# NZ Soldiers sent home over un-professional photo



## Newt (17 Sep 2009)

Article here http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/2875735/Soldiers-sent-home-for-photo-stunt.


----------



## OldSolduer (17 Sep 2009)

Can you beleive it?

It appears the fun police are at it in NZ as well as Canada. 

Soldiers etc have been writing on bombs etc since the beginning of time. WTF is wrong with their leaders?


----------



## HollywoodHitman (17 Sep 2009)

******** SLOW NEWS DAY ALERY ******* ********SLOW NEWS DAY ALERT *********


----------



## mariomike (17 Sep 2009)

Times have changed. 
Flashback to 22 May 1944. LIFE Magazine: "Picture of the Week: When he said goodbye two years ago to Natalie Nickerson, 20, a war worker of Phoenix, Ariz., a big, handsome Navy lieutenant promised her a Jap. Last week Natalie received a human skull, autographed by her lieutenant and 13 friends, and inscribed: "This is a good Jap – a dead one picked up on the New Guinea beach." Natalie, surprised at the gift, named it Tojo."
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a8/LifeMag.jpg


----------



## The Bread Guy (17 Sep 2009)

OldSoldier said:
			
		

> Can you beleive it?
> 
> It appears the fun police are at it in NZ as well as Canada.
> 
> Soldiers etc have been writing on bombs etc since the beginning of time. WTF is wrong with their leaders?



Ah, but like with many stories, we have to read the tea leaves a bit.  Looking at what the NZ Air Force spokesperson said:


> "Irrespective of the investigation into whether the acts contravened military law, the NZDF sets and expects very high levels of professionalism and behaviour from its people - this is especially the case in an operational theatre where *the protection of information is vital to the overall security of New Zealand interests and activities.* On this occasion those standards have not been met and as a consequence these three soldiers will be returned to New Zealand at the earliest opportunity."
> 
> "Let me be very clear that this is not about a group of young soldiers just *taking a photograph* of themselves; soldiers have been doing this since the availability of cameras. These three are returning to New Zealand because of *a series of actions and errors of judgment on their part that did not meet the standards we expect of our people.*"


Could it be the troops, say, have standing orders not to send imagery from in theatre home without vetting?  

A bit more from Radio New Zealand:


> Three New Zealand soldiers serving in Afghanistan are to be sent home after potentially compromising security by emailing photographs of themselves posing with a bomb and machine guns.
> 
> The photos, sent to an energy drinks company, showed the soldiers next to a bomb with a message on it to the Taleban.
> 
> ...



There's no statement I can find yet on the NZDF web page, and we've only seen one photo, so I'd be curious to find out exactly what "offence under the Armed Forces Discipline Act" the troops were charged with and found guilty of.


----------



## armyvern (17 Sep 2009)

Ahhh yes, I more suspect that the 'offending' photo was accompanied by some (even more offensive) opsec wording when distr electroniclly ...

Something akin to "here we are at Camp X in Location Y just prior to dumping this baby on Taliban camp Z." ...


----------



## The Bread Guy (17 Sep 2009)

A shame, really, that we have to guess when there's no organization or institution out there that could be, I don't know, the public's eyes and ears, bringing *all* the relevant information back to people who would read, view or listen to this information, allowing them to make informed decisions....


----------



## armyvern (17 Sep 2009)

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> A shame, really, that we have to guess when there's no organization or institution out there that could be, I don't know, the public's eyes and ears, bringing *all* the relevant information back to people who would read, view or listen to this information, allowing them to make informed decisions....



Unless, of course, the *relevant* information was OPSEC info/material/matters as the NZDF stated it was in their press release ...


----------



## 1feral1 (17 Sep 2009)

I remember seeing an Allied WW2 pic with an aircraft bomb which had 'Iron rations' written on it in chalk. If I remember right, it was being loaded into a bomb bay of a Lanc.

Even Jimmy Dolittle had 'bomb graffitti' written on his bombs for Tokyo back in 1942.

There is nothing wrong with this recent pic, just a world gone PC mad.

Pathetic and outragous.

OWDU


----------



## armyvern (17 Sep 2009)

Did everyone miss the big, bold yellow part in the article "*a series of actions and errors*" <--- ie Not JUST the photo (& perhaps, not EVEN the photo itself)?


----------



## The Bread Guy (17 Sep 2009)

ArmyVern said:
			
		

> Unless, of course, the *relevant* information was OPSEC info/material/matters as the NZDF stated it was in their press release ...


In which case, this institution could have said (if it was indeed the case) "the airmen were disciplined for sharing pictures and e-mails the NZ Defence Force says could provide useful information to the enemy."


----------



## mariomike (17 Sep 2009)

Overwatch Downunder said:
			
		

> I remember seeing an Allied WW2 pic with an aircraft bomb which had 'Iron rations' written on it in chalk. If I remember right, it was being loaded into a bomb bay of a Lanc.
> Even Jimmy Dolittle had 'bomb graffitti' written on his bombs for Tokyo back in 1942.
> There is nothing wrong with this recent pic, just a world gone PC mad.
> Pathetic and outragous.
> OWDU



Hi Wes. There was a lot a bomb graffiti and nose art. Seems the powers that be take a rather dim view of it now:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-460054/PC-brigade-ban-pin-ups-RAF-jets--case-offend-women-Muslims.html


----------



## armyvern (17 Sep 2009)

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> In which case, this institution could have said (if it was indeed the case) "the airmen were disciplined for sharing pictures and e-mails the NZ Defence Force says could provide useful information to the enemy."



But, the article does state: "...the protection of information is vital to the overall security of New Zealand interests and activities. On this occasion those standards have not been met  ..."

which tells me that these soldiers are being returned because "they did not protect information vital to the overall security of NZ interests & activities ..." IE: They _somehow_ breached OPSEC (be it via the accompanying text or captions sent with the pics _whatever_ (I don't think the "HOW specificly" is important) ... but they were found to have violated OPSEC which is also conducive to the later comments in the article regarding them having "violated the Defence Act". Violating OPSEC is an offence here in Canada too under our NDA.


----------



## gcclarke (17 Sep 2009)

I honestly would not be surprised if the problem that got these guys sent back home was not the writing on the bomb, not the taking of a photo of the writing on the bomb, not the e-mailing said photo, nor any OPSEC stuff accompanying the photo. I would not be surprised if it was the fact that they were using said photo in order to try and win a contest.


----------



## mariomike (9 Oct 2009)

Overwatch Downunder said:
			
		

> I remember seeing an Allied WW2 pic with an aircraft bomb which had 'Iron rations' written on it in chalk. If I remember right, it was being loaded into a bomb bay of a Lanc.
> OWDU



Hey Wes, you do remember right. This is a 5,000 lb "cookie" blast bomb being loaded onto an RCAF Lanc with some rather un- P.C. nose art! Incidentally, that thing over the damsel's head is not a halo. It's a gas patch. The photo must have been taken in 1945, because "Tiger" Squadron flew Halifax's until then.
You can see the pic at exactly the 1:00 min mark, if interested. Looks like all the crews are Canadian. Has a pic of the Bomber Command Memorial in Nanton, Alberta:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B69CquvLHgY


----------



## gaspasser (10 Oct 2009)

If I may add my two cents, OPSEC aside (where it may have been stated in the article here we are at camp X about to drop bomb A on enemy F); in the movie Apocalypse Now that Marlon Brando stated, and I quote without the full word:
"We train young men to drop fire on people, but their commanders won't let them write F**K on their aeroplanes because....it's obscene."
It's my favourite line because it demonstrates the double sidedness of our jobs.


----------

