The Night Mail

[rockershovel]

I can't say that I am an enthusiastic follower of the "Mrs Windsors Boys" show, but I did notice the thing about those leaving service before 2022 being eligible to purchase one. 

 

I passed the question regarding this opportunity to my cousin, now retired after a lengthy career spent in contact with HM's "enemies  domestic and foreign" in places which generally speaking, didn't impress him greatly, while wearing an assortment of stripes and badges which I gather, struck fear and trepidation into his contemporaries. 

 

His reply was remarkably comprehensive, even by his standards and might be summarised as "probably not" 

[polybear]

2 hours ago, Happy Hippo said:

Again, another change of subject, but those that follow 'Royal' news might have read that, 'unlike other Veterans'. Princes Andrew and Harry will not be receiving the Queen's Platinum Jubilee Medal.

 

Bear notes with some disgust that Harry has had to resort to legal proceedings in order to try to secure proper protection whilst in the UK , for which he himself wants to pay for 

Personally I think the Royal Family/Gov./Met are being more than a little short-sighted on this one; perhaps they might like to consider the possible consequences if he were to be kidnapped - or worse.  It's all very well having private security, but I assume such security wouldn't be entitled to carry firearms in the UK - so less than ideal.  Barking

[Happy Hippo]

13 minutes ago, polybear said:

 

Bear notes with some disgust that Harry has had to resort to legal proceedings in order to try to secure proper protection whilst in the UK , for which he himself wants to pay for 

Personally I think the Royal Family/Gov./Met are being more than a little short-sighted on this one; perhaps they might like to consider the possible consequences if he were to be kidnapped - or worse.  It's all very well having private security, but I assume such security wouldn't be entitled to carry firearms in the UK - so less than ideal.  Barking

There are various arguments for and against, but we should not forget that he served as an Apache helicopter gunner in Afghanistan. (First tour crew do not fly as the pilot in command, although he may have got some stick time in when flying straight and level.)

 

A lot of others also did this, but they tend to have a much lower public profile.

 

Those that fill that particular role was/is are considered targets of high value by those that were on the receiving end of an Apache's wrath. 

 

If we accept that there are some very unsavoury people in the UK and elsewhere who would hold this fact very much against him and therefore see him and his immediate family as a high profile target, then PB's assessment of the myopia that envelopes those in power, is absolutely spot on.

[DenysW]

This is an acrimonious divorce within a Family. Don't get sucked in to taking anything at face value - from either side. There will be an agenda as well as the truth, both probably blended in very variable amounts.

[rockershovel]

2 hours ago, DenysW said:

This is an acrimonious divorce within a Family. Don't get sucked in to taking anything at face value - from either side. There will be an agenda as well as the truth, both probably blended in very variable amounts.

Indeed.

 

However the police are not a security contractor. 

 

I expect it will sort itself out. The York girls (Beatrice and Eugenie) pay for private security (as reported in several papers today......)

Edited January 19, 2022 by rockershovel

[BoD]

6 hours ago, PhilJ W said:

The 70's, the decade that fashion forgot, or is it the decade that fashion tries to forget?

Purple brushed denim (very) wide flares. 3” heels. Two-tone purple shirt with a silly collar, occasionally worn with a yellow, pink and orange flowery tie, which I still have somewhere.  And no you are not seeing it. 

[Happy Hippo]

17 minutes ago, BoD said:

Purple brushed denim (very) wide flares. 3” heels. Two-tone purple shirt with a silly collar, occasionally worn with a yellow, pink and orange flowery tie, which I still have somewhere.  And no you are not seeing it. 

That vision has put me off my cake (temporarily).

[PhilJ W]

4 hours ago, BoD said:

Purple brushed denim (very) wide flares. 3” heels. Two-tone purple shirt with a silly collar, occasionally worn with a yellow, pink and orange flowery tie, which I still have somewhere.  And no you are not seeing it. 

And ain't I glad of that. 

[polybear]

6 hours ago, BoD said:

Purple brushed denim (very) wide flares. 3” heels. Two-tone purple shirt with a silly collar, occasionally worn with a yellow, pink and orange flowery tie, which I still have somewhere.  And no you are not seeing it. 

 

5 hours ago, Happy Hippo said:

That vision has put me off my cake (temporarily).

 

Bear barfed his....

Edited January 19, 2022 by polybear

[jamie92208]

In 1977 I had a suit made for me by a grateful tailor. I'd locked up and enterprising young burglar called McVicar who used to get suits from an eat Leeds workshop by braking a window then hooking suits off the rails with a fishing rod.   I think that he admitted 42 offences before he was sentenced.  The owner of the firm offered to make me a suit and a good job he made of it in brown pinstripe with flared trousers.   Here is the evidence 

However young McVicar did me a favour as I had to got to juvenile court to get him to sign some forms whilst on remand (He was 15) and a certain young policewoman was dock officer that morning and as they say the rest was history.   Even jeans were flared in those days.

We were out house hunting in Derbyshire.

And not polaroids.

 

Jamie

Edited April 20, 2022 by jamie92208

[simontaylor484]

In 1977 I was wearing babygro's I don't think they were flares.

 

[br2975]

10 hours ago, polybear said:

 

Bear notes with some disgust that Harry has had to resort to legal proceedings in order to try to secure proper protection whilst in the UK , for which he himself wants to pay for 

Personally I think the Royal Family/Gov./Met are being more than a little short-sighted on this one; perhaps they might like to consider the possible consequences if he were to be kidnapped - or worse.  It's all very well having private security, but I assume such security wouldn't be entitled to carry firearms in the UK - so less than ideal.  Barking

 

This is a moot point.

.

Any security provided for Harry and Co. would need to be armed.

.

From my personal experience, whilst police officers can, and are deployed at events such as football matches where certain policing costs are met by the football club; there is no precedent for someone paying for armed protection.

.

As for Harry & Co bringing their own 'heavies' from the USA, or hiring similar 'home grown' protection, they could still not carry firearms.

.

In addition, Police UK plc are not obliged to share intelligence regarding threats and suspects with private security companies.

In fact, most intelligence is not even shared within the police, all being on a need to know basis, based upon operational needs and the security clearances of those involved.

.

Currently,  it may be claimed either the law doesn't cover Harry's wishes, and/or there is no precedent.

.

However, I cannot see any reason why he cannot be provided with police protection, especially if intelligence suggests he is a potential terrorist target.

.

Such protection is not restricted to members of the Royal family (working, or estranged), for as long ago as 1979 I was providing such a service to the then Lord Chief Justice, a target for Irish republicans.

Edited January 19, 2022 by br2975

[Happy Hippo]

17 minutes ago, br2975 said:

 

 

In addition, Police UK plc are not obliged to share intelligence

The military are the same....

[AndyID]

Jamie, the mortgage on that place you bought must have been horrendous.

[polybear]

6 hours ago, AndyID said:

Jamie, the mortgage on that place you bought must have been horrendous.

 

Just wait till he gets the gas bill....

[iL Dottore]

13 hours ago, BoD said:

… And no you are not seeing it. 

Pity, I could do with some cheering up.

[iL Dottore]

7 hours ago, simontaylor484 said:

In 1977 I was wearing babygro's I don't think they were flares.

 

But were they polyester???

[jamie92208]

8 hours ago, Happy Hippo said:

The military are the same....

But do they actually have any to share.

 

Jamie

[AndyID]

8 hours ago, Happy Hippo said:

The military are the same....

 

Isn't "military intelligence" an oxymoron?

 

(I'm going to bed now, in my underground bunker.)

[br2975]

9 hours ago, jamie92208 said:

 The owner of the firm offered to make me a suit and a good job he made of it in brown pinstripe with flared trousers.   

 

 

Tenuous I know, but . . . .Is this the source of the phrase "fitted up"......................................

.

O.K. I'll get my coat.

Edited January 20, 2022 by br2975

[TheQ]

I didn't get any of the freebee gongs when I was in the RAF, Although I was in, I hadn't been in the 2 years required to get the First Jubilee medal and I left before just before the second one..

 

I may have mentioned it before but Parkside tools are generally made by Bosch, so a better quality of cheap mostly.

I've had their battery drill for some years but the bearings are now beginning to fail, their jigs saws though were no good, one failed on first use, it was exchanged and the second one failed just out of guarantee.

 

Makita is my favourite brand, but it depends on finance available when a tool needs replacement..

 

My sisters first secondary School, wore Bright Yellow tops and chocolate brown Skirts , very fashionable when chosen, hated within a couple of years. The boys were in traditional black blazers and trousers at a separate school. Flares were NOT allowed.. Just looked at the replacement mixed academy, all wear the black blazers now..

I note they have a CCF which they didn't have in my day..

 

 

[Winslow Boy]

Can I throw in a couple more just to round things off.

 

The Civil Service mind you they only have two speeds slow and stop so it is a bit difficult to tell and finally;

 

Local Government - they don't share anything particularly to Joe public as they can't have anyone knowing that they don't have a clue about what they are doing or as in most cases not doing.

[Compound2632]

5 minutes ago, Winslow Boy said:

Can I throw in a couple more just to round things off.

 

The Civil Service mind you they only have two speeds slow and stop so it is a bit difficult to tell and finally;

 

Local Government - they don't share anything particularly to Joe public as they can't have anyone knowing that they don't have a clue about what they are doing or as in most cases not doing.

 

Calumny. I know plenty of conscientious and public-spirited professionals in both. What's your profession so I can unjustly abuse it?

[Winslow Boy]

26 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Calumny. I know plenty of conscientious and public-spirited professionals in both. What's your profession so I can unjustly abuse it?

 

I was for twenty five years a fully paid up member of local government in various localities. During that time I have a number of dealings with the Civil Service. 

 

You are correct in saying that there are many public spirited professionals in both of these organisations. The problem is that whenever you get reasonably large numbers of people together you immediately have start to rely on some who not have the same level of commitment. It is the same in any large organisation whether private or public. The difference is that public set ups can have more impact with less redress. There is therefore less 'desire' to make the right decision espically if it is contreversal.

[Happy Hippo]

2 hours ago, AndyID said:

 

Isn't "military intelligence" an oxymoron?

 

(I'm going to bed now, in my underground bunker.)

Oh Absolutely!

 

However, I would like to raise a point which arose from Brian's comment about sharing intelligence, and that is, there is a great reluctance to share, often out of the fear that your carefully and hard earned information will be flushed down the pan and your source(s) compromised.

 

Many years ago I was involved in an operation which turned into a right balls up.

 

We had been given a titbit of information about a certain person of interest, so we decided that since the tip had come from a very reliable source, we would follow it up.

 

Unlike TV programs or blockbuster movies, it was not a case of sit down and wait 10 minutes:  We knew we were in for the long slog, but after a reasonable time, nothing was happening, yet other incidents were playing out, that should have been connected.

 

We told our boss that the target knew he was being watched, so you can imagine, our boss was not very amused and we were summoned from our nice warm office to his so we could explain what seemed to have gone wrong.

 

Basically it was a case of: 'Not us..... because we have been nowhere near the property.  Perhaps somebody else has given the game away?'

 

A tasking then followed to look, not at the target's house, but  specifically to see if there were any other agencies operating in the area on non related cases that might have spooked the target.

 

The Boss made immediate enquiries at a much higher level, but with multiple denials being offered to him drew a blank, so he decided, to mount an operation specifically to look at the surrounding area. 

 

It took a week, but we identified, and took photos as evidence of, members of three other agencies who had physical surveillance on the target's house. 

 

Our Boss now goes and throws a big bucket of brown stuff up into the big roof propeller.  The target was under surveillance from (including ourselves) four different, agencies.  not only had this been categorically denied, but he  now had the physical evidence.

 

When you have that many assets (less ours), on the ground, in a generally sensitive area, is it any wonder that someone somewhere spotted something not quite right.  It must have been similar to having the old fashioned equivalent of having the Paparazzi parked on your doorstep.

 

What was really embarrassing was that none of the other three agencies had been prepared to let on an operation was happening, and we are not talking about a specific street here but a general area, which would have warned the others to be extra careful. 

 

Worse was the fact that they were so sure of themselves that they never considered that they would be specifically searched for.  We know at least one of those agencies had been compromised, and there was the distinct possibility that it was only a matter of time before it was removed rather violently.

 

After that we did receive a little more cooperation, but it was grudgingly given, and I suspect that over time, the system reverted to what it was, and the agencies concerned reverted to their insular policies.

 

Sadly when we fail in intelligence gathering and making sure our surveillance procedures are absolutely spot on, it can lead to  incidents such as the de Menezes killing in London.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited January 20, 2022 by Happy Hippo