully aware of the OSA - however it only places a duty on you to withhold information that could damage national security if released


So if we tell terrorists to plant bombs on more ropads as we are particulkarly vulnerable to this sort of attackyou think it wouldn't break the OSA?

Mister James wrote:
it does not require you to lie.


It can do.

Mister James wrote:
If he felt so strongly about the whole thing he could've refused to carry on doing so


Very easy to say, hard thing to do when in the middle.


Mister James wrote:
in fact, it's technically a legal obligation for him to do so.


Technically yes, in practise no.

Mister James wrote:
While there is no longer any 'public interest' defence for breaching the OSA, there was certainly nothing compellingly in the national interest to compel him to lie about Afghan equipment - it was only in New Labour's interest, which isn't the civil service's concern


It is the civil services concern if the Government of the day tell them it is.

Mister James wrote:
I'm not too bothered about the fact that he continued to do his job and knowingly tell porkies about the war; I'm more concerned with his rank hypocrisy in blubbing about the poor, dear ill-equipped troops while sticking his hands out for a share of the MoD's shrinking budget in kompensayshun. His actions are mercenary and imply that he believes his 'suffering' is on a par with the people getting blown limb from limb in a dusty shit hole on the other side of the world.


I think if I was forced by circumstance and legal complications to tell people their loved ones were perfectly safe while knowing they were in danger and then having to visit the families of these 'safe' soldiers who died I would be pretty traumatised but then I'm a bit sensitive like that.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Mister James
I want to believe!



Joined: 10 Aug 2004
Karma :

PostPosted: 01:03 - 07 Aug 2009    Post subject: Reply with quote

sickpup wrote:

So if we tell terrorists to plant bombs on more ropads as we are particulkarly vulnerable to this sort of attackyou think it wouldn't break the OSA?


What a strange thing to say.

The terrorists/insurgents/Taliban/Freedom fighters already know this - that's why people were/are dying.

Everyone even slightly involved in military affairs knows how poorly armoured Snatch was, and even on these hallowed forums we have debates over the vulnerability of other forms of transport.

There was no secret, the government was just hoping to.....well, I don't know what they hoped to achieve to be honest, I can't think like them.

Quote:

Mister James wrote:
it does not require you to lie.


It can do.


Not at all. It simply stops you from disclosing information likely to harm the national interest. If the civil servant in question (or his bosses) choose to interpret that as him needing to lie - that's down to them, not the law.

Lets remember that he was a press officer, not 007.

Quote:

Mister James wrote:
If he felt so strongly about the whole thing he could've refused to carry on doing so


Very easy to say, hard thing to do when in the middle.


I agree - doesn't mean you have to go whining to the press about how hard done-to you were.

Quote:

It is the civil services concern if the Government of the day tell them it is.


I was referring to the Official Secrets Act, as that is what you quoted.

The Civil Service is indeed bound by the wishes of the government, but not to such an extent that they are forced to ignore the law.

The OSA isn't really relevant to this gent's conundrum - it isn't a violation of the act to refuse to tell porkies.


Quote:

I think if I was forced by circumstance and legal complications to tell people their loved ones were perfectly safe while knowing they were in danger and then having to visit the families of these 'safe' soldiers who died I would be pretty traumatised but then I'm a bit sensitive like that.


Granted.

Doesn't remove his culpability, or my annoyance at his portrayal of himself as a victim.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

sickpup
Old Timer



Joined: 21 Apr 2004
Karma :

PostPosted: 09:05 - 07 Aug 2009    Post subject: Reply with quote

[quote="Mister James"]
sickpup wrote:

So if we tell terrorists to plant bombs on more ropads as we are particulkarly vulnerable to this sort of attackyou think it wouldn't break the OSA?


What a strange thing to say.

The terrorists/insurgents/Taliban/Freedom fighters already know this - that's why people were/are dying.

Everyone even slightly involved in military affairs knows how poorly armoured Snatch was, and even on these hallowed forums we have debates over the vulnerability of other forms of transport.

There was no secret, the government was just hoping to.....well, I don't know what they hoped to achieve to be honest, I can't think like them.[quote]

Sorry for the terrible spelling in this part and the badly worded comment but at least you understood. Sadly even when things are well known the Government and the civil service still try to hide things, it's the put a towel over your head and say loudly 'you can't see me, you can't see me' mentality.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts
Old Thread Alert!

The last post was made 17 years, 72 days ago. Instead of replying here, would creating a new thread be more useful?
  Display posts from previous:   
This page may contain affiliate links, which means we may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. By clicking on an affiliate link, you accept that third-party cookies will be set.

Post new topic   Reply to topic    Bike Chat Forums Index -> Politics & Current Affairs All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Page 1 of 1

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum

Read the Terms of Use! - Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group
 

Debug Mode: ON - Server: birks (www) - Page Generation Time: 0.09 Sec - Server Load: 0.93 - MySQL Queries: 13 - Page Size: 90.14 Kb