Poppies, Hfh, 'heroes' And All That

[The Generation Game]

Just to be clear, I'm not taking a pop at remembering the cost of war, looking out for the victims of war (combatants and non combatants), or even folk making an honest profit.

My perception of the charity industry in general has changed over the last ten to twenty years though. It could at least partially be down to me becoming a cynical old scrote. However, aside from that, there is also an element of good causes increasingly being treated as 'brands', with loads of accumulated goodwill, ripe for commercialisation by people who specialize in such things.

That's arguably OK, provided it's not overdone and the brand becomes tarnished. I'm not suggesting the Poppy Appeal and associated causes have quite reached that point, yet.

All that aside, if we as a society can afford to put soldiers in harm's way and spank billions to the benefit of a highly lucrative war industry, we really should be putting aside a small fraction of that spend to properly care for the casualties, without p1ssing around with charity fund-raising.

Requiring a CEO paid £500k a year to realise the potential.

[Bloo Loo]

http://www.theguardian.com/society/salarysurvey/table/0,12406,1042677,00.html

Salvation Army Alex Hughes *27

10,540

Royal British Legion *2 Ian Townsend 95,000

[Nuggets Mahoney]

http://www.theguardian.com/society/salarysurvey/table/0,12406,1042677,00.html

Salvation Army

Alex Hughes *27

10,540

Royal British Legion *2

Ian Townsend

95,000

That's from 2003 isn't it?

I know the chief exec of one of those charities listed and he's on a fair bit more than the amount listed.

Also, it excludes the £££s of the guys who run the professional fund-raising outfits that have latched onto the charity business.

[Oliver Sutton]

[geezer466]

http://www.theguardian.com/society/salarysurvey/table/0,12406,1042677,00.html

Salvation Army Alex Hughes *27

10,540

Royal British Legion *2 Ian Townsend 95,000

Its all about how you present the figures...

Bang for Buck money raised overall measured against the Chief Execs salary which is why there is a column for it on the page.

http://www.britishlegion.org.uk/media/3906923/AnnualReport2013.pdf

Contains the 2013 accounts.

Of £124.6 Million raised they spent £1.4 Million on governance..

They claim that year of every £1 donated 77p went straight back out in charitable benefit..

I would be interested if there are other charities which are close to this figure.

As to the argument on high salary's it all comes back to why council executives claim similiar amounts. The handling and management of Multi Million £ budgets. Just a reflection of the times we live in and the values we place on such things.

At least the charity chief execs can be measured on performance and everything their organisations raise is given freely. Council Execs make you pay even if you don't want to and can and will use the law if you don't.

[stormymonday_2011]

Er nothing at all like that. Most school kids seem to visit Normandy at some point (mine did).

The 'poppy' branding is pure Saatchi & Saatchi propaganda. It's not in Normandy and it's nothing at all like a young man being blown to bits or poisoned in the trenches. It's bizarre abstract brainwashing/war propaganda. Even to question it one is seen as being unpatriotic or anti-British which should raise a red flag on its own.

Well Saatchi certainly did not invent the logo which surprisingly is American in origin not British,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remembrance_poppy

Years ago the Remembrance Sunday service used to be broadcast by the BBC simultaneously from the Cenotaph and a local war memorial. I appeared on one of these programs as a young cub scout. All I can recall about it was that ceremony was cold and boring but my Mum insists I picked my nose on camera in front of millions. Like a lot of kids it did not mean much to me but over the years that changed as I began to learn a bit more about the reality of the 2 World Wars.

Two incidents really brought it home.

The first was a visit to the Canadian war cemetery and Memorial at Beaumont Hamel on the Somme. It was beautiful sunny day and I walked across the grass from the line of preserved trenches from which the Newfoundland Regiment attacked on 1st July 1916. I had walked about 20-30 yards towards the front line trenches when it struck me that by the time the Newfoundlanders had got that far all the officers and about 650 of the other ranks had become casualties. I still find it one of the saddest places I have ever visited

The second was a chance visit to a French church on an ordinary holiday. Buried in the grave yard were the bodies of a crew from a Stirling bomber which had crashed nearby in the second World War. This was not a formal military burial but had clearly been done by the locals as a tribute. There were 7 graves. One belonged to the planes navigator who was in his late 30s (about the same age as I was when I visited the church). Of the remaining six graves not one of the occupants including the pilot and co-pilot was older than 19 years of age. There lives had been brutally cut off before they had hardly started.

Now I don't know whether these peoples sacrifice was worthwhile or not. Nor do I know whether the Poppy is the best symbol of remembrance that can be devised for them since like all things in life it can be manipulated and abused by the cynical, by money grubbers and those who wish to glorify conflict. However, I don't want what those Newfoundlanders and that Stirling aircrew had to endure to be forgotten and if that means buying and wearing a poppy so be it even if the symbol has been tainted by warmongers such as Tony Blair. Ultimately the act of remembrance belongs to me not the scumbag politicians who try to take it over to carve their mark on history

[Bloo Loo]

That's from 2003 isn't it?

I know the chief exec of one of those charities listed and he's on a fair bit more than the amount listed.

Also, it excludes the £££s of the guys who run the professional fund-raising outfits that have latched onto the charity business.

Dont know what year, but the Sally Army raised far more than many of the charities on the list, yet the top man only took a small salary..although he was provided with accomodation.

[bovinedealer]

Well Saatchi certainly did not invent the logo which surprisingly is American in origin not British,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remembrance_poppy

Years ago the Remembrance Sunday service used to be broadcast by the BBC simultaneously from the Cenotaph and a local war memorial. I appeared on one of these programs as a young cub scout. All I can recall about it was that ceremony was cold and boring but my Mum insists I picked my nose on camera in front of millions. Like a lot of kids it did not mean much to me but over the years that changed as I began to learn a bit more about the reality of the 2 World Wars.

Two incidents really brought it home.

The first was a visit to the Canadian war cemetery and Memorial at Beaumont Hamel on the Somme. It was beautiful sunny day and I walked across the grass from the line of preserved trenches from which the Newfoundland Regiment attacked on 1st July 1916. I had walked about 20-30 yards towards the front line trenches when it struck me that by the time the Newfoundlanders had got that far all the officers and about 650 of the other ranks had become casualties. I still find it one of the saddest places I have ever visited

The second was a chance visit to a French church on an ordinary holiday. Buried in the grave yard were the bodies of a crew from a Stirling bomber which had crashed nearby in the second World War. This was not a formal military burial but had clearly been done by the locals as a tribute. There were 7 graves. One belonged to the planes navigator who was in his late 30s (about the same age as I was when I visited the church). Of the remaining six graves not one of the occupants including the pilot and co-pilot was older than 19 years of age. There lives had been brutally cut off before they had hardly started.

Now I don't know whether these peoples sacrifice was worthwhile or not. Nor do I know whether the Poppy is the best symbol of remembrance that can be devised for them since like all things in life it can be manipulated and abused by the cynical, by money grubbers and those who wish to glorify conflict. However, I don't want what those Newfoundlanders and that Stirling aircrew had to endure to be forgotten and if that means buying and wearing a poppy so be it even if the symbol has been tainted by warmongers such as Tony Blair. Ultimately the act of remembrance belongs to me not the scumbag politicians who try to take it over to carve their mark on history

+1

[Guest Jemmy Button]

Well Saatchi certainly did not invent the logo which surprisingly is American in origin not British,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remembrance_poppy

Years ago the Remembrance Sunday service used to be broadcast by the BBC simultaneously from the Cenotaph and a local war memorial. I appeared on one of these programs as a young cub scout. All I can recall about it was that ceremony was cold and boring but my Mum insists I picked my nose on camera in front of millions. Like a lot of kids it did not mean much to me but over the years that changed as I began to learn a bit more about the reality of the 2 World Wars.

Two incidents really brought it home.

The first was a visit to the Canadian war cemetery and Memorial at Beaumont Hamel on the Somme. It was beautiful sunny day and I walked across the grass from the line of preserved trenches from which the Newfoundland Regiment attacked on 1st July 1916. I had walked about 20-30 yards towards the front line trenches when it struck me that by the time the Newfoundlanders had got that far all the officers and about 650 of the other ranks had become casualties. I still find it one of the saddest places I have ever visited

The second was a chance visit to a French church on an ordinary holiday. Buried in the grave yard were the bodies of a crew from a Stirling bomber which had crashed nearby in the second World War. This was not a formal military burial but had clearly been done by the locals as a tribute. There were 7 graves. One belonged to the planes navigator who was in his late 30s (about the same age as I was when I visited the church). Of the remaining six graves not one of the occupants including the pilot and co-pilot was older than 19 years of age. There lives had been brutally cut off before they had hardly started.

Now I don't know whether these peoples sacrifice was worthwhile or not. Nor do I know whether the Poppy is the best symbol of remembrance that can be devised for them since like all things in life it can be manipulated and abused by the cynical, by money grubbers and those who wish to glorify conflict. However, I don't want what those Newfoundlanders and that Stirling aircrew had to endure to be forgotten and if that means buying and wearing a poppy so be it even if the symbol has been tainted by warmongers such as Tony Blair. Ultimately the act of remembrance belongs to me not the scumbag politicians who try to take it over to carve their mark on history

Looking at the current state of this country, I'd say their sacrifice was very much in vain - which saddens me greatly.

[bkkandrew]

Yes, indeed, Goebbles at his most mendacious would have been hard pressed to equal the double speak and lies spouted by UK Governments for the past decades...

[Dorkins]

Like a lot of kids it did not mean much to me but over the years that changed as I began to learn a bit more about the reality of the 2 World Wars.

Two incidents really brought it home.

I personally know the feeling you're describing, but in my experience it seems to be culturally conditioned. I went to Belgium with a couple of Portuguese people and visited the usual battlefields, cemeteries and memorials and was struck by how it basically did nothing for them. WW1 was a war that didn't involve their country and it was a century ago, so for them I think it was all pretty abstract.

[ccc]

I personally know the feeling you're describing, but in my experience it seems to be culturally conditioned. I went to Belgium with a couple of Portuguese people and visited the usual battlefields, cemeteries and memorials and was struck by how it basically did nothing for them. WW1 was a war that didn't involve their country and it was a century ago, so for them I think it was all pretty abstract.

I dont think you have to be closely involved to a conflict to find it 'affecting' to visit memorials etc..

I want to the killing fields in Cambodia years back. ****** me that's a grim place.

The fact the second part of the tour was firing ak-47 rifles made it all the more ******ed up and surreal.

[SarahBell]

Manchester pride has a turnover of over a million and says it's got about 54k for charities this year.

[R K]

Well Saatchi certainly did not invent the logo which surprisingly is American in origin not British,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remembrance_poppy

Years ago the Remembrance Sunday service used to be broadcast by the BBC simultaneously from the Cenotaph and a local war memorial. I appeared on one of these programs as a young cub scout. All I can recall about it was that ceremony was cold and boring but my Mum insists I picked my nose on camera in front of millions. Like a lot of kids it did not mean much to me but over the years that changed as I began to learn a bit more about the reality of the 2 World Wars.

Two incidents really brought it home.

The first was a visit to the Canadian war cemetery and Memorial at Beaumont Hamel on the Somme. It was beautiful sunny day and I walked across the grass from the line of preserved trenches from which the Newfoundland Regiment attacked on 1st July 1916. I had walked about 20-30 yards towards the front line trenches when it struck me that by the time the Newfoundlanders had got that far all the officers and about 650 of the other ranks had become casualties. I still find it one of the saddest places I have ever visited

The second was a chance visit to a French church on an ordinary holiday. Buried in the grave yard were the bodies of a crew from a Stirling bomber which had crashed nearby in the second World War. This was not a formal military burial but had clearly been done by the locals as a tribute. There were 7 graves. One belonged to the planes navigator who was in his late 30s (about the same age as I was when I visited the church). Of the remaining six graves not one of the occupants including the pilot and co-pilot was older than 19 years of age. There lives had been brutally cut off before they had hardly started.

Now I don't know whether these peoples sacrifice was worthwhile or not. Nor do I know whether the Poppy is the best symbol of remembrance that can be devised for them since like all things in life it can be manipulated and abused by the cynical, by money grubbers and those who wish to glorify conflict. However, I don't want what those Newfoundlanders and that Stirling aircrew had to endure to be forgotten and if that means buying and wearing a poppy so be it even if the symbol has been tainted by warmongers such as Tony Blair. Ultimately the act of remembrance belongs to me not the scumbag politicians who try to take it over to carve their mark on history

I didnt pass any comment on the origin of the poppy or its use in fund raising over the years.

I specifically passed comment on the manner it has been used at the Tower of London. Reducing each individual loss of each individual young man, son, father, brother to a homogenous plastic toy on a stick so that KAte Middleton and her idiot husband, whose family were responsible for all those deaths, can have a photo opportunity is gut-wrenchingly sick and perverted (in my humble opinion). Representing each person by the same plastic copy of a flower is the antithesis of remembering the individual. It turns them into nothing more than the impersonal, unfeeling, unreal mass of cannon fodder that the British monarchy and military saw them as. The lumpen poppytariat.

Of course, if one wishes to remember ones dead ancestors or community, individually or collectively, I completely support that.

[Nuggets Mahoney]

Reducing each individual loss of each individual young man, son, father, brother to a homogenous plastic toy on a stick so that KAte Middleton and her idiot husband, whose family were responsible for all those deaths, can have a photo opportunity is gut-wrenchingly sick and perverted (in my humble opinion). Representing each person by the same plastic copy of a flower is the antithesis of remembering the individual. It turns them into nothing more than the impersonal, unfeeling, unreal mass of cannon fodder that the British monarchy and military saw them as. The lumpen poppytariat.

I disagree. The toys which arguably abstractify, homogenize and sanitize the individual suffering are ceramic, not plastic.

I can't fault the way they've been arranged to look like a pool of blood pouring out of the Tower, it's a nice touch.

[geezer466]

What I would find quite moving would be if the Royal Family finally admitted their guilt to the people for the carnage of the First World War and resigned in utmost shame.

I think you will find it was modern and evolving weaponry (and the inability in how to counter it) which caused the carnage in WW1. They learnt too late that you cannot defeat a machine gun by throwing wave after wave of men against it. Not to mention how our artillery was ineffective against deep dug German bunkers. (Main cause of the huge loss of the first day of the Somme 60,000 casualties in one day). French artillery being of a larger calibre was better at this job and casualties were lighter in the parts of the line where it was used.

The allies (as it was by 1918) did not so much as defeat the Germans militarily (Germany surrendered before they had actually fell back to German soil) it was the naval blockade. The civpol of Germany was literally starving in the streets.

The French lost more people than we did. Estimates vary from 1.7 to 1.75 Million. The UK lost 800k to 1 Million. How are the British Royal family responsible for the French losses if they have been a republic since 1792? Not to mention all the other nations who participated and lost people..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_I_casualties

[bkkandrew]

What I would find quite moving would be if the Royal Family finally admitted their guilt to the people for the carnage of the First World War and resigned in utmost shame.

Both this and the comment on which it is based:

+1

So many deluded people left in UK it seems. Blindly supporting HFH, RBR and other nonsense..

[bkkandrew]

What I would find quite moving would be if the Royal Family finally admitted their guilt to the people for the carnage of the First World War and resigned in utmost shame.

Both this and the comment on which it is based:

+1

So many deluded people left in UK it seems. Blindly supporting HFH, RBR and other nonsense..

[Goat]

Not to mention how our artillery was ineffective against deep dug German bunkers. (Main cause of the huge loss of the first day of the Somme 60,000 casualties in one day). French artillery being of a larger calibre was better at this job and casualties were lighter in the parts of the line where it was used.

I think things are more complicated than that.

What's surprising about the Somme is that there is little agreement or understanding about what went wrong, some sources say that the artillery was innefective at cuttting the wire, others say that it was. I don't think that the French artillery would have been any more effective at dealing with the bunkers (they were just too deep) but it's unclear why they were more effective than our guns.

I think one of the principal problems may have been poor co-ordination between our gunners and the infantry commanders, a clue to this can be found by comparing the instructions given in the 1916 artillery notes and "Artillery in Offensive Operations, March 1917".

The 1916 guidance states: "Before guns attempt to cut wire, infantry patrols should be sent out to report on the nature and extent of the wire, looking especially for low trip wires where the grass is long. They should also report on the progress of destruction....".

By 1917 the guidance had been expanded to: "Wire-cutting demands the closest co-operation between the artil-lery and infantry. Commanders of assaulting battalions should visit the O.P.'s of the batteries cutting the wire on their front to watch the progress of the work, and should inform the battery commanders when they consider that the wire has been properly cut. In addi-tion, patrols should be sent out nightly during wire-cutting to examine and report on the progress made during the day. Once gaps have been made, it is the duty of divisional com-manders to employ all means at their disposal to keep these gaps open during the hours of darkness throughout the period of the prepara-tory bombardment. These means include the use of rifle and machine-gun fire, rifle grenades, &c...."

I think this indicates that the wire wasn't cut effectively in many places because the gunners didn't know what the infantry needed them to do; when the wire was cut effectively it seems that the Germans were able to quickly repair the breech because no effective efforts were being made to stop them.

http://www.gutenberg-e.org/mas01/frames/fmasarc02.html

[Bloo Loo]

I think you will find it was modern and evolving weaponry (and the inability in how to counter it) which caused the carnage in WW1. They learnt too late that you cannot defeat a machine gun by throwing wave after wave of men against it. Not to mention how our artillery was ineffective against deep dug German bunkers. (Main cause of the huge loss of the first day of the Somme 60,000 casualties in one day). French artillery being of a larger calibre was better at this job and casualties were lighter in the parts of the line where it was used.

The allies (as it was by 1918) did not so much as defeat the Germans militarily (Germany surrendered before they had actually fell back to German soil) it was the naval blockade. The civpol of Germany was literally starving in the streets.

The French lost more people than we did. Estimates vary from 1.7 to 1.75 Million. The UK lost 800k to 1 Million. How are the British Royal family responsible for the French losses if they have been a republic since 1792? Not to mention all the other nations who participated and lost people..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_I_casualties

I dunno, maybe it was because both sides rulers were on the same family christmas list

The First World War saw millions of men separated from their families and sent to the front line but very few were pitted against their relations.

For the royals, however, World War I truly was a family affair.

A new documentary has revealed how the roots of the Great War lay partly in the tangled web of Royal family relationships - in particular that of the British-hating Kaiser Wilhelm II of Germany and his cousins, George V and Tsar Nicholas of Russia.

[Bloo Loo]

I think you will find it was modern and evolving weaponry (and the inability in how to counter it) which caused the carnage in WW1. They learnt too late that you cannot defeat a machine gun by throwing wave after wave of men against it. Not to mention how our artillery was ineffective against deep dug German bunkers. (Main cause of the huge loss of the first day of the Somme 60,000 casualties in one day). French artillery being of a larger calibre was better at this job and casualties were lighter in the parts of the line where it was used.

The allies (as it was by 1918) did not so much as defeat the Germans militarily (Germany surrendered before they had actually fell back to German soil) it was the naval blockade. The civpol of Germany was literally starving in the streets.

The French lost more people than we did. Estimates vary from 1.7 to 1.75 Million. The UK lost 800k to 1 Million. How are the British Royal family responsible for the French losses if they have been a republic since 1792? Not to mention all the other nations who participated and lost people..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_I_casualties

I dunno, maybe it was because both sides rulers were on the same family christmas list

The First World War saw millions of men separated from their families and sent to the front line but very few were pitted against their relations.

For the royals, however, World War I truly was a family affair.

A new documentary has revealed how the roots of the Great War lay partly in the tangled web of Royal family relationships - in particular that of the British-hating Kaiser Wilhelm II of Germany and his cousins, George V and Tsar Nicholas of Russia.

[Steppenpig]

They lay half a dozen plastic poppy wreaths on the war memorial in my mum's village, and they really do look like utter crap, almost like some surplus garbage someone has left behind. They really should spend a few quid on something more attractive. A vase of twigs would be better.

[geezer466]

Forgetting to remember is certainly a problem. Whats needed is loudspeaker-equipped towers dotted around towns and cities to call the faithful to remembering six times a day.

We could also have specially trained experts in remembering to make sure its being done properly and issue edicts against those who show insufficient remembering or remember something else instead.

These experts could be trained in special schools from an early age where they would do nothing but memorise that which needs to be remembered.

Or we could just leave things as they are where you get the choice as to whether you wear a red flower or not and the freedom to criticise it if you so wish. Not forgetting the irony of course of what gave you those rights..

[SNACR]

I disagree. The toys which arguably abstractify, homogenize and sanitize the individual suffering are ceramic, not plastic.

I can't fault the way they've been arranged to look like a pool of blood pouring out of the Tower, it's a nice touch.

Yes, I think the arrangement is a masterstroke. I'm pretty much on the fence with the visiting and I'm certainly not prepared to sneer at or criticise those that are doing so but I'm undecided if it's a healthy thing, or not.

It seems to be in the centre of a Venn diagram the constituents of which are Diana style outpouring, nostalgia for the values of the past and discombobulation from the way the world seems to be changing.

Also, a very strong, build it and they will come, vibe of this, with maybe the word baseball replaced with war and possibly Boris Johnson as James Earl Jones and David Cameron as Kevin Costner.

Littlejohn has done some compare and contrast piece between the young anonymous protestors and young first world war soldiers which spectacularly misses the point with the inevitable reference to present day youth enjoying the freedom their ancestors fought for.

The unfortunate fact is, if the youth of a century ago had more angrily questioned the behaviour of their elders, there would be a lot less poppies in the Tower of London moat.

[Dorkins]

Forgetting to remember is certainly a problem. Whats needed is loudspeaker-equipped towers dotted around towns and cities to call the faithful to remembering six times a day.

We could also have specially trained experts in remembering to make sure its being done properly and issue edicts against those who show insufficient remembering or remember something else instead.

These experts could be trained in special schools from an early age where they would do nothing but memorise that which needs to be remembered.

Genius.