Returning troops strip on airport tarmac after uniform ban
More than 200 soldiers on their way home from Afghanistan had to strip off their uniforms on the tarmac at Birmingham International Airport and don civilian clothes before being allowed access to the terminal building.
The charter flight was bringing the men back for Christmas leave when it was diverted from its intended destination at RAF Brize Norton because of bad weather, the Ministry of Defence confirmed yesterday.
The incident, which has
triggered a barrage of complaints to the MoD and to the company which runs Birmingham
International, follows another military diversion blunder highlighted by The Herald yesterday in which 130 Wiltshire-based troops returning from Iraq were left 400 miles from home at Prestwick Airport on Christmas Eve.
Then, despite having 15 hours notice of the delay and diversion, RAF movements staff claimed they had not received orders to make onward travel arrangements and that no coaches were available to take the troops home.
The soldiers at Birmingham were told by the pilot that their baggage was being unloaded on to the runway and that they must reclaim it, dig out their own clothes and remove their desert combat kit before they could
proceed into the airport building.
While he then offered to allow them to re-enter the aircraft to change, most chose to strip down in a freezing wind to save
precious leave time.
One soldier involved in the Birmingham fiasco said: "The temperature was Baltic on the runway but most of just wanted to get home so we cracked on with getting changed in the open.
"We weren't told who gave the order. It might have been the
designated senior officer on board, the chartered airline or the airport security people. It's an insult to the entire Army to force guys who've been fighting in Afghanistan to obey some
jobsworth rule when all they want to do is get home soonest to their families. So much for a nation proud of its servicemen."
An MoD spokesman said: "We can confirm the incident occurred but because everyone is on leave, we have not been able to discover who gave the order.
"It's possibly a response to an out-of-date standing instruction during the confrontation with the IRA that service personnel should not make themselves
terrorist targets by wearing
uniform in public places."
An airport spokesman added: "There are no restrictions
relating to clothing or appearance for those using the airport for public flights. However, the airport company has been advised that certain airlines may refuse to accept personnel in
military uniform."
© All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without
permission is prohibited.
Posted by: baffies away on 12:48am Thu 3 Jan 08
Disgraceful. I would also want to know which airlines dont allow troops on in uniform. They should be named.
Disgraceful. I would also want to know which airlines dont allow troops on in uniform. They should be named.
Posted by: Alexander Richmond, Barrie Ontario on 12:52am Thu 3 Jan 08
As a civilian fire fighter at CFB BORDEN in Ontario I have got to know those DND PERS who serve over seas. This is not only an insult to your forces but to all who serve their country. Bully for them to strip and get on with it. Sounds like a scene from The Glory Brigade. I hope who gave the order is next in line to be shipped. This may not be a loud voice but as one born in Scotland I am insulted .
As a civilian fire fighter at CFB BORDEN in Ontario I have got to know those DND PERS who serve over seas. This is not only an insult to your forces but to all who serve their country. Bully for them to strip and get on with it. Sounds like a scene from The Glory Brigade. I hope who gave the order is next in line to be shipped. This may not be a loud voice but as one born in Scotland I am insulted .
Posted by: Colin B, Bearsden on 12:52am Thu 3 Jan 08
More shocking treatment of our armed forces by an ungrateful ( as well as despicable) Labour government which thinks it can pick up the service personnell as a marketing tool then throw these brave people away like a rag doll when they are finished.
Des Browne has repeatedly treated the forces with contempt and must now resign- lies over cockpit video, sailors stories, housing, pay, delays over Astute submarines, helicopters, body armour, Nimrod, protecting Human Rights of those who kill our troops ( Colonel Gus Kohnop and Iraqi's in custody in Basra). It's time he stood up against penny wise pound foolish Brown and Darling and put his own squalid career after the interests of the armed forces.
Well done the Herald for publicising this-shame on them for protecting their advertising airlines/individuals (As they frequently do with our liberal judges such as Lord Reed and Roger Craik).
More shocking treatment of our armed forces by an ungrateful ( as well as despicable) Labour government which thinks it can pick up the service personnell as a marketing tool then throw these brave people away like a rag doll when they are finished.
Des Browne has repeatedly treated the forces with contempt and must now resign- lies over cockpit video, sailors stories, housing, pay, delays over Astute submarines, helicopters, body armour, Nimrod, protecting Human Rights of those who kill our troops ( Colonel Gus Kohnop and Iraqi's in custody in Basra). It's time he stood up against penny wise pound foolish Brown and Darling and put his own squalid career after the interests of the armed forces.
Well done the Herald for publicising this-shame on them for protecting their advertising airlines/individuals (As they frequently do with our liberal judges such as Lord Reed and Roger Craik).
Posted by: doonhamer on 1:10am Thu 3 Jan 08
There is only two options available to Des Browne over this shameful escapade.
A public apology to the personnel involved and in the House of Commons
Or
His resignation.
There is only two options available to Des Browne over this shameful escapade.
A public apology to the personnel involved and in the House of Commons
Or
His resignation.
Posted by: Graham, Glasgow on 1:27am Thu 3 Jan 08
Colin B, Since when did you care about our soldiers. Its routine to strip off and BURN Uniforms when required. Its called HYGIENE, PREVENTION OF DISEASE. Churchill will have to apologise to my father. No point really both are dead![bold]bold[/bold]
Colin B, Since when did you care about our soldiers. Its routine to strip off and BURN Uniforms when required. Its called HYGIENE, PREVENTION OF DISEASE. Churchill will have to apologise to my father. No point really both are dead!
Posted by: stonehaven on 1:41am Thu 3 Jan 08
[quote][bold]Graham[/bold] wrote:
Colin B, Since when did you care about our soldiers. Its routine to strip off and BURN Uniforms when required. Its called HYGIENE, PREVENTION OF DISEASE. Churchill will have to apologise to my father. No point really both are dead![bold]bold[/bold] [/quote] Graham, pathetic attempt to defend the indefensible.
Graham wrote:
Colin B, Since when did you care about our soldiers. Its routine to strip off and BURN Uniforms when required. Its called HYGIENE, PREVENTION OF DISEASE. Churchill will have to apologise to my father. No point really both are dead!
Graham, pathetic attempt to defend the indefensible.
Posted by: Tom H, Scotland on 2:00am Thu 3 Jan 08
[quote][bold]Colin B[/bold] wrote:
More shocking treatment of our armed forces by an ungrateful ( as well as despicable) Labour government which thinks it can pick up the service personnell as a marketing tool then throw these brave people away like a rag doll when they are finished.
Des Browne has repeatedly treated the forces with contempt and must now resign- lies over cockpit video, sailors stories, housing, pay, delays over Astute submarines, helicopters, body armour, Nimrod, protecting Human Rights of those who kill our troops ( Colonel Gus Kohnop and Iraqi's in custody in Basra). It's time he stood up against penny wise pound foolish Brown and Darling and put his own squalid career after the interests of the armed forces.
Well done the Herald for publicising this-shame on them for protecting their advertising airlines/individuals (As they frequently do with our liberal judges such as Lord Reed and Roger Craik).[/quote] Blah Blah Blah...
The reality of this incident is likely to be that the order to change into civilian clothing was given by the senior officer on the flight. Who, would have made the decision with individuals’ safety in mind, as the majority would be travelling on alone to their homes across the country. A serviceman/woman alone and in uniform, can attract the attention of yobs as well as terrorists and their sympathisers.
Colin B wrote:
More shocking treatment of our armed forces by an ungrateful ( as well as despicable) Labour government which thinks it can pick up the service personnell as a marketing tool then throw these brave people away like a rag doll when they are finished.
Des Browne has repeatedly treated the forces with contempt and must now resign- lies over cockpit video, sailors stories, housing, pay, delays over Astute submarines, helicopters, body armour, Nimrod, protecting Human Rights of those who kill our troops ( Colonel Gus Kohnop and Iraqi's in custody in Basra). It's time he stood up against penny wise pound foolish Brown and Darling and put his own squalid career after the interests of the armed forces.
Well done the Herald for publicising this-shame on them for protecting their advertising airlines/individuals (As they frequently do with our liberal judges such as Lord Reed and Roger Craik).
Blah Blah Blah...
The reality of this incident is likely to be that the order to change into civilian clothing was given by the senior officer on the flight. Who, would have made the decision with individuals’ safety in mind, as the majority would be travelling on alone to their homes across the country. A serviceman/woman alone and in uniform, can attract the attention of yobs as well as terrorists and their sympathisers.
Posted by: Mathew T. on 2:37am Thu 3 Jan 08
Disgraceful. Absolutely disgraceful. The RAF saved Britain don't forget and any man that suits up to fight for his country should be afforded the utmost respect. I hope you publish a list of the companies that want to disrespect the military men so we can all help them towards ruin.
I wish a pox on Birmingham Airport and the Jihadi moron that gave the disgusting 'order'. Here's an order for you DROP DEAD YOU RAT!!!
Disgraceful. Absolutely disgraceful. The RAF saved Britain don't forget and any man that suits up to fight for his country should be afforded the utmost respect. I hope you publish a list of the companies that want to disrespect the military men so we can all help them towards ruin.
I wish a pox on Birmingham Airport and the Jihadi moron that gave the disgusting 'order'. Here's an order for you DROP DEAD YOU RAT!!!
Posted by: Scunnert, Travelling in Nihlon on 3:18am Thu 3 Jan 08
[quote][bold]Tom H[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]Colin B[/bold] wrote:
More shocking treatment of our armed forces by an ungrateful ( as well as despicable) Labour government which thinks it can pick up the service personnell as a marketing tool then throw these brave people away like a rag doll when they are finished.
Des Browne has repeatedly treated the forces with contempt and must now resign- lies over cockpit video, sailors stories, housing, pay, delays over Astute submarines, helicopters, body armour, Nimrod, protecting Human Rights of those who kill our troops ( Colonel Gus Kohnop and Iraqi's in custody in Basra). It's time he stood up against penny wise pound foolish Brown and Darling and put his own squalid career after the interests of the armed forces.
Well done the Herald for publicising this-shame on them for protecting their advertising airlines/individuals (As they frequently do with our liberal judges such as Lord Reed and Roger Craik).[/quote] Blah Blah Blah...
The reality of this incident is likely to be that the order to change into civilian clothing was given by the senior officer on the flight. Who, would have made the decision with individuals’ safety in mind, as the majority would be travelling on alone to their homes across the country. A serviceman/woman alone and in uniform, can attract the attention of yobs as well as terrorists and their sympathisers.
[/quote] You make it sound like it's more dangerous for our troops on the streets of the UK than in Afghanistan. Maybe it's time to bring them home and get them to pacify the terrorist filled streets of England.
Tom H wrote:
Colin B wrote:
More shocking treatment of our armed forces by an ungrateful ( as well as despicable) Labour government which thinks it can pick up the service personnell as a marketing tool then throw these brave people away like a rag doll when they are finished.
Des Browne has repeatedly treated the forces with contempt and must now resign- lies over cockpit video, sailors stories, housing, pay, delays over Astute submarines, helicopters, body armour, Nimrod, protecting Human Rights of those who kill our troops ( Colonel Gus Kohnop and Iraqi's in custody in Basra). It's time he stood up against penny wise pound foolish Brown and Darling and put his own squalid career after the interests of the armed forces.
Well done the Herald for publicising this-shame on them for protecting their advertising airlines/individuals (As they frequently do with our liberal judges such as Lord Reed and Roger Craik).
Blah Blah Blah...
The reality of this incident is likely to be that the order to change into civilian clothing was given by the senior officer on the flight. Who, would have made the decision with individuals’ safety in mind, as the majority would be travelling on alone to their homes across the country. A serviceman/woman alone and in uniform, can attract the attention of yobs as well as terrorists and their sympathisers.
You make it sound like it's more dangerous for our troops on the streets of the UK than in Afghanistan. Maybe it's time to bring them home and get them to pacify the terrorist filled streets of England.
Posted by: Jim Baxter RIP, Hong Kong on 3:36am Thu 3 Jan 08
Bloody disgraceful. I endorse the comment that the airline should be named, shamed and avioded by the public.
Bloody disgraceful. I endorse the comment that the airline should be named, shamed and avioded by the public.
Posted by: Euan, Qatar on 3:47am Thu 3 Jan 08
I bnever thought I could be so ashamed of my country.
Euan
I bnever thought I could be so ashamed of my country.
Euan
Posted by: Los Angeles, Edinburgh on 4:36am Thu 3 Jan 08
Tom H, Not Tommy Gun[quote]The reality of this incident is likely to be that the order to change into civilian clothing was given by the senior officer on the flight.[/quote] On the tarmac?
Bit late, don't you think, to preserve their dignity? Is he a sado-masochist?
However, I agree they should be in civvies when among civilians and not on duty. No point in alarming the population unduly. I'm sure there was an airport room freethey could have used, if the officer had used his head. Scunnert has it right when he wonders if their senior officer is more fearful of the streets of home than of Baghdad.
Tom H, Not Tommy Gun
The reality of this incident is likely to be that the order to change into civilian clothing was given by the senior officer on the flight.
On the tarmac?
Bit late, don't you think, to preserve their dignity? Is he a sado-masochist?
However, I agree they should be in civvies when among civilians and not on duty. No point in alarming the population unduly. I'm sure there was an airport room freethey could have used, if the officer had used his head. Scunnert has it right when he wonders if their senior officer is more fearful of the streets of home than of Baghdad.
Posted by: Austin Tayshus on 4:42am Thu 3 Jan 08
Poor reporting of unclear facts, accompanied by fevered, uninformed and speculative comment.
The story doesn't say which military authority, if any, gave an order to the soldiers to change out of uniform. It says that the civilian pilot of the charter plane told the soldiers to change, and implies that they took the pilot at his or her word.
This may or may not be true, but why is everyone foaming at the mouth and behaving like rabid Daily Mail readers?
The press really should name and shame anti-military airlines and commercial firms, though, and the Secretary of State and CGS need to arrange for some senior military backsides to be kicked for creating a climate in which returning soldiers have been treated with less than respect and proper regard this Christmas and New Year.
Poor reporting of unclear facts, accompanied by fevered, uninformed and speculative comment.
The story doesn't say which military authority, if any, gave an order to the soldiers to change out of uniform. It says that the civilian pilot of the charter plane told the soldiers to change, and implies that they took the pilot at his or her word.
This may or may not be true, but why is everyone foaming at the mouth and behaving like rabid Daily Mail readers?
The press really should name and shame anti-military airlines and commercial firms, though, and the Secretary of State and CGS need to arrange for some senior military backsides to be kicked for creating a climate in which returning soldiers have been treated with less than respect and proper regard this Christmas and New Year.
Posted by: emsscot, Houston, Texsas on 5:32am Thu 3 Jan 08
One thing I've learned in my old age is that "there's no smoke without fire." Whomever made the decision, the bottom line is that these men should never have had to change their uniforms before being allowed into an airport terminal. And all the bunk about being in civvies and not spreading germs all over the place - it wa It sounds as though the UK now treats its servicemen/women with the same lack of respect as does the U.S. How many WW2 service men coming back from El-Alamein and the Far East were made to strip out of their uniforms when they came back home. Absolutely no excuse for this no matter the reason. As for the airline, you know fine well they were just doing what the officer in charge told them to do. No pilot or airline is going to come up with that on their own!
One thing I've learned in my old age is that "there's no smoke without fire." Whomever made the decision, the bottom line is that these men should never have had to change their uniforms before being allowed into an airport terminal. And all the bunk about being in civvies and not spreading germs all over the place - it wa It sounds as though the UK now treats its servicemen/women with the same lack of respect as does the U.S. How many WW2 service men coming back from El-Alamein and the Far East were made to strip out of their uniforms when they came back home. Absolutely no excuse for this no matter the reason. As for the airline, you know fine well they were just doing what the officer in charge told them to do. No pilot or airline is going to come up with that on their own!
Posted by: jdk on 5:44am Thu 3 Jan 08
whenever i see military in military uniforms at airports , they are usually met with people standing, and applauding. in my home airport, on many occasions, there is a welcoming committee and the television news is there as well.
i am proud of the people in the service protecting our freedom. i am also glad that i live in the united states where we are proud of our servicemen and women.
i am almost certain that this is the case in great britain.
whenever i see military in military uniforms at airports , they are usually met with people standing, and applauding. in my home airport, on many occasions, there is a welcoming committee and the television news is there as well.
i am proud of the people in the service protecting our freedom. i am also glad that i live in the united states where we are proud of our servicemen and women.
i am almost certain that this is the case in great britain.
Posted by: Wullie, Aberdeen on 6:09am Thu 3 Jan 08
[quote][bold]jdk[/bold] wrote:
whenever i see military in military uniforms at airports , they are usually met with people standing, and applauding. in my home airport, on many occasions, there is a welcoming committee and the television news is there as well.
i am proud of the people in the service protecting our freedom. i am also glad that i live in the united states where we are proud of our servicemen and women.
i am almost certain that this is the case in great britain.[/quote] British soldier's were not allowed to wear their uniforms in British streets for 35 years because they would be easy targets for the I.R.A terrorists. The British left and liberals hate Britain and woould like it turned into a multicultural Islamic swamp.
jdk wrote:
whenever i see military in military uniforms at airports , they are usually met with people standing, and applauding. in my home airport, on many occasions, there is a welcoming committee and the television news is there as well.
i am proud of the people in the service protecting our freedom. i am also glad that i live in the united states where we are proud of our servicemen and women.
i am almost certain that this is the case in great britain.
British soldier's were not allowed to wear their uniforms in British streets for 35 years because they would be easy targets for the I.R.A terrorists. The British left and liberals hate Britain and woould like it turned into a multicultural Islamic swamp.
Posted by: Sandy Rodger, Barrow-in-furness on 6:17am Thu 3 Jan 08
The same thing happened to my Son-in-law when returning home on the 17th of Dec. They were not allowed of there flight which had landed at newcastle airport, and had to wait on the plane for over 2 hours before it took off again and landed at brize Norton.
The same thing happened to my Son-in-law when returning home on the 17th of Dec. They were not allowed of there flight which had landed at newcastle airport, and had to wait on the plane for over 2 hours before it took off again and landed at brize Norton.
Posted by: rat on 6:26am Thu 3 Jan 08
wah? US forces have to do this or stay on the plane at nearly every country we go to
wah? US forces have to do this or stay on the plane at nearly every country we go to
Posted by: Snall, New York on 6:30am Thu 3 Jan 08
" However, the airport company has been advised that certain airlines may refuse to accept personnel in military uniform."
Horrid. Bloody horrid.
" However, the airport company has been advised that certain airlines may refuse to accept personnel in military uniform."
Horrid. Bloody horrid.
Posted by: Guga, Rockall on 6:39am Thu 3 Jan 08
Doonhamer, it's not a case of OR it should be a case of AND.
In any event, what else can you expect of the New Labour Sleaze and Corruption Party. Their leader detests the armed forces, and treats them like rubbish.
Doonhamer, it's not a case of OR it should be a case of AND.
In any event, what else can you expect of the New Labour Sleaze and Corruption Party. Their leader detests the armed forces, and treats them like rubbish.
Posted by: James Schaeffer, USA on 6:51am Thu 3 Jan 08
[quote][bold]rat[/bold] wrote:
wah? US forces have to do this or stay on the plane at nearly every country we go to[/quote] You are full of crap. 20 year USN vet and NEVER saw anything so disgraceful. British troops deserve far better. I am absolutely appalled.
rat wrote:
wah? US forces have to do this or stay on the plane at nearly every country we go to
You are full of crap. 20 year USN vet and NEVER saw anything so disgraceful. British troops deserve far better. I am absolutely appalled.
Posted by: Andrew, California on 7:06am Thu 3 Jan 08
One or two villages in England are missing an idiot
One or two villages in England are missing an idiot
Posted by: Wullie on 7:17am Thu 3 Jan 08
Somebody gave the order. To disembark two hundred troops, their baggage and then have them change on the runway does not happen of its own accord.
Moreove if the pilot offered to allow the troops back on to the plane to change it is clear that there will have been cockpit dialogue on the subject.
It is not normal circumstances to have hundreds of men and hundreds of bags out on the runway apron.
For the MoD to confirm that the incident occurred but that because because everyone is on leave they have not been able to discover who gave the order is just pure spin and deceipt. If they don't know then they should no, but they do know - but that's the way it is in Great Britain.
Surprised, of course not. Stupid public for even asking about this.
Their's not to reason why.......
Somebody gave the order. To disembark two hundred troops, their baggage and then have them change on the runway does not happen of its own accord.
Moreove if the pilot offered to allow the troops back on to the plane to change it is clear that there will have been cockpit dialogue on the subject.
It is not normal circumstances to have hundreds of men and hundreds of bags out on the runway apron.
For the MoD to confirm that the incident occurred but that because because everyone is on leave they have not been able to discover who gave the order is just pure spin and deceipt. If they don't know then they should no, but they do know - but that's the way it is in Great Britain.
Surprised, of course not. Stupid public for even asking about this.
Their's not to reason why.......
Posted by: Allan, Glasgow on 7:19am Thu 3 Jan 08
This is a disgrace. While I don't support this war, I do support those who are bravely fighting it on our behalf.
This is a disgrace. While I don't support this war, I do support those who are bravely fighting it on our behalf.
Posted by: Mac, Wigan on 7:34am Thu 3 Jan 08
Any airline which refuses to carry military personnel in uniform should immediately be banned from British air space, and named & shamed by the government. I don't support the war either, but I have nothing but respect for the people at the sharp end.
Any airline which refuses to carry military personnel in uniform should immediately be banned from British air space, and named & shamed by the government. I don't support the war either, but I have nothing but respect for the people at the sharp end.
Posted by: Terry, Australia on 7:50am Thu 3 Jan 08
If I been the leader of these men (heroes)? I would have said "form up in parade lines, pick a gate, quick march" and not stopped until I reached the rent-a-coach line.
See if the rent-a-cops would stand up to a marching force of real men.
If I been the leader of these men (heroes)? I would have said "form up in parade lines, pick a gate, quick march" and not stopped until I reached the rent-a-coach line.
See if the rent-a-cops would stand up to a marching force of real men.
Posted by: Larry, New Hampshire, USA on 7:56am Thu 3 Jan 08
What kind of farking morons do you have over there? Flying military standby REQUIRES wearing a uniform. Traveling either on leave or under orders, uniforms are required for certain benefits. But then muddle-headedness is a job requirement for bureaucrats...
What kind of farking morons do you have over there? Flying military standby REQUIRES wearing a uniform. Traveling either on leave or under orders, uniforms are required for certain benefits. But then muddle-headedness is a job requirement for bureaucrats...
Posted by: Ronnie, Glasgow on 8:54am Thu 3 Jan 08
It shows the contempt this Labour government shows for our forces. Weazel words of support from Gordon Brown who as Chancellor starved the forces of funds for 10 years show what he really thinks of them. This disgracefull incident highlights it.
It shows the contempt this Labour government shows for our forces. Weazel words of support from Gordon Brown who as Chancellor starved the forces of funds for 10 years show what he really thinks of them. This disgracefull incident highlights it.
Posted by: Bill, England, freehootsman on 8:54am Thu 3 Jan 08
We should consider ourselves lucky that our troops even want to come home to the UK, never mind laying their lives on the line for us for a pittance and being treated with contempt by our disgusting government.
We should consider ourselves lucky that our troops even want to come home to the UK, never mind laying their lives on the line for us for a pittance and being treated with contempt by our disgusting government.
Posted by: Yorkie on 8:58am Thu 3 Jan 08
[quote][bold]Larry[/bold] wrote:
What kind of farking morons do you have over there? Flying military standby REQUIRES wearing a uniform. Traveling either on leave or under orders, uniforms are required for certain benefits. But then muddle-headedness is a job requirement for bureaucrats...[/quote] Sadly, Larry, no such system exists in the UK.
Larry wrote:
What kind of farking morons do you have over there? Flying military standby REQUIRES wearing a uniform. Traveling either on leave or under orders, uniforms are required for certain benefits. But then muddle-headedness is a job requirement for bureaucrats...
Sadly, Larry, no such system exists in the UK.
Posted by: Los Angeles, Edinburgh on 9:00am Thu 3 Jan 08
Well, I've never been asked to change clothes by a customs official -
"Those trousers don't match that cardigan!"
But I have been asked to remove my steel button cowboy shirt, tie clip, belt, shoes, socks, rings, pen, rapier walking stick, tin of mint freezers, tweezers, nail clippers, Yankee Clippers, hedge clippers, metal toed slippers, knees, (metal joint therein) keys, spectacles, spittoon, replica Pinkerton badge, gold fillings, implants, money, wallet, laptop, watch, including those sewn into my coat lining, souvenir model of Eiffel Tower, stainless steel car exhaust system, crash helmet, and stocking dirk when using an airport terminal.
Personally, I think it's all getting out of hand.
Well, I've never been asked to change clothes by a customs official -
"Those trousers don't match that cardigan!"
But I have been asked to remove my steel button cowboy shirt, tie clip, belt, shoes, socks, rings, pen, rapier walking stick, tin of mint freezers, tweezers, nail clippers, Yankee Clippers, hedge clippers, metal toed slippers, knees, (metal joint therein) keys, spectacles, spittoon, replica Pinkerton badge, gold fillings, implants, money, wallet, laptop, watch, including those sewn into my coat lining, souvenir model of Eiffel Tower, stainless steel car exhaust system, crash helmet, and stocking dirk when using an airport terminal.
Personally, I think it's all getting out of hand.
Posted by: Soldier X, South England on 9:41am Thu 3 Jan 08
[quote][bold]Bill, England[/bold] wrote:
We should consider ourselves lucky that our troops even want to come home to the UK, never mind laying their lives on the line for us for a pittance and being treated with contempt by our disgusting government.[/quote] I am a serving soldier and quite right many of us don't wish to come back to UK. I for one will leave the UK after my 22 Years service. 5 yeras to go and cannot wait.
Sad to say it.....but fact.
Bill, England wrote:
We should consider ourselves lucky that our troops even want to come home to the UK, never mind laying their lives on the line for us for a pittance and being treated with contempt by our disgusting government.
I am a serving soldier and quite right many of us don't wish to come back to UK. I for one will leave the UK after my 22 Years service. 5 yeras to go and cannot wait.
Sad to say it.....but fact.
Posted by: angusb, xray room on 9:47am Thu 3 Jan 08
Can't help wondering where LA kept his Eiffel Tower and car exhaust. Was he protecting himself from the stewards?
ON story itself: most of outrage unjustified by unclear story. Until line of responsibility clarified, we just don't know enough. Not the troops' fault, though.
Can't help wondering where LA kept his Eiffel Tower and car exhaust. Was he protecting himself from the stewards?
ON story itself: most of outrage unjustified by unclear story. Until line of responsibility clarified, we just don't know enough. Not the troops' fault, though.
Posted by: SileMairin, Earth on 10:05am Thu 3 Jan 08
Well there is an easy route to get the facts. mail your MP you pay him to work for you , and if this story is fact demand those responsible are named and shamed,
You can e-mail them it's as easy as posting on here and if enough people do it they will have to start listening. OK its fun to blast off on comment pages but start ranting where it may do some good. whats here today is forgotten in tomorrows rant, why not start making it count for something....
Well there is an easy route to get the facts. mail your MP you pay him to work for you , and if this story is fact demand those responsible are named and shamed,
You can e-mail them it's as easy as posting on here and if enough people do it they will have to start listening. OK its fun to blast off on comment pages but start ranting where it may do some good. whats here today is forgotten in tomorrows rant, why not start making it count for something....
Posted by: Donald2, on the tarmac on 10:05am Thu 3 Jan 08
re Los Angeles
Were they flying with Ryan Air and just trying to avoid the usual excess baggage charges?
re Los Angeles
Were they flying with Ryan Air and just trying to avoid the usual excess baggage charges?
Posted by: Martin Grant, East Kilbride on 10:06am Thu 3 Jan 08
I, as ex-forces, would like to apologies on behalf of the country for the treatment these men had on their return. I am however excluding the politicians and personnel at Brum Airport from that collective apology as they are obviously on another planet.
I, as ex-forces, would like to apologies on behalf of the country for the treatment these men had on their return. I am however excluding the politicians and personnel at Brum Airport from that collective apology as they are obviously on another planet.
Posted by: Pete, Bearsden on 10:21am Thu 3 Jan 08
What a fiasco! The quoted "airport official" should be strung up by the balls!
What a fiasco! The quoted "airport official" should be strung up by the balls!
Posted by: RogerT, Hamilton on 10:35am Thu 3 Jan 08
OUTRAGEOUS!
Posted by: Colin B, Bearsden on 11:01am Thu 3 Jan 08
The Airline concerned was Omni Air whos pilots were instructed by some desk jockey also known as a a "mover" at the MOD to divert /conduct of soldiers etc
Incidentally the reason charters are used is because the RAF stil fly Tristars which ony Vietnam and Ethopian regional carriers tilluse because they are so unreliable, more unreliable even than the Nimrod.
This and helicopter shortage(eg problems eg Pumas), repeating the post World War 1 error of naval aviation re HArriers, having to rely on US ground support aircraft due to shortage lead to several friendly fire deaths is due to Browne and Brown underfunding our troops and over paying for useless civil servants and refurbishing MOD offices in Whitehall.
The reason Browne and Brown don't care is because Labour under Reid and Blair denied many servicemen serving oveseas the vote in 2005 and also because there are more snivelling serpents than soldiers. Labour rewards failure eg the RAF wing commander, Cressida Dick
The Airline concerned was Omni Air whos pilots were instructed by some desk jockey also known as a a "mover" at the MOD to divert /conduct of soldiers etc
Incidentally the reason charters are used is because the RAF stil fly Tristars which ony Vietnam and Ethopian regional carriers tilluse because they are so unreliable, more unreliable even than the Nimrod.
This and helicopter shortage(eg problems eg Pumas), repeating the post World War 1 error of naval aviation re HArriers, having to rely on US ground support aircraft due to shortage lead to several friendly fire deaths is due to Browne and Brown underfunding our troops and over paying for useless civil servants and refurbishing MOD offices in Whitehall.
The reason Browne and Brown don't care is because Labour under Reid and Blair denied many servicemen serving oveseas the vote in 2005 and also because there are more snivelling serpents than soldiers. Labour rewards failure eg the RAF wing commander, Cressida Dick
Posted by: Neil 9% Growth, glasgow on 11:09am Thu 3 Jan 08
[quote]"An airport spokesman added: "There are no restrictions relating to clothing or appearance for those using the airport for public flights. However, the airport company has been advised that certain airlines may refuse to accept personnel in military uniform."[/quote] This is clearly what is technically known as a lie. These men were [bold]not[/bold] boarding another aircraft they were passing through the airport to get home. Heads should roll at Birmingham Airport (not literally though I am sure some of the squaddies wouldn't object).
"An airport spokesman added: "There are no restrictions relating to clothing or appearance for those using the airport for public flights. However, the airport company has been advised that certain airlines may refuse to accept personnel in military uniform."
This is clearly what is technically known as a lie. These men were
not boarding another aircraft they were passing through the airport to get home. Heads should roll at Birmingham Airport (not literally though I am sure some of the squaddies wouldn't object).
Posted by: Hamish McGruntled, Tired o' Apologists on 11:18am Thu 3 Jan 08
[quote][bold]Graham[/bold] wrote:
Colin B, Since when did you care about our soldiers. Its routine to strip off and BURN Uniforms when required. Its called HYGIENE, PREVENTION OF DISEASE. Churchill will have to apologise to my father. No point really both are dead![bold]bold[/bold] [/quote] GRAHAM
I've hardly ever agree with COLIN B on these posts............but YOU sir............YOU are a TOTAL F***WIT ans need a good auld fashioned kick up the 4rse !!
Itsa disgrace to treat our fighting men in this way...and if YOU can't see that, I'd happily do the kicking.......IDIOT !!
Graham wrote:
Colin B, Since when did you care about our soldiers. Its routine to strip off and BURN Uniforms when required. Its called HYGIENE, PREVENTION OF DISEASE. Churchill will have to apologise to my father. No point really both are dead!
GRAHAM
I've hardly ever agree with COLIN B on these posts............but YOU sir............YOU are a TOTAL F***WIT ans need a good auld fashioned kick up the 4rse !!
Itsa disgrace to treat our fighting men in this way...and if YOU can't see that, I'd happily do the kicking.......IDIOT !!
Posted by: Jim, Ayr on 11:37am Thu 3 Jan 08
[bold]bold[/bold] [italic]italic[/italic] [quote]quote[/quote] [bold]bold[/bold] Agree with Bill, Britain has now become an undiscipled, disorganised rabble and thats just the politicians. Anybody not allowing British servicemen to pass through an airport in uniform needs to look at themselves in the mirror and question their motives.
quote
Agree with Bill, Britain has now become an undiscipled, disorganised rabble and thats just the politicians. Anybody not allowing British servicemen to pass through an airport in uniform needs to look at themselves in the mirror and question their motives.
Posted by: Pacificst on 11:41am Thu 3 Jan 08
[quote][bold]Allan[/bold] wrote:
This is a disgrace. While I don\'t support this war, I do support those who are bravely fighting it on our behalf.[/quote] Not on my behalf. Don't "bravely" kill anyone for me, thanks.
Allan wrote:
This is a disgrace. While I don\'t support this war, I do support those who are bravely fighting it on our behalf.
Not on my behalf. Don't "bravely" kill anyone for me, thanks.
Posted by: Colin B, Bearsden on 11:48am Thu 3 Jan 08
Hamish
Thanks, Graham does appear rather ignorant as I have been very conistently very supportive of our forces having spent time with the Royal Navy in the 1980s when all our forces were treated as heroes( save perhaps by John Nott and his 1981 Review).
During the Falklands, despite their being 8,000 miles away and no nearby airfields ( and the Simonstown Naval Agreement with South Africa was not availed of ) the quality of boots were the major criticism. Although helicopters and temporary metal runway were lost on Atlantic Conveyor Sea Kings , no longer needed in Anti submarine warfare, were used alongside one Chinnook. The tories invested heavily in the Navy post Falklands eg stretched Type 22.
The other shortage was Carrier based Airbone Early Warning the blame for which can be placed at LAbour's door (HArold Wilson, Jim Callaghan and Dennis Heally) with ridiculous policy during the cold war of no more aircraft carriers and no more combat aircraft for RAF
The Falkands conflict 8000 miles away was finished in 13 weeks ( it took the Task force 3 weeks to get there ) because the forces were well armed, well resourced and well motivated fighting for a just and popular cause.
I'd point out that Afganistan and Iraq have taken longer than the Second World War. Another difference is during the Falklands there was one press officer/spin doctor - Iain MAcDonald -the MOD now has 1000 - two battalions worth!
Finally I suggest commentators argue/debate their case using evidence and examples as facts not resort to speculation and emotion.
Hamish
Thanks, Graham does appear rather ignorant as I have been very conistently very supportive of our forces having spent time with the Royal Navy in the 1980s when all our forces were treated as heroes( save perhaps by John Nott and his 1981 Review).
During the Falklands, despite their being 8,000 miles away and no nearby airfields ( and the Simonstown Naval Agreement with South Africa was not availed of ) the quality of boots were the major criticism. Although helicopters and temporary metal runway were lost on Atlantic Conveyor Sea Kings , no longer needed in Anti submarine warfare, were used alongside one Chinnook. The tories invested heavily in the Navy post Falklands eg stretched Type 22.
The other shortage was Carrier based Airbone Early Warning the blame for which can be placed at LAbour's door (HArold Wilson, Jim Callaghan and Dennis Heally) with ridiculous policy during the cold war of no more aircraft carriers and no more combat aircraft for RAF
The Falkands conflict 8000 miles away was finished in 13 weeks ( it took the Task force 3 weeks to get there ) because the forces were well armed, well resourced and well motivated fighting for a just and popular cause.
I'd point out that Afganistan and Iraq have taken longer than the Second World War. Another difference is during the Falklands there was one press officer/spin doctor - Iain MAcDonald -the MOD now has 1000 - two battalions worth!
Finally I suggest commentators argue/debate their case using evidence and examples as facts not resort to speculation and emotion.
Posted by: jim mitchell, Sauchie, Clack's on 12:09pm Thu 3 Jan 08
Doesn't it make you proud to be British? Well doesn't it?
Doesn't it make you proud to be British? Well doesn't it?
Posted by: Happy®, A.B.C. on 12:10pm Thu 3 Jan 08
This is a government which despises the military in a number of deep ways.
Some of that hostility stems from the traditional anti-militarism of the metropolitan left. Can you imagine dear old Ralph Miliband sitting down with the kids to watch 633 Squadron or Zulu? Can you imagine Ed Balls coming back from the newsagents with the latest Commando book, a Sherbet Dip and a toy capgun?
But some of it also stems from the more Trotskyite tendencies of new Labour. Whilst they see the utility of force, they dislike the fact that the armed forces contain power structures which they cannot directly influence -for instance, it is clear that they have struggled to find a puppet to do business with in the armed forces comparable to the likes of Sir Ian Blair in the police.
Also I think they dislike the emphasis on tradition and continuity in the armed forces composition and training. Because we all know nothing good was ever achieved before New Labour came to power.
And finally they are abysmally ignorant. Having met a few Labour politicians, I'm often struck for instance how their understanding of military matters appears to be largely shaped by doing the War Poets in sixth form and a quick viewing of Ooh What a Lovely War.
This is a government which despises the military in a number of deep ways.
Some of that hostility stems from the traditional anti-militarism of the metropolitan left. Can you imagine dear old Ralph Miliband sitting down with the kids to watch 633 Squadron or Zulu? Can you imagine Ed Balls coming back from the newsagents with the latest Commando book, a Sherbet Dip and a toy capgun?
But some of it also stems from the more Trotskyite tendencies of new Labour. Whilst they see the utility of force, they dislike the fact that the armed forces contain power structures which they cannot directly influence -for instance, it is clear that they have struggled to find a puppet to do business with in the armed forces comparable to the likes of Sir Ian Blair in the police.
Also I think they dislike the emphasis on tradition and continuity in the armed forces composition and training. Because we all know nothing good was ever achieved before New Labour came to power.
And finally they are abysmally ignorant. Having met a few Labour politicians, I'm often struck for instance how their understanding of military matters appears to be largely shaped by doing the War Poets in sixth form and a quick viewing of Ooh What a Lovely War.
Posted by: Patricia Ferguson, Oxford on 12:28pm Thu 3 Jan 08
Disgraceful, but let's not forget that Birmingham is now a predominantly non-white English city, and we all know whose sensitivities must be pandered to.
Disgraceful, but let's not forget that Birmingham is now a predominantly non-white English city, and we all know whose sensitivities must be pandered to.
Posted by: Craig P, oompa goompa land on 12:43pm Thu 3 Jan 08
I wish you would all take a breath here!! I dont see you getting out of your prams when the soldiers are being maimed, then sent home to join the NHS waiting lists. Big deal they had to get changed onto civilian clothes. Get a grip. Oh and Patricia Ferguson well lets all laught at her lunatic rantings....
I wish you would all take a breath here!! I dont see you getting out of your prams when the soldiers are being maimed, then sent home to join the NHS waiting lists. Big deal they had to get changed onto civilian clothes. Get a grip. Oh and Patricia Ferguson well lets all laught at her lunatic rantings....
Posted by: Anon, South of you but north of France on 12:45pm Thu 3 Jan 08
[quote]Its routine to strip off and BURN Uniforms when required[/quote]
No it's not!!
Its routine to strip off and BURN Uniforms when required
No it's not!!
Posted by: alan, Chatham on 12:48pm Thu 3 Jan 08
It's unlikely to be any higher than some idiot within the civilan element of MoD requiring this to happen, too many jobsworths and minor functionaries who 'regulate and control' what should not need regulation. The British forces are almost without exception showing great self discipline in not rounding up the damnable penny pinching politicians and exporting them and their hangers on to Guantanamo or somewhere less hospitable.
Wait and see who gets the best pay rises, MP's or Servicemen, Civil Servants or Nurses. Thata will show you the values of a craven left wing goverment led dare i say by a mealy mouthed hypocritical son of the Manse!
It's unlikely to be any higher than some idiot within the civilan element of MoD requiring this to happen, too many jobsworths and minor functionaries who 'regulate and control' what should not need regulation. The British forces are almost without exception showing great self discipline in not rounding up the damnable penny pinching politicians and exporting them and their hangers on to Guantanamo or somewhere less hospitable.
Wait and see who gets the best pay rises, MP's or Servicemen, Civil Servants or Nurses. Thata will show you the values of a craven left wing goverment led dare i say by a mealy mouthed hypocritical son of the Manse!
Posted by: Pedantic, Scotland on 1:33pm Thu 3 Jan 08
Colin B,
A point of information, Vietnamese Airlines have one of the most modern fleets of aircraft in the world. Hainv just come back from holidaying over there, I can confirm that their fleet consists mainly of Airbus 320, less than 6 years old. Flights leave and arrive on time and are fully catered.
Please feel freet o have a go at the situation noted above, but leave the poor Vietnamese out of this one, their national airline is far better than the majority of the operators in Britain
Colin B,
A point of information, Vietnamese Airlines have one of the most modern fleets of aircraft in the world. Hainv just come back from holidaying over there, I can confirm that their fleet consists mainly of Airbus 320, less than 6 years old. Flights leave and arrive on time and are fully catered.
Please feel freet o have a go at the situation noted above, but leave the poor Vietnamese out of this one, their national airline is far better than the majority of the operators in Britain
Posted by: frank, glasgow on 1:35pm Thu 3 Jan 08
Absolutely disgraceful. Airlines that refuse uniformed service personnel should be named and shamed - and then we can decide whether we want to fly on them or not.
Absolutely disgraceful. Airlines that refuse uniformed service personnel should be named and shamed - and then we can decide whether we want to fly on them or not.
Posted by: JimB, Midlands on 1:53pm Thu 3 Jan 08
Some of you need a reality check.
Birmingham airport was not involved in the order for the troops to change. The order was given to them on board the aircraft and was a military decision. Once again....For the terminally stupid....It was nothing to do with the Airport Authority. It was not a decision of any airline either as they were disembarking having flown in uniform...Come on, it's not difficult......
The OC is the person who needs questioning and also the MOD.
Some of you need a reality check.
Birmingham airport was not involved in the order for the troops to change. The order was given to them on board the aircraft and was a military decision. Once again....For the terminally stupid....It was nothing to do with the Airport Authority. It was not a decision of any airline either as they were disembarking having flown in uniform...Come on, it's not difficult......
The OC is the person who needs questioning and also the MOD.
Posted by: MacleanHodge, PLYMOUTH DEVON on 1:56pm Thu 3 Jan 08
With ref to Colin B . Bearsden.
Welcome once again to Scotland. the most bigoted little country
in the world.
When serving in the air force you could not enter a civilian airport in battle dress.
With ref to Colin B . Bearsden.
Welcome once again to Scotland. the most bigoted little country
in the world.
When serving in the air force you could not enter a civilian airport in battle dress.
Posted by: Colin B, Bearsden on 2:26pm Thu 3 Jan 08
MAclean Hodge/Pedantic
The info re remaining use of Tristars by Ethiopia and Vietnam came from a British Army Website - it was not meant as a bigoted view , nor could resaonbly be construed as such, of those countries merely to convey only two other countries are still using Tristarts and for local not interncontinental flights only.
Best
MAclean Hodge/Pedantic
The info re remaining use of Tristars by Ethiopia and Vietnam came from a British Army Website - it was not meant as a bigoted view , nor could resaonbly be construed as such, of those countries merely to convey only two other countries are still using Tristarts and for local not interncontinental flights only.
Best
Posted by: Soldier Y, England on 2:42pm Thu 3 Jan 08
[quote][bold]Soldier X[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]Bill, England[/bold] wrote: We should consider ourselves lucky that our troops even want to come home to the UK, never mind laying their lives on the line for us for a pittance and being treated with contempt by our disgusting government.[/quote] I am a serving soldier and quite right many of us don't wish to come back to UK. I for one will leave the UK after my 22 Years service. 5 yeras to go and cannot wait. Sad to say it.....but fact.[/quote] So am I Soldier X. I will be on my way to Spain as soon as my service is over.
Another shamful example of how our forces are treated. B*ll*cks to 'em.
Soldier X wrote:
Bill, England wrote: We should consider ourselves lucky that our troops even want to come home to the UK, never mind laying their lives on the line for us for a pittance and being treated with contempt by our disgusting government.
I am a serving soldier and quite right many of us don't wish to come back to UK. I for one will leave the UK after my 22 Years service. 5 yeras to go and cannot wait. Sad to say it.....but fact.
So am I Soldier X. I will be on my way to Spain as soon as my service is over.
Another shamful example of how our forces are treated. B*ll*cks to 'em.
Posted by: SileMairin, Earth on 3:01pm Thu 3 Jan 08
[quote][bold]Craig P[/bold] wrote:
I wish you would all take a breath here!! I dont see you getting out of your prams when the soldiers are being maimed, then sent home to join the NHS waiting lists. Big deal they had to get changed onto civilian clothes. Get a grip. Oh and Patricia Ferguson well lets all laught at her lunatic rantings....[/quote] Do not generalise on such a thing, I have marched against the War/Wars since our devout Christian leader T. bLIAR lied his way into the History books. I have today written to my MP and Des Browne on this matter. we are not all just comment page ranters.. and Patricia may not be so far from the truth as you think, as visitors to the maimed from bLIARS wars have been told not to wear uniform as it could offend others in the hospital... And I wrote about that as well...
Craig P wrote:
I wish you would all take a breath here!! I dont see you getting out of your prams when the soldiers are being maimed, then sent home to join the NHS waiting lists. Big deal they had to get changed onto civilian clothes. Get a grip. Oh and Patricia Ferguson well lets all laught at her lunatic rantings....
Do not generalise on such a thing, I have marched against the War/Wars since our devout Christian leader T. bLIAR lied his way into the History books. I have today written to my MP and Des Browne on this matter. we are not all just comment page ranters.. and Patricia may not be so far from the truth as you think, as visitors to the maimed from bLIARS wars have been told not to wear uniform as it could offend others in the hospital... And I wrote about that as well...
Posted by: James Toal, Wemyss Bay on 3:23pm Thu 3 Jan 08
Name them and shame them. Some jobsworth behaving in a disgraceful and despicable way. And even worse if it's a"standing MOD intsruction" not to wear their uniforms in public.
Name them and shame them. Some jobsworth behaving in a disgraceful and despicable way. And even worse if it's a"standing MOD intsruction" not to wear their uniforms in public.
Posted by: Jesse from Tulsa, Tulsa, Oklahoma, USA on 4:31pm Thu 3 Jan 08
Ok, dumb yank here...
but why were the troops not allowed in the airport? I really don't care if it was an airline, a government policy, the airport itself, the city, or a defense official who made the decision - I do not understand why.
I've seen RAF soldiers here in our airport for join training at a nearby base - in full uniform, in a foreign country, and they were standing proud. I can't imagine why they could not do so at home.
Ok, dumb yank here...
but why were the troops not allowed in the airport? I really don't care if it was an airline, a government policy, the airport itself, the city, or a defense official who made the decision - I do not understand why.
I've seen RAF soldiers here in our airport for join training at a nearby base - in full uniform, in a foreign country, and they were standing proud. I can't imagine why they could not do so at home.
Posted by: mr toad, toadhall on 5:55pm Thu 3 Jan 08
M fontaine ottawa 2:35pm.....What about Scotlands fighting spirit???Our troops are involved to...just incase you didnt know???
M fontaine ottawa 2:35pm.....What about Scotlands fighting spirit???Our troops are involved to...just incase you didnt know???
Posted by: Wullie, Aberdeen on 6:31pm Thu 3 Jan 08
[quote][bold]mr toad[/bold] wrote:
M fontaine ottawa 2:35pm.....What about Scotlands fighting spirit???Our troops are involved to...just incase you didnt know???[/quote] Scottish soldiers are just canon fodder for England.
Scotland is 10% of the United Kingdom yet we make up for 30% of the British Army.
mr toad wrote:
M fontaine ottawa 2:35pm.....What about Scotlands fighting spirit???Our troops are involved to...just incase you didnt know???
Scottish soldiers are just canon fodder for England.
Scotland is 10% of the United Kingdom yet we make up for 30% of the British Army.
Posted by: Bill, freehootsman on 6:39pm Thu 3 Jan 08
[quote][bold]Jesse from Tulsa[/bold] wrote:
Ok, dumb yank here...
but why were the troops not allowed in the airport? I really don't care if it was an airline, a government policy, the airport itself, the city, or a defense official who made the decision - I do not understand why.
I've seen RAF soldiers here in our airport for join training at a nearby base - in full uniform, in a foreign country, and they were standing proud. I can't imagine why they could not do so at home.[/quote] For years now, our troops have been forbidden or discouraged to wear uniforms in public because of IRA terrorism funded by the USA.
Now they are under additional threat from the burgeoning terrorism caused by the illegal invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq and our misguided support for Israel.
Finally, our subversive government is dedicated to overthrowing all of our national traditions and institutions, in which the services are foremost.
That's why.
Jesse from Tulsa wrote:
Ok, dumb yank here...
but why were the troops not allowed in the airport? I really don't care if it was an airline, a government policy, the airport itself, the city, or a defense official who made the decision - I do not understand why.
I've seen RAF soldiers here in our airport for join training at a nearby base - in full uniform, in a foreign country, and they were standing proud. I can't imagine why they could not do so at home.
For years now, our troops have been forbidden or discouraged to wear uniforms in public because of IRA terrorism funded by the USA.
Now they are under additional threat from the burgeoning terrorism caused by the illegal invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq and our misguided support for Israel.
Finally, our subversive government is dedicated to overthrowing all of our national traditions and institutions, in which the services are foremost.
That's why.
Posted by: Former Grunt, USA on 6:41pm Thu 3 Jan 08
What a disgrace. If it was the Pilot or some airport staff person I hope an insurgent gets into the UK, goes to his Mum's house, and blows her arse up onto her shoulders. If it was an officer that gave the order, I hope the soldiers know it so that he gets the appropriate warm reception when they return to Afghanistan.
God Bless the Squaddies and God Save the Queen, but not the Taliban, God curse the day they were born.
What a disgrace. If it was the Pilot or some airport staff person I hope an insurgent gets into the UK, goes to his Mum's house, and blows her arse up onto her shoulders. If it was an officer that gave the order, I hope the soldiers know it so that he gets the appropriate warm reception when they return to Afghanistan.
God Bless the Squaddies and God Save the Queen, but not the Taliban, God curse the day they were born.
Posted by: SileMairin, Earth on 6:46pm Thu 3 Jan 08
Wullie has nae one told you, Our forces are ALL volounteers, so stop with your stupid remarks agin the English, the British govt top posts are held by the Scots, so what are you saying because you are such a minority in Britain your kinfolk should not hold so much power...
Wullie has nae one told you, Our forces are ALL volounteers, so stop with your stupid remarks agin the English, the British govt top posts are held by the Scots, so what are you saying because you are such a minority in Britain your kinfolk should not hold so much power...
Posted by: Iain, Glasgow on 7:06pm Thu 3 Jan 08
This is absolutely disgraceful. When I was tasked with my unit (a TA unit in Glasgow) to help de-kit personnel returning from the first Gulf war conflict at Prestwick Airport, I felt proud when people waiting at the airport for their flights applauded the "boys" when they marched through the airport to their coaches.
Whoever ordered this (I assume this was an officer) should resign his commission.
This is absolutely disgraceful. When I was tasked with my unit (a TA unit in Glasgow) to help de-kit personnel returning from the first Gulf war conflict at Prestwick Airport, I felt proud when people waiting at the airport for their flights applauded the "boys" when they marched through the airport to their coaches.
Whoever ordered this (I assume this was an officer) should resign his commission.
Posted by: Madscottnz, New Zealand on 7:13pm Thu 3 Jan 08
Scunnert and Patricia Ferguson, I agree with you, It makes no difference as to who gave the order, it was given.
In case of I.R.A. terrosts, NO. I think it was a case of "please dont offend the [bold]local residents[/bold] " it would not be P.C. to do so they have come through so much to be able to live in their England sic.
Were the troops that landed at Prestwick made to change either in the plane ar on the runway, I think not, so back to who would they be offending ??
A Glaswegian from the Gorbals, am I still proud of my Country, yes but the administrators need looking at quite closely, and as we used to say [bold]"HINGINS TOO GOOD FR THEM"[/bold]
Alex. Cameron
Scunnert and Patricia Ferguson, I agree with you, It makes no difference as to who gave the order, it was given.
In case of I.R.A. terrosts, NO. I think it was a case of "please dont offend the
local residents " it would not be P.C. to do so they have come through so much to be able to live in their England sic.
Were the troops that landed at Prestwick made to change either in the plane ar on the runway, I think not, so back to who would they be offending ??
A Glaswegian from the Gorbals, am I still proud of my Country, yes but the administrators need looking at quite closely, and as we used to say
"HINGINS TOO GOOD FR THEM"
Alex. Cameron
Posted by: John, Is this the United Kingdom? on 7:35pm Thu 3 Jan 08
As a recent serving member of the Armed forces. It's stuff like this, that has made me leave. This kind of treatment is beyond a joke. The armed forces are to protect and to serve this nation in times of war and peace. We do not stay in a box which says, "open in case of emergency", If the country wants it's shores to be protected, then I would like this country to start supporting troops, sailors and airmen.
As a recent serving member of the Armed forces. It's stuff like this, that has made me leave. This kind of treatment is beyond a joke. The armed forces are to protect and to serve this nation in times of war and peace. We do not stay in a box which says, "open in case of emergency", If the country wants it's shores to be protected, then I would like this country to start supporting troops, sailors and airmen.
Posted by: Il Penseroso, Inverurie on 8:22pm Thu 3 Jan 08
Isn't it a blessing that all the useless faggots that are New Labour MPs from Scotland and making such a cod's @rse of running Britain and the Armed Forces, are stationed at Westminster. If allowed power up here we would never get Independence and our country would be the laughing stock of the world. What a disgrace to our soldiers! To be humiliated by such incompetents is beyond the pale!
And these same MPs want a 10% rise in their pay! It's Time!
Isn't it a blessing that all the useless faggots that are New Labour MPs from Scotland and making such a cod's @rse of running Britain and the Armed Forces, are stationed at Westminster. If allowed power up here we would never get Independence and our country would be the laughing stock of the world. What a disgrace to our soldiers! To be humiliated by such incompetents is beyond the pale!
And these same MPs want a 10% rise in their pay! It's Time!
Posted by: Richard Page, Hawick on 9:06pm Thu 3 Jan 08
I served in the Army for twenty four years and think this is an absolute disgrace. One regret I have is not leaving this country when I was young enough to emigrate as I just watch it go downhill fast.
I served in the Army for twenty four years and think this is an absolute disgrace. One regret I have is not leaving this country when I was young enough to emigrate as I just watch it go downhill fast.
Posted by: Heather, US on 9:16pm Thu 3 Jan 08
As daft as the UK has been getting lately I wouldn't be surprised if this wasn't some more PC nonsense. Maybe they were afraid musilms would be offended at the sight of troops in uniform.
As daft as the UK has been getting lately I wouldn't be surprised if this wasn't some more PC nonsense. Maybe they were afraid musilms would be offended at the sight of troops in uniform.
Posted by: JoJo Starbuck on 9:35pm Thu 3 Jan 08
And I thought it was only U.S. Democrats that treated their soldiers like S#%T.
Un-freaking-believab
le.....
And I thought it was only U.S. Democrats that treated their soldiers like S#%T.
Un-freaking-believab
le.....
Posted by: Katty, Bannockburn on 9:41pm Thu 3 Jan 08
Resign Brown. Which one? Both of you!!!!
It is a sad day when the Broons of 10 Downing Street get laughed at mair than the Broons of 10 Glebe Street
Resign Brown. Which one? Both of you!!!!
It is a sad day when the Broons of 10 Downing Street get laughed at mair than the Broons of 10 Glebe Street
Posted by: Graham, Glasgow on 9:46pm Thu 3 Jan 08
British Soldiers have a sense of humour. Some of you wingers above do not give a toss about them. The squaddies will be laughing at you with contempt whilst baring their bums.Well done lads glad you are home safe and well.[bold]bold[/bold]
British Soldiers have a sense of humour. Some of you wingers above do not give a toss about them. The squaddies will be laughing at you with contempt whilst baring their bums.Well done lads glad you are home safe and well.
Posted by: Politically-incorrec
t Man, Glasgow on 10:03pm Thu 3 Jan 08
[quote][bold]Il Penseroso[/bold] wrote:
Isn't it a blessing that all the useless faggots that are New Labour MPs from Scotland and making such a cod's @rse of running Britain and the Armed Forces, are stationed at Westminster. If allowed power up here we would never get Independence and our country would be the laughing stock of the world. What a disgrace to our soldiers! To be humiliated by such incompetents is beyond the pale!
And these same MPs want a 10% rise in their pay! It's Time! [/quote] Sir, just because a man chooses to put his todger up a man’s back passage rather than a lady’s front bottom does not mean he is not fit to be an MP, to imply otherwise leaves a nasty taste in the mouth. Recant Philistine!!!
Il Penseroso wrote:
Isn't it a blessing that all the useless faggots that are New Labour MPs from Scotland and making such a cod's @rse of running Britain and the Armed Forces, are stationed at Westminster. If allowed power up here we would never get Independence and our country would be the laughing stock of the world. What a disgrace to our soldiers! To be humiliated by such incompetents is beyond the pale!
And these same MPs want a 10% rise in their pay! It's Time!
Sir, just because a man chooses to put his todger up a man’s back passage rather than a lady’s front bottom does not mean he is not fit to be an MP, to imply otherwise leaves a nasty taste in the mouth. Recant Philistine!!!
Posted by: Covenanter, Lanarkshire on 10:10pm Thu 3 Jan 08
Terry from Oz,
agreed, but you forgot the pipers: march over them whilst playing 'B
Search This Site
INDEX
Comment | Read Comments (103)
