PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Military Aviation (https://www.pprune.org/military-aviation-57/)
-   -   Don't shop at Harrods! (https://www.pprune.org/military-aviation/253084-dont-shop-harrods.html)

toddbabe 22nd Nov 2006 21:08

Agree wholeheartedly with you both, but for me it's a risk not worth taking no matter how small.
Armistice day is our own and I agree that Uniform should be worn with pride on that day without fear or worry, but London is a different kettle of fish, whilst the tactics of extremism differ from the IRAs, Wandering about in the Capital in uniform away from the Parade and ceremony is asking for trouble.
Walking about London in any clothes is trouble in London!
Maybe am being over cautious but but have been indoctinated to be cautious when outside of work in my uniform and I for one avoid it at all costs.
You can still show your support for those that went before us without getting dressed up and making yourself a target.
Don't get me wrong think Harrods was well out of order and we shouldn't have to think about these things but unfortunately this is the world we live in and have helped create.

Top Right 22nd Nov 2006 21:15

QFIH,
I was surprised by your comment that we are discouraged from wearing uniform in public. I recall word coming down from CDS about 5/6 years ago that we could now go to public places without covering up. Indeed, it's not been unusual to see RAF guys from HQ STC in uniform around the High Wycombe town centre. So has this changed and we're being discouraged again?

Sad times if this is so, since our visibility to the public will wane even more. I hope it's easier for you front-end guys as people can probably figure out what the brevet means, but for we others there's no end of mistaken identity, be it policeman, RAC or securicor. Now maybe someone could stop painting the new RAF logo/brand on those Pumas and divert the money into similar named flashes for our uniform ........... (awaiting incoming).

And as for the security issue of wearing uniform in public, the threat today appears indiscriminate whereas the IRA one was deliberate, targeted and planned. Sorry Toddbabe, but it didn't matter what precautions you took, if the IRA wanted to get you, they would. They appeared professional, though I'm not an expert. Oct 89, Wildenrath: Cpl Mick Islania in civvies, left-hand drive car, off base. He took 2 rounds in the neck and his 6-month daughter took one through the head, as the killers came out of the bushes with the AKs. Every rendition of "Nimrod" still brings back the images of that white coffin in the 60 Sqn Hangar. (Admittedly the IRA did get it wrong 6 months later in Holland with the 2 Oz tourists gunned down in broad daylight, but they'd hit 4 x RAF Regt in '88 in the same town fairly easily).

Let's wear our uniforms, in Harrods, in Tescos, wherever.

Talking Radalt 22nd Nov 2006 21:22


Originally Posted by QFIhawkman (Post 2980790)
Erm.... I think that was my point TR.

I promise to type quicker in future. :(

QFIhawkman 22nd Nov 2006 21:49


Originally Posted by Top Right (Post 2980830)
QFIH,
I was surprised by your comment that we are discouraged from wearing uniform in public. I recall word coming down from CDS about 5/6 years ago that we could now go to public places without covering up. Indeed, it's not been unusual to see RAF guys from HQ STC in uniform around the High Wycombe town centre. So has this changed and we're being discouraged again?

Sad times if this is so, since our visibility to the public will wane even more. I hope it's easier for you front-end guys as people can probably figure out what the brevet means, but for we others there's no end of mistaken identity, be it policeman, RAC or securicor. Now maybe someone could stop painting the new RAF logo/brand on those Pumas and divert the money into similar named flashes for our uniform ........... (awaiting incoming).

And as for the security issue of wearing uniform in public, the threat today appears indiscriminate whereas the IRA one was deliberate, targeted and planned. Sorry Toddbabe, but it didn't matter what precautions you took, if the IRA wanted to get you, they would. They appeared professional, though I'm not an expert. Oct 89, Wildenrath: Cpl Mick Islania in civvies, left-hand drive car, off base. He took 2 rounds in the neck and his 6-month daughter took one through the head, as the killers came out of the bushes with the AKs. Every rendition of "Nimrod" still brings back the images of that white coffin in the 60 Sqn Hangar. (Admittedly the IRA did get it wrong 6 months later in Holland with the 2 Oz tourists gunned down in broad daylight, but they'd hit 4 x RAF Regt in '88 in the same town fairly easily).

Let's wear our uniforms, in Harrods, in Tescos, wherever.

I agree with you fully. Good points well made, better than I was making them anyway, that much is clear. You've summed up what I thought.

Talking Radalt: Apology accepted! To save double posting, would you like to reply to top right? I'll abstain from now on on this thread to give you a chance! :cool:

Talking Radalt 22nd Nov 2006 22:06


Originally Posted by Top Right (Post 2980830)
QFIH,
Now maybe someone could stop painting the new RAF logo/brand on those Pumas and divert the money into similar named flashes for our uniform ...........

Where have you been?!! In amongst the carry-on of finding enough CBA to go round, receiving a lecture from a 19-year old SAC Med Asst about why one should wash one's hands after having a poo, getting yet more vaccinations and ensuring everyone was current for the dunker before deploying to the desert, some of us also got a right telling off from the SWO for not stitching the all new Royal Air Force "flash" on the upper arm of our desert DPM (like a little scrap of stable belt that says "Don't bollock me, I'm not Army") and the wordage "Royal Air Force" across the top left (or was it right?) pocket.

Top Right 22nd Nov 2006 22:17

To a fellow TR,
Can't disagree your point ref DPMs be they desert or temperate. My point (sorry - not clear enough) related to our RAC-lookalike blue stuff that we tend to wear in view of our own public.
TR

PPRuNeUser0211 23rd Nov 2006 09:11

Brevet is no assurance them civvie types will know what you do! Got stopped by a salesman at a motorway service station whilst in 1's trying to sell me some piece of tat or other. Came to the end of the conversation and he asked "so what is it you do then?" and genuinely had no idea I was in the military at all....

As for not shopping at harrods, family instructed (not a drama as mrs target already a f&ms hamper kinda gal)

QFIhawkman 23rd Nov 2006 09:28


Originally Posted by pba_target (Post 2981568)
Brevet is no assurance them civvie types will know what you do! Got stopped by a salesman at a motorway service station whilst in 1's trying to sell me some piece of tat or other. Came to the end of the conversation and he asked "so what is it you do then?" and genuinely had no idea I was in the military at all....

But whose fault is that? If our public never see their forces in uniform in the UK, then they're not going to have a clue what our uniforms look like. All they are used to seeing is the DPMs on the news.
All this started with the PIRA campaign against the forces in the 80's, and unfortunately our identity hasn't recovered since.

anotherthing 23rd Nov 2006 09:54

to be fair though,

The RAF uniform is a bit non descript.

Tigs2 23rd Nov 2006 11:10

Why not have a Fri evening in Dec, when anyone who can make it in the locality, pitches up in uniform for a quick sharpner in london (i know a pub that would love to oblige) then we all go to Harrods for shopping (press are primed), when we eventually get turned away, the press rip s**t out of Al Fayed and Harrods, and we all go back to the pub and get p****d. If we dont get turned away, we go shopping, and buy nothing, win one over for the boys and girls, and then still go back to the pub and get p****d:ok:

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaargh! 23rd Nov 2006 13:38

When Harrods wrote their reply containing the statement

There is a historical precedent in place which relates specifically to those wearing uniforms - the main reason for which is that certain customers can be alarmed by the sight of uniforms - assuming that there is some sort of incident going on.
did they overlook the possibility that their security guard might have been wearing ... a uniform?

Top Right 23rd Nov 2006 13:48

Anotherthing does make a good point. Perhaps we should hire some consultants for an image review of our uniform, to look for something with a more demonstrative branding? NEXT stole the Roundel (can I be done for libel by saying that?) so maybe they could help? Or maybe silk scarves would just be a lot cheapr ......

QFIhawkman 23rd Nov 2006 14:00


Originally Posted by Top Right (Post 2982000)
Anotherthing does make a good point. Perhaps we should hire some consultants for an image review of our uniform, to look for something with a more demonstrative branding? NEXT stole the Roundel (can I be done for libel by saying that?) so maybe they could help? Or maybe silk scarves would just be a lot cheapr ......

Didn't know that NEXT had stolen the roundel. I know that Lambretta and Ben Sherman have though, it's plastered all over their clothing!

Anyway, I think you'll find that we have natty little roundels on our socks nowadays.... Perhaps we should hitch up our trouser legs and show people our socks whenever there's any doubt?
But then I suppose people might think that we're:
a) Being very "yoof" and trendy by wearing Lambretta socks, or:
b) Doing a "Monty Python" style Freemason impression.

We can't win!

Mystic Greg 23rd Nov 2006 16:53

Harrods has not always banned uniforms. As a University Cadet on ULAS, whose Town HQ is a short walk from Harrods, we used to provide a Guard of Honour for the University Chancellor (the Princess Royal) at the graduation ceremonies a couple of times a year. Parade over, we would return to the THQ to demolish a barrel of beer and then walk down the road - in No 1s - for afternoon tea at Harrods: the deal was 'all you can eat' for the fixed price (at £4.50 this dates me somewhat). There were no problems with the uniforms and Harrods's staff (and other customers) always seemed to tolerate us!

Happy days. That said, I have not bought anything from Harrods, even though I live fairly close to it, since it was bought by Mr Fayed: I don't wish him the trauma he has suffered in losing his son, but I have always thought him a rather dodgy character who does not deserve my business.

toddbabe 23rd Nov 2006 17:05

"but they'd hit 4 x RAF Regt in '88 in the same town fairly easily".
Top right they hit the rocks in Roermond because they found them asleep in the back of a car after a night out, what gave them away? their uniform draped over the back seat of the car they were sleeping in, totally random and opportunistic.

Talking Radalt 23rd Nov 2006 17:27


the main reason for which is that certain customers can be alarmed by the sight of uniforms
I tend to find the only people who are alarmed by the presence of uniforms are in actual fact more alarmed by the authority they represent.
Must admit, I once knew a delighful young lass who signed up with the Met, and upon visting her at Hendon one weekend, arriving to the sight of her and her three room mates in smartly pressed police-totty uniform well, yeah it was kind of intimidating :O
They're not called the Filth for nothing. :E

Flatus Veteranus 23rd Nov 2006 17:41


Originally Posted by toddbabe (Post 2980814)
.
Don't get me wrong think Harrods was well out of order and we shouldn't have to think about these things but unfortunately this is the world we live in and have helped create.

Please tell me in what way we (including me!) have "helped to create the world we live in". In the context of this thread, the world includes suicidal and indiscriminate terrorists. I refuse to put my hand up to that, and find your aspersion offensive.

toddbabe 23rd Nov 2006 19:10

Not trying to offend anyone, but it is quite simple really, because of our foreign policy and our "Special" relationship with America we have made ourselves more of a target for the extremists.
Has their been a problem in France with extremist Terrorism? Germany? Holland? Italy ? if there has it has been on a much smaller scale.
It is widely regarded as a major factor as to why we are such targets for terror.
It's about time we started putting our own people first and stopped sticking our noses in America's problems, we aren't a superpower and haven't been since the end of the Second World war, we should stop trying to be the worlds policemen and take a step or two away from America's influence.
This Nation used to be Great in it's own right, now it is seen as America's puppy and it's about time it stopped, if we want to live free from Terror we should stop starting wars in Extremist country's for no bloody reason

QFIhawkman 23rd Nov 2006 20:59


Originally Posted by toddbabe (Post 2982552)
Not trying to offend anyone, but it is quite simple really, because of our foreign policy and our "Special" relationship with America we have made ourselves more of a target for the extremists.
Has their been a problem in France with extremist Terrorism? Germany? Holland? Italy ? if there has it has been on a much smaller scale.
It is widely regarded as a major factor as to why we are such targets for terror.
It's about time we started putting our own people first and stopped sticking our noses in America's problems, we aren't a superpower and haven't been since the end of the Second World war, we should stop trying to be the worlds policemen and take a step or two away from America's influence.
This Nation used to be Great in it's own right, now it is seen as America's puppy and it's about time it stopped, if we want to live free from Terror we should stop starting wars in Extremist country's for no bloody reason

We didn't start a war in an extremist country. And it wasn't for "No bloody reason". We don't "Stick our noses" into American problems (I.e. American domestic policy), but Okay we do have a say in US foreign policy.

The reason we are more of a target than Germany, France, Holland, Italy etc is because we stand shoulder to shoulder with the US I'll grant you that.
The difference though, is that we're the only country who stands alongside the US. The others seem to be absent right now.

Now I'm no fan of the US. In fact I hate Americans. But it seems that the UK is the only nation that has supported the US full time since the whole thing started.

I'm pretty sure that you would be the first person to write to the tabloids if you ever saw the headline "UK snubs US". So what is the UK to do? Yes we could declare full independance from the USA.

And where would we go from there?

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaargh! 23rd Nov 2006 21:26


Now I'm no fan of the US. In fact I hate Americans.
You shouldn't really. They're just people like everyone else. They've made me very welcome here, some I like and some I don't, just like any other group really.

But it seems that the UK is the only nation that has supported the US full time since the whole thing started.
Perhaps, though I sometimes wonder why. I'm not sure anyone here realises there are any other militaries involved. You'll see "I Support Our Troops" stickers on cars everywhere but I've never seen one that says "I support ALL the Troops" :*


Did I just contradict myself?


All times are GMT. The time now is 17:11.


Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.