Difference between revisions of "Talk:Simon Craig Broughton"
m (Bad CO moved page Talk:Simon de Montfort-Broughton to Talk:Simon Craig Broughton: Change of name)
Latest revision as of 21:42, 21 December 2018
Crikey. I wasn't quite expecting the shit to hit the fan quite so much with this entry, though I must admit to feeling slightly miffed at its removal. Is the ARRSE thread going to be removed in this way too - or the whole Infamous Walts category?
I must point out that I contacted Nigel before posting this entry, just to see if he could cast light on any developments. The pm I got was quite meaty and I deliberately left the meaty bits out of the post. He is still gobbing off about his military 'service' apparently (do these twats ever learn?).
As most of you are aware, unlike ANZMI, the UK does not have an equivalent database of these choppers and the ARRSEpedia is as good as it gets (for the time being). Sir Simon is already on record as a card-carrying walt to some degree, but I personally felt he was worthy of his own ARRSEpedia entry - especially that he's associated with a group 'honouring the memory of the SAS' - like they fucking need it from this clown?
Hey, anyone can justify anything if they want to - just look at the SS mongs who 're-live' history. All very nice guys, but there are plenty still alive that 're-live' the SS's exploits in their dreams every night.
Re-enactors aside (who I don't really have much problem with) I'm starting to get very tired of the lying idiots who big themselves up and wear kit and awards they're not entitled to, and short of a written apology for all to read, they should be pilloried and ridiculed for the sad tossers they really are.
I say bring back the entry (though I would wouldn't I?) - 'sanitised' or not. If Sir Simon wishes to publish an apology for his walting lies, then even better. AS for the police? I'm not even going to comment on that suggestion as they're way too busy fighting real crime (cough). As for threats of legal action from the walts? I wouldn't hold my breath. Unlike these pricks, I can sleep soundly.
Buck Felize 17:41, 1 April 2008 (BST)
I recovered the original vandalism by m-m and Bad-co gave me the heads up that there might be more action on the page ... but Good-co seemed to take the line that the git had had enough so rather than argue a lost cause I popped smoke and fecked off. Seemed a bit of a climb down as it was perfectly valid walt busting page cause Mongfort-Broughton seems like a megawalting cnut. I'm on the side of bringing the page back exactly as it was. --Rabid Hams 22:18, 1 April 2008 (BST)
After looking back on the initial text, I now admit that some of the content was rather naughty. However, I am still in favour of the good Colonel having an entry - albeit sanitised - if to serve as a salutary warning to those who choose to go down this path. I'm quite happy to re-write it, but as he's already in the public domain and on record, I don't see what the problem is providing the entry doesn't touch upon the more personal aspect.
The whole thing should stand as a cautionary tale to those who live by the sword, that they can expect - and undoubtedly will get - incoming.
I must point out that no criticism whatsoever is levelled at Good CO - who merely acted in the best interests of ARRSE. I must admit to being a little surprised how quickly 'we' caved in though. God help us if anyone with real power sees their entry!
Buck Felize 17:14, 2 April 2008 (BST)
I always assume the COs do whats best for ARRSE ... thus I shut up then they make decisions but I do agree, not happy we folded so quick. Anything thats out there we should be able to collate into a wiki entry especially about walts. --Rabid Hams 17:28, 2 April 2008 (BST)
I've flashed it back up to the COs for ruling. I agree that we need something here... Proximo 03:39, 8 April 2008 (BST)
I eagerly await the green light. It's a shame to have that smashing image and not be 'allowed' to use it. Again, I'm quite happy to concoct a total pile of fictitious, unlibelous drivel.
Buck Felize 08:12, 8 April 2008 (BST)
No change there then BF ;o) --Rabid Hams 16:39, 8 April 2008 (BST)
WOOHOO its back! :o) --Rabid Hams 20:03, 9 April 2008 (BST)
Well bugger me! I was not expecting that. It remains to be seen if anything of a legal nature transpires, as I understand all is not well amongst 'certain' circles. Wait out!
Buck Felize 20:56, 9 April 2008 (BST)
Mega, it's back! Well played to all concerned. Proximo 03:52, 11 April 2008 (BST)
Good grief this is like watching a deep sea fisherman trying to reel in a sailfish that's fighting tooth and nail. Can we reel this sucker in? The tension is unbelievable. COs demand proof of his secret George Cross! --Rabid Hams 16:45, 11 April 2008 (BST)
I can categorically prove he hasn't got one! This is getting ridiculous - like watching a train derailment. Let's stick to the facts:
- He DID wear that uniform - and it's already in the public domain.
- He has claimed military service.
That's two good enough resons for an entry. There is a part of me that wishes to see this episode brought to an end. Simply bin the entry. However, that smells of victory for the other party - and there's the other part of me: the bit that's like a terrier that's spotted the bunny.
I'm sure Simon has read this thread, as I'm certain he's read the other. There's nothing to stop him defending his corner is there? The silence is palpable. So Simon, if you're reading this, log on, defend yourself, give us your s/n and we'll shut the fcuk up and leave you alone for the rest of eternity... probably.
Buck Felize 13:10, 12 April 2008 (BST)
Ah yes, the old "I'm going to threaten legal action as that will make my actions seem legal" tactic. Honestly, what a vile little cowardly cunt this walt is. That said, it's not our ballgame so we'll roll with whatever the COs decide. Proximo 15:18, 12 April 2008 (BST)
franky after the caubeen debacle I was starting to think the Co's had got matrix chambers on retainer! I'm sure cherie loves us. My feeling is the lying little wart on the arrse of humanity has got it coming (simon, not cherie) and we should stick it to him. Its just a terrible shame that the govt cant be bothered to create a law for walts given they are outlawing everything else. --Rabid Hams 16:10, 12 April 2008 (BST)
It would have been a whole different boiling vessel full of poissants had the colonel dressed up as a Chief Superintendent wouldn't it? I bet there wouldn't have been a solicitor's letter then?
Buck Felize 16:49, 12 April 2008 (BST)
So, what's the gen Ben? I see 'it' is back. Is this an attempt to placate the colonel or should I expect the full weight of the law to come crashing around my arse? Though quite how that would transpire I'd like to know.
Puzzled of Peterborough. Buck Felize 10:35, 13 April 2008 (BST)
Good - it's back. Proximo 00:58, 15 April 2008 (BST)
As things seemed to have calmed down, I would like to take this opportunity to offer a snivelling apology to the COs for their tolerance over this matter. It would have been far simpler to bin the whole thing. It is my understanding that they've drawn quite a bit of flak over this entry. I also apologise for another entry that caused GCO an embolism of late.
In future I shall seek 'weapons clear' before unloading the ordnance on entries concerning individuals.
Buck Felize 21:01, 17 April 2008 (BST)
ha ha! thats funking hilarious!
what sort of knob would want to dress up in military kit and pretend to be...oh hold on?!...erm...
well atleast we're not funking morris dancers eh!?
I'm not in the forces never have been never will, never would want to be either, (even if they would take me!) i've been reenacting for 1999-2008 8-9yrs and I still get a bit creeped out with folks dressed as nazi's. but i'd still consider them reenactors as its portraiting a historical period, but pretending to be in the current army, pretending to be an officer in the hardest part of the army, pretending to be hereditary peer, well one thing your not pretending to be simon and thats a propper c u n t!
seriously words can not convey accuratly my disdain for what a w anker you are!
sorry for my language but I cant help it, i dont suffer fools gladly at the best of times and you are a fool, i feel sorry for anybody who has been hurt by your lies as it sounds like your wife has. pathetic.
Rant over. d
I'd kinda forgot about poor ol' Simes. That Shortt feller has out-walted all the walts by a significant margin. Good on Simon for taking the crap and cracking on with that harmless medieval stuff. I espied his image in a recent-ish copy of the Mail's Weekend supplement (there was a feature on re-enactors), suitably armed and helm'd with a mobile phone clamped to the side of his lid in true Renaissance fashion. He was pretty unmistakable, as poor Simon's visage is burned on to my retina for all eternity. Season's greetings your Sir-ness! Buck Felize 17:04, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
I had had high hopes that Simon would be crowned king of the walts but that person (who isnt an inspiration for Jack Small) has indeed blown away all opposition. --Rabid Hams 10:54, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
Indeed so. I fear walting has reached its zenith. The bar is simply now too high. There will always be pretenders and chancers, but we shall never see the likes of the true professional career walt again. At least we can say 'We were there at the two hundred!' Buck Felize 11:19, 21 December 2008 (UTC)