# Year of the Veteran Commercial



## the 48th regulator

Hello Troops,

Well a little bit of fun that I had has turned into art.....

I participated in a commercial with some veterans from my Regiment, and others from our great military.

The Royal Canadian mint has released a coin in honour of "The Year of the Veteran" and produced a commercial.  It was a long day yet fun to do, best of all there are a load of clips of the Highland laddies! We had three representing the Regimental Family! WW2 (Herb Pike, and he was the main character you will se him at the start) Korea (Doug Chappell) and Myself....

I have added a link to the commercial, that you can also find at the Mint's Site.

Also, below is the still of the only shot you will see of me.  I am the blurry guy in the back ground with the Glengarry on,  no blue beret, regimental all the way.  But I guess if I did, maybe I would not have been so blurred...ah that is for another story hammy hamster..

dileas

tess


----------



## Michael Dorosh

Better late than never, I just got my YOTV pin for my uniform.   With 2.5 months left in the year....figured I better have it for REmemberance Day....congrats on the TV commercial, looks great!


----------



## The_Falcon

Yeah I saw the commercial a day or so ago, I was kinda stoked to see Mr. Pike representing the regiment, isn't he on the coin as well?  I will keep an eye out for ya Tess next time I see it.


----------



## Old Ranger

I saw it on the big screen.

I see you went Regimental, couldn't tell from the computer version.

Good work


----------



## Hill677

Is it me ??? or why is the " peacekeeper" that is walking beside Mr. Pike  wearing a peacekeeper beret ??? I do not see a UN medal on her uniform. Do they count NATO tours IE Germany or Alert as a peacekeeping Tour???? could some one straighten me out.


----------



## the 48th regulator

Hill677 said:
			
		

> Is it me ??? or why is the " peacekeeper" that is walking beside Mr. Pike  wearing a peacekeeper beret ??? I do not see a UN medal on her uniform. Do they count NATO tours IE Germany or Alert as a peacekeeping Tour???? could some one straighten me out.



whoa there boy,

She did serve, here is a little about her;

ANGELA MONDOU 

A lot of assumption on your part, with that "Keen Observation", and this ain't a flame thread either.

Hope that straightens you out  :tsktsk:

dileas

tess


----------



## Dirt Digger

Hill677 said:
			
		

> Is it me ??? or why is the " peacekeeper" that is walking beside Mr. Pike  wearing a peacekeeper beret ??? I do not see a UN medal on her uniform. Do they count NATO tours IE Germany or Alert as a peacekeeping Tour???? could some one straighten me out.



The one wearing the dangley earrings?


----------



## the 48th regulator

> The one wearing the dangley earrings?



Well I didn't show up with a proper hair cut, in fact I don't think Herb did either.

Shit let's all trash the commercial,  

dileas

tess


----------



## GO!!!

Why are all our vets appearing in Blue Berets though? What is wrong with their uniforms? Why can't we attach Canadian significance to our accomplishments, instead of giving the credit to the UN?

In addition to that, it reeks of social engineering to me that females figure so prominently in all of our publicity campaigns, given the small percentage of female involvement in deployed units.

At least they picked a hot one this time though!


----------



## ZipperHead

Ms/Mrs Mondou rubbed me the wrong way (for the reasons mentioned by others: dangly earrings, blue beret, etc) and the link provided did little to make me feel any more warm and fuzzy about her appearing in the commercial. The write-up indicates she:  





> As a Canadian forces officer working for NATO in West Germany, Mondou successfully developed the strategy for deployment of the largest United Nations Peacekeeping contingent in Canadian history into former Yugoslaviaâ â€œwhile under fire and in just ten days!


 So...... if she was posted to Germany, and was "under fire", she would have received the SSM and the UNPROFOR medal, entitling her to the CPSM. That would make for 3 medals, not 2. I haven't watched the commercial lately, but I'm 99% certain she had 2 medals on her coat (at first I thought she was still serving, hence my disgust at the earrings, but clued in after a few viewings that she is retired).

Personally, I also wish it wouldn't have focussed on the blue-beret aspect, or even peacekeeping in general, but someone who has done a fair variety of the whole thing: Op Apollo and/or Athena, Balkans time (UN and NATO), maybe Africa and Middle-East. That's just an Army guys opinion though: the other 99.9% of the Canadian populace will just think: Wow, she's just as much a veteran as the old guy!! 

And before I weigh in with the whole veteran issue, I will go cool off, and punch my teddy-bear a few times to relax..... 

Al

Edit: Just downloaded and played the clip. My keen recce eye can't make out what the second medal is, but the first one is the SSM. Anyway, it still bugs me, but due to the political correctness-brigade, they would have had to put a female on the coin. That being said, I'm sure they could have found a serving (or even retired) female member that has a larger "rack" (no sexual connotations implied....). But what do I know about these things.......


----------



## the 48th regulator

> Personally, I also wish it wouldn't have focussed on the blue-beret aspect, or even peacekeeping in general, but someone who has done a fair variety of the whole thing: Op Apollo and/or Athena, Balkans time (UN and NATO), maybe Africa and Middle-East. That's just an Army guys opinion though: the other 99.9% of the Canadian populace will just think: Wow, she's just as much a veteran as the old guy!!



OK stop the eff right there....

I served with the UN, '94 FRY,  I am in the Same regiment as the "Old Guy"  I held the same rank as the "Old Guy",  I am not a vet?  

This is truly sad man, hey I agree, the U.N was only a small part of my career, hence why I wore my regimental attire (glengarry) but lets take it easy on the freaking pot shots regarding what is a vet mate.

dileas

tess


----------



## x-grunt

I think this ad is a step in the right direction. Finally, there is recognition that there are modern veterans. I have utmost respect for those who served in the big wars and they deserve all the accolades we can give them. However, I truly think the post Korea vets of various stripes have gone unrecognized in the public eye far too long. Details notwithstanding, the direction the ad is going in is a good one.


----------



## Armymedic

Allan Luomala said:
			
		

> Ms/Mrs Mondou rubbed me the wrong way (for the reasons mentioned by others: dangly earrings, blue beret, etc) and the link provided did little to make me feel any more warm and fuzzy about her appearing in the commercial.



You know, I have to agree with Al on this one. Right from the first time I say the commercial, I thought something was off...and indeed it was, she is only wearing the 2 medals, not in uniform, etc....

There is no requirement to discuss the term "veteran". Any of us who has served, wearing the name or flag of our country on our shoulder, are veterans. Regardless of where or of how long....End of story.

Al, the medals are: SSM and CPSM.


----------



## the 48th regulator

> ....SO she helped to plan the insertion of Canadian peacekeeping troops to Yugoslavia from bases in Germany, does that mean she is any more or better then those officers who supported OP Apollo from Tampa Fl?



is her service any less?



> There is no requirement to discuss the term "veteran". Any of us who has served, wearing the name or flag of our country on our shoulder, are veterans. Regardless of where or of how long....End of story.



So you agree then, that she is a vet, and rightfully desrves to be there? 

Sorry, you lost me brother.

dileas

tess


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse

Sorry, me too....... and remember, this is the MINT, bastion of the reigning party. :'(


----------



## Daidalous

But them dangly earrings, you would think someone would have picked up on that before they shot the scene and spent big bucks editing it with music and voice overs.    My wife on the other hand thought they would look nice with cocktail dress.


----------



## Michael Dorosh

Allan Luomala said:
			
		

> (at first I thought she was still serving, hence my disgust at the earrings, but clued in after a few viewings that she is retired).



Was she in uniform?  If so, it doesn't matter what era the uniform is from - dangly earrings have never been permitted with uniform.

Was she in civviies?  If so, then what is the big deal about wearing earrings?


----------



## Hill677

:sniper: Get your Helmets on.....Its a Logistic Officer to the rescue... :soldier: The two medal she is wear are, the SSM for her time in Germany and the other is the CPSM..Funny thing Germany does not qualify for the CPSM ( http://www.forces.gc.ca/dhh/downloads/honours/cpsm_noneligible.pdf ) it falls into the " Non- Eligible Missions " ..Because they do not meet the the approved definition of "PeaceKeeping ".... So why the UN Beret ????..It sounds like from her little video that she did spend some time in Croatia ..hence her "10 days.. under fire "  To receive the UNPROFOR medal you need "ELIGIBILITY & CRITERIA -- Awarded for 90 days consecutive service from 01 March 1992 to 19 December 1995." SO take Off the blue Beret....


----------



## the 48th regulator

She served with Gen Mac's HQ...

Some of us were at the shoot, and I think we were able to see the real ones from the Walts....

WTF people, get a grip and go to radio chatter if you are friggin' bored...

dileas

tess

 :threat: :skull:  :soldier:

 :argument:

and all that...


----------



## muskrat89

Forget it Tess - not worth getting uptight over.

Like my Grandmother says "What would you expect from a pig, but a grunt?"  If someone made a post about marshmallows, there'd be 50 people post why their opinion was wrong.

Friggin A guys - One of ours was in a commercial, which is cool. Get over yourselves


----------



## armyvern

Hill677 said:
			
		

> :sniper: Get your Helmets on.....Its a Logistic Officer to the rescue... :soldier: The two medal she is wear are, the SSM for her time in Germany and the other is the CPSM..Funny thing Germany does not qualify for the CPSM ( http://www.forces.gc.ca/dhh/downloads/honours/cpsm_noneligible.pdf ) it falls into the " Non- Eligible Missions " ..Because they do not meet the the approved definition of "PeaceKeeping ".... So why the UN Beret ????..It sounds like from her little video that she did spend some time in Croatia ..hence her "10 days.. under fire "   To receive the UNPROFOR medal you need "ELIGIBILITY & CRITERIA -- Awarded for 90 days consecutive service from 01 March 1992 to 19 December 1995." SO take Off the blue Beret....


There is always the "Peace Bar" to the SSM. Awarded for 180 cumulative total days in peacekeeping missions, not necessarily consecutively. Perhaps she has both the "NATO" bar to her SSM as well as the "Peace" bar. The bio only reads 10 days under fire. It does not state that she didn't serve more time there (obviously less than the 90 required for the UNPROFOR though). Being an officer, and a zoomie, it's quite possible that in her career she spent 180 days in various theatres as part of short term TAV/TATs/liaison etc that did not qualify for individual medals but did for the "Peace" Bar. I would think that is the case, as entitlement to this bar would also qualify her for the CPSM as well. 

http://www.forces.ca/hr/dhh/honours_awards/images/ribbons/bar_ssm_peace.jpg

As a side note, I have many medals but have a good friend with only 4, the CD, the CPSM, UNDOF, and the SSM with the NATO, PEACE and ALERT bars. And...for his one Alert bar he's been to Alert 3 times. The number of medals does not a veteran make.


----------



## Armymedic

the 48th regulator said:
			
		

> is her service any less?
> 
> So you agree then, that she is a vet, and rightfully deserves to be there?
> 
> Sorry, you lost me brother.
> 
> dileas
> 
> tess



Yes, Sorry, I don't sound so clear in there to myself either......She served so yes, she is a vet, and yes she deserves to be on the commercial. My "uncomfort" is that of her place, being highlighted on the commercial and the coin just doesn't sit well with me.

Of all the veterans we have, why did they chose her to be on the coin when there is so many other people to be in that place. Is it because they specifically wanted a woman to profile along side the older male veteran? And then why not one currently serving? Like the Signaller they show in the commercial talking to Mr Pike?

Edit:
Thinking about this, I do think it unfair that I point my discomfort with the commercial at the person herself. It is the same discomfort I felt about having the woman peacekeeper on the back of the $10 bill, and the concerted effort by the mint to ensure political correctness. Obviously, it is not a feeling unique to myself.

It is a memorial to the veterans who have served this country with honour for the last 130+ yrs, and in that, it is a good thing.


----------



## GDawg

Indeed. I vote for the Signaller. ;D


----------



## Old Ranger

But the best thing...

Positive Military Image!!!

Yes, it can be nitpicked by those who are in the know.

The average civi won't pick up on those things.

Yes, the earings drove me nuts as well, and what ever that look on her face was going for.

But, positive image for Veterans.....

Regards,

Ben


----------



## Infanteer

Guys, why the heck are we trashing Ms Mondou's service on this site; are we really that petty?

Trash the mint if you don't like the coin (and the ten dollar bill), but I think this friendly fire on a fellow service member who agreed to step up to represent the CF and what it has done for Canada is beneath what we are aiming for on this site.


----------



## the 48th regulator

Well said Infanteer..

dileas

tess


----------



## ZipperHead

I get it (finally)!!!!!! If you agree with everyone here, you are "in". If you don't, you aren't!! 

Wow, it only took me 200+ posts to figure it out. Which again reaffirms my theory that the army is just high school with guns.

I vaguely recall that people are allowed to agree to disagree with one another (lord knows I do it enough). 

As mentioned, the Mint is but another cog in the great machine that is the government, and they will do whatever they want to put their spin on a given situation. Patronage is also the name of the game, so I don't doubt that somebody in the corridor's of power want to help out a friend, who happens to make a living doing speaking engagements, and they get some free publicity at the expense of taxpayer's, why not!! 

I won't weigh in on what constitutes being a "veteran" other than saying that I feel that I am not one. There's a thread for that ad nauseum discussion already, so we'll leave the arguing of that there.

On the whole, though, I agree with the idea of the coin (along with the Terry Fox coin, and the poppy coin). It is meant to honour those that served in the defence of freedom, so that we can freely argue over things such as this, without worrying about The Man coming down on those that are opposed to unpopular concepts (maybe some people should remember that in their posts/replies.....)

Al


----------



## Fishbone Jones

I'm just glad we're getting some good press for a change. Quit looking a gift horse up the anus.


----------



## the 48th regulator

Allan Luomala said:
			
		

> I get it (finally)!!!!!! If you agree with everyone here, you are "in". If you don't, you aren't!!
> 
> Wow, it only took me 200+ posts to figure it out. Which again reaffirms my theory that the army is just high school with guns.
> 
> I vaguely recall that people are allowed to agree to disagree with one another (lord knows I do it enough).
> 
> As mentioned, the Mint is but another cog in the great machine that is the government, and they will do whatever they want to put their spin on a given situation. Patronage is also the name of the game, so I don't doubt that somebody in the corridor's of power want to help out a friend, who happens to make a living doing speaking engagements, and they get some free publicity at the expense of taxpayer's, why not!!
> 
> I won't weigh in on what constitutes being a "veteran" other than saying that I feel that I am not one. There's a thread for that ad nauseum discussion already, so we'll leave the arguing of that there.
> 
> On the whole, though, I agree with the idea of the coin (along with the Terry Fox coin, and the poppy coin). It is meant to honour those that served in the defence of freedom, so that we can freely argue over things such as this, without worrying about The Man coming down on those that are opposed to unpopular concepts (maybe some people should remember that in their posts/replies.....)
> 
> Al



No Al,

You don't get it.  What gives you the right to criticize other who feel they are a vet?  You don't feel you are one??  Then you deal with your inner issues.  You want to post in a thread just to be heard? Then choose the right one to do that.  Hey need some help?? Let me point you in the right way.  In fact let's start with one I posted, after hearing _ad nauseum _ why people have such a hate on being considered veterans.

I think it will take a heck of a lot more than 200 post, to make you realize what you say ain't on mate.

dileas

tess


----------



## ZipperHead

_PM sent to avoid having our little spat derail thread (any more than it already is)._


----------



## the 48th regulator

Allan Luomala said:
			
		

> _PM sent to avoid having our little spat derail thread (any more than it already is)._



pm returned

dileas

tess


----------



## FormerHorseGuard

i saw the coin today, kind of cool if you ask me,  does it really matter that  she served, she worn earrrings,  she worn the uniform same the as the old guy  did and  hundreds of others, thousands of people worn the uniform. they  picked 2 get over it and spend your darn quarters. 

nice to see something postive said about the men and yes women who served their country.

some people here would find something bash no matter the topic. move on , it is just a quarter, 25 cents. and your wasting how much time on it?


----------



## ZipperHead

I see that I have become the whipping boy for this particular love-in. 



> nice to see something postive said about the men and yes women who served their country.
> 
> some people here would find something bash no matter the topic. move on , it is just a quarter, 25 cents. and your wasting how much time on it?



If it were an independent body saying something nice about our servicmen-women, I would probably less critical, but as it is a government agency, who I doubt are going to cast us in a negative light (in what may turn out to be an election year, thanks to Mr Layton). I have never been a fan of "cheerleading" types of ads, and if I am wrong to be critical of something that our fair government churns out for it's own gains, sue me.

As I have been pilloried, I will retreat to a neutral corner. Continue the self-congratulations (and self aggrandizations) without me, or any others that may have a contrary opinion.....

Al


----------



## the 48th regulator

Allan Luomala said:
			
		

> I see that I have become the whipping boy for this particular love-in.
> 
> If it were an independent body saying something nice about our servicmen-women, I would probably less critical, but as it is a government agency, who I doubt are going to cast us in a negative light (in what may turn out to be an election year, thanks to Mr Layton). I have never been a fan of "cheerleading" types of ads, and if I am wrong to be critical of something that our fair government churns out for it's own gains, sue me.
> 
> As I have been pilloried, I will retreat to a neutral corner. Continue the self-congratulations (and self aggrandizations) without me, or any others that may have a contrary opinion.....
> 
> Al



Hey Crusader,

What part of my post above, and the PM exchange we had did you not under stand.

Troll elsewhere.  You have had your fifteen minutes of internet grandstanding now go away.

dileas

tess


----------



## ZipperHead

After my drive in, and a morning coffee (and notwithstanding the taunts), I have reflected somewhat on the whole issue at hand: the commercial. My impression (and many others, I suspect) is that Ms Mondou was a serving member (i.e. in CF uniform for the commercial). That's what got me started with the dangly ear-rings, and the blue-beret (my personal feeling is that there is no need to wear the blue-beret on Rememberance Day. Rather, wear your unit head-dress, to remember the members of your unit/regiment that fell in battle.) After a few viewings though, it is apparent she is a civilian now. So, in reality Ms Mondou (more or less) fits my personal description of a veteran: one who SERVED in the military, but no longer does. Again, personally, I think that the only true veterans are those that fought for our freedoms in wartime (WWI, WWII, Korea). I know that is not a popular opinion here, but again, it is my opinion. Live with it. Move on.

Al


----------



## 043

Well said!

The only day that Blue or Orange berets are authorized is on UN Day. And the dangly, non-regulation earings must go!

As for veteran status.........I think that if anyone has served on a overseas Mission, they should be granted Veteran Status.

Chimo!


----------



## Gramps

All I ask about this whole argument is WHO CARES? Why such a petty little argument about someones earrings, beret, medals or service? I can find about a dozen other things in life right now that worry, interest or concern me a lot more that most of the points brought up on this forum. As usual, someone here tries to show people something they find interesting or were involved in and the "Military Trekkies" hell bent for leather on pointing out miniscule details that no one in the real world will care about ot even notice for that matter.


----------



## ZipperHead

One thing that always makes me shake my head, is people who take the time to type in "Who cares??!!!" or similar things when they read things like this. If you don't care, don't post. It's like complaining about things that you don't like on TV or the radio. If you don't like it, change the channel/station. Or disregard.

BTW, spell check your signature-block. My Trekkie-senses compute many spelling errors. I don't think Greg Ginn wants to go down in history misquoted. Oddly enough, I was raised to never pass a fault, aka pay attention to detail. Not trendy anymore, with MSN-speak, and gangsta rap, I suppose.

Al


----------



## 043

Gramps said:
			
		

> All I ask about this whole argument is WHO CARES? Why such a petty little argument about someones earrings, beret, medals or service? I can find about a dozen other things in life right now that worry, interest or concern me a lot more that most of the points brought up on this forum. As usual, someone here tries to show people something they find interesting or were involved in and the "Military Trekkies" heck bent for leather on pointing out miniscule details that no one in the real world will care about ot even notice for that matter.



You are quite right Gramps! Thanks for redirecting my focus!


----------



## Gramps

From Allan Luomala "BTW, spell check your signature-block. My Trekkie-senses compute many spelling errors. I don't think Greg Ginn wants to go down in history misquoted."

Done,I would not want to misquote my favorite band. I Will take that constructively and maybe not have many drinks the next time I change the signature block. As for the other comments I have seen on this topic (and I am not directing this at just one person) I will dismiss the vast majority of them.


----------



## 3rd Horseman

48th I saw ya on the tube tonight, looks good, were ya moon walking in the background? I liked the commercial read the posts ouch, I can agree somewhat just wish when we get such good press like the coin, commercial, peace keeper monument or the 10 spot only wish it was truly representative of who we all look up to and not a politically correct statement. I would have enjoyed seeing The 48th Regulator in the commercial and it would have been well deserved or Bruce Henwood on the 10 spot or so many more just not the ones they keep picking.


----------



## Infanteer

Allan Luomala said:
			
		

> I get it (finally)!!!!!! If you agree with everyone here, you are "in". If you don't, you aren't!!



WTF are you talking about?  Do you feel it is not beneath ones professionalism to act like a teenage girl and trash somebody else in public for their perceived "lack" of service?

There is nothing about being "in".  As I've said many times, this place isn't to be a change-room to stick the knife in the back of others.  If anybody disagrees with the Mint's choice, then do so.  If anybody wishes to criticize Ms Mondou and her service/physical appearance/choice of clothing then do it elsewhere (or better yet, tell it to her face).


----------



## Art Johnson

Is it not amazing how this thread went from talking about an old man (I'm sure Herb would like that expression) to a pair of dangling ear rings. While we are given a description of Ms Mondou's service no one mentioned the "Old Mans" service or Tesse's for that matter.
Herb Pike came up to the 48th in Italy as a reinforcement in 1944 and was posted to "A" Coy as a Sergeant, he was 19 years of age (old man indeed).
Herb stayed with the 48th till the end of the war and ended up as CQMS of "C" Coy in Holland.
When Herb says in the commercial "he would do it again" he is not kidding. Herb is one of the finest soldiers that I have met and has a record in Action second to none.

Aye Dileas


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse

Thanks Art, 
yours ain't too shabby either, my friend.......


----------



## Bartok5

Well, this is gonna get me lynched, but having read throught the entire thread I still have a problem with the manifestly "politically-correct" bent of the commercial featuring Ms. Mondou.   Yes, everyone is entitled to their views, and I sincerely respect those views.   Which is why I trust that you will in turn respect my contrary opinion.

As others have duly pointed out (in perhaps not so direct language) I am of the firm belief that Ms Mondou's "counter-point" inclusion in the commercial was a politically-correct sop to countless irrelevant interest groups as specifically regards Remembrance Day and The 2005 Year of the Veteran.   

Allow me to highlight the most glaring "counterpoint" offered to the aged male WW II veteran.   Ms Mondou is a female.   Nothing wrong with that, but does it not strike anyone else as somewhat suspicious that a distinct minority of the CF was chosen as the "poster-child" for modern veteran status?   Hey - I have zero problems with females in military service - including the combat arms.   Do a search - my words regarding female soldiers on combat operations speak for themselves.   But in terms of general representation of the modern veteran?   Females remain a distinct minority.   A lovely contrast to the aged Veteran for sure, but was that truly representative of the majority?   Was it truly necessary?   Or was it just another needless concession to the ceaseless Canadian need for political correctness?   Could we have been better served by having one of the countless first or second-generation immigrant Canadian soldiers representing our visual interests?   How about a true representation of the CF based on the latest multi-million-dollar demographics poll?   Let the chips fall where they may in terms of genuine CF representation, rather than cater to abjectly "PC" (and therefore misrepresentative) "CF representation".

Aside from gender, we have the inevitably sticky question of "been there, done that".   Yes, we all acknowledge that "anyone who serves 3 years and completes basic training with an honourable discharge" is technically a "Veteran".   But those of us who are honest with ourselves also know that the base-line criteria offers no distinction between those who have "been there/done that", and those who have done the minimum qualifying time without risking anything.   Ms Mondou's credentials (or lack thereof) have been thoroughly dissected within this post, so no need to revisit that issue.   All I would point out is that if we (eg. the "royal" we) are endeavouring to make the point that there are also modern day Veterans deserving of recognition, you'd think that we would make the effort to highlight someone who has done a tad more than cumulative Airforce time to qualify for the SSM and CPSM.   As others have already pointed out, we have many personnel who have engaged in post-Korean War combat operations.   People who were in the Medak Pocket with 2 PPCLI (both Reg and Res F), folks who were on Op APOLLO, etc.   If we were seeking representative examples, why wasn't a serving soldier with some serious "put it on the line" credentials" offered up as a counterpart to the WW II Vet?   Heck - if we insist upon having disproportional female representation because that is the "PC" thing to do, I still could have told you where to find a couple of well-decorated female infanteers who soldiered at the pointy-end in Afghanistan....

And then there's the whole dress thing.   Is she still serving or is she retired?     I'm pretty sure that Ms Mondou is wearing Airforce DEUs in the commercial.   If she is still serving, what's with the whole "dangly ear-ring" thing?   Whatever happened to adherence to Dress Regs?  And what about the UN Beret, which (at least in my unit) we've been told is not authorized for wear at this year's proceedings?  Call me a dinosaur, but c'mon.   Either she's "in" or she's "out".   Last time I checked, there was no provision to wear your service dress post-retirement. If she's out, then so is the service dress uniform.   Unless of course she has already been elevated to the illustrious heights of some unit's Honorary Colonel....

All of the above to say that I wholeheartedly agree with the intent of the commercial.   The idea of portraying modern veterans alongside the stereotypical example that (regrettably) resides firmly within the delusional Canadian psyche was both long overdue and well-considered.   Unfortunately, the execution sucked - as is entirely typical of publicly-funded pap for the Canadian masses.   We could have done far, far better. But we typically opted for politically-correct bumpf.   Worst of all, the "pap" wasn't even remotely well considered in view of the readily available alternatives.   

Yes, "something" is better than nothing.   But is what we currently have honsestly the best that the "royal we" can do?   If so, then I lament our current state of affairs.

By all means, feel free to lambaste me for the above comments.   I am a "binge poster" who comes on line a couple of times per week as time permits.   That leaves you plenty of time to crucify me on the altar of political correctness.   Chances are, I won't be back until after Remembrance Day to respond - if indeed a response is warranted.   In that vein, I simply offer my personal views as food for thought.   "PC" can go too far, and in this particular instance I am inclined to believe that it has.

FWIW.   Just one "dinosaur's" perspective on the matter.

Cheers,

Mark C


----------



## camochick

Holy lord tundering..... It's a coin people, it's not that big, you can't fit every tom dick and harry on the thing. So what they put a woman on it, so what she didn't fight in some major war. Everyday there is a post on here about how the Canadian public doesn't understand you, they don't care about you. Well now the government is doing this small thing to try and recognize those who have served and those who serve and all you do is whine about it. I think the coin is sapposed to represent veterans young and old, male and female. This is not the work of the big powerful PC police force that so many think is out there trying to change everyone into a tree hugger. Why can't a commercial be a commercial and a freaking coin be a freaking coin. Be proud that the forces, and our great veterans, are getting some recognition.  >


----------



## Michael Dorosh

Mark C said:
			
		

> Well, this is gonna get me lynched, but having read throught the entire thread I still have a problem with the manifestly "politically-correct" bent of the commercial featuring Ms. Mondou.  Yes, everyone is entitled to their views, and I sincerely respect those views.  Which is why I trust that you will in turn respect my contrary opinion.
> 
> As others have duly pointed out (in perhaps not so direct language) I am of the firm belief that Ms Mondou's "counter-point" inclusion in the commercial was a politically-correct sop to countless irrelevant interest groups as specifically regards Remembrance Day and The 2005 Year of the Veteran.
> 
> Allow me to highlight the most glaring "counterpoint" offered to the aged male WW II veteran.  Ms Mondou is a female.  Nothing wrong with that, but does it not strike anyone else as somewhat suspicious that a distinct minority of the CF was chosen as the "poster-child" for modern veteran status?  Hey - I have zero problems with females in military service - including the combat arms.  Do a search - my words regarding female soldiers on combat operations speak for themselves.  But in terms of general representation of the modern veteran?  Females remain a distinct minority.  A lovely contrast to the aged Veteran for sure, but was that truly representative of the majority?  Was it truly necessary?  Or was it just another needless concession to the ceaseless Canadian need for political correctness?  Could we have been better served by having one of the countless first or second-generation immigrant Canadian soldiers representing our visual interests?  How about a true representation of the CF based on the latest multi-million-dollar demographics poll?  Let the chips fall where they may in terms of genuine CF representation, rather than cater to abjectly "PC" (and therefore misrepresentative) "CF representation".
> 
> Aside from gender, we have the inevitably sticky question of "been there, done that".  Yes, we all acknowledge that "anyone who serves 3 years and completes basic training with an honourable discharge" is technically a "Veteran".  But those of us who are honest with ourselves also know that the base-line criteria offers no distinction between those who have "been there/done that", and those who have done the minimum qualifying time without risking anything.  Ms Mondou's credentials (or lack thereof) have been thoroughly dissected within this post, so no need to revisit that issue.  All I would point out is that if we (eg. the "royal" we) are endeavouring to make the point that there are also modern day Veterans deserving of recognition, you'd think that we would make the effort to highlight someone who has done a tad more than cumulative Airforce time to qualify for the SSM and CPSM.  As others have already pointed out, we have many personnel who have engaged in post-Korean War combat operations.  People who were in the Medak Pocket with 2 PPCLI (both Reg and Res F), folks who were on Op APOLLO, etc.  If we were seeking representative examples, why wasn't a serving soldier with some serious "put it on the line" credentials" offered up as a counterpart to the WW II Vet?  Heck - if we insist upon having disproportional female representation because that is the "PC" thing to do, I still could have told you where to find a couple of well-decorated female infanteers who soldiered at the pointy-end in Afghanistan....
> 
> And then there's the whole dress thing.  Is she still serving or is she retired?   I'm pretty sure that Ms Mondou is wearing Airforce DEUs in the commercial.  If she is still serving, what's with the whole "dangly ear-ring" thing?  Whatever happened to adherence to Dress Regs?  And what about the UN Beret, which (at least in my unit) we've been told is not authorized for wear at this year's proceedings?  Call me a dinosaur, but c'mon.  Either she's "in" or she's "out".  Last time I checked, there was no provision to wear your service dress post-retirement. If she's out, then so is the service dress uniform.  Unless of course she has already been elevated to the illustrious heights of some unit's Honorary Colonel....
> 
> All of the above to say that I wholeheartedly agree with the intent of the commercial.  The idea of portraying modern veterans alongside the stereotypical example that (regrettably) resides firmly within the delusional Canadian psyche was both long overdue and well-considered.  Unfortunately, the execution sucked - as is entirely typical of publicly-funded pap for the Canadian masses.  We could have done far, far better. But we typically opted for politically-correct bumpf.  Worst of all, the "pap" wasn't even remotely well considered in view of the readily available alternatives.
> 
> Yes, "something" is better than nothing.  But is what we currently have honsestly the best that the "royal we" can do?  If so, then I lament our current state of affairs.
> 
> By all means, feel free to lambaste me for the above comments.  I am a "binge poster" who comes on line a couple of times per week as time permits.  That leaves you plenty of time to crucify me on the altar of political correctness.  Chances are, I won't be back until after Remembrance Day to respond - if indeed a response is warranted.  In that vein, I simply offer my personal views as food for thought.  "PC" can go too far, and in this particular instance I am inclined to believe that it has.
> 
> FWIW.  Just one "dinosaur's" perspective on the matter.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Mark C



As always, well said.  I wrote in to the Sentinel back in the day, and told the editor that if some members couldn't be bothered to wear their uniforms correctly (they published a photo of a  Major in the RCA wearing his Garrison Dress incorrectly - and on foreign soil no less) then perhaps they shouldn't get the honour of having their pictures published.

The UN blue beret is a loaded political statement in itself.  To my mind, it is an operational piece of kit.  If you're in a combat zone, you wear a helmet.  If you're on UN ops, you wear the blue beret.  

I wouldn't wear my helmet to Rememberance Day any more than I would my toque...


----------



## Bartok5

"Camochick",

Okee dokee, and thanks for that.   I reckon that some of us misguided mysogynists have a problem with our "public representation" being unduly slanted.   Yes, "a coin is a coin", and a "commercial is a commercial".   I quite clearly stated as much.   Although I don't personally buy into the misguided mantra that "any representation is GOOD representation", I will reluctantly take whatever we can get.   But that doesn't make it truly representative, and by extension nor does it make it right.   

That said, you are fully entitled to your opinion.   That is what it is all about, yes?   So thanks for adding your opinion.   I don't personally agree, but I will certainly acknowledge your right to hold that opinion.   And at the end of the day, that is the tangible result within our society that we attribute to those we remember not just on Friday, but year-round.   N'est ce pas?

I'm off to sleepy-time.   See you in a few days' time.   I'm sure that the debate will continue in my absence, and perhaps I will have more to add after my 26th year in uniform at a Remembrance Day ceremony.   

Cheers,

Mark C


----------



## Infanteer

Mark C said:
			
		

> Nothing wrong with that, but does it not strike anyone else as somewhat suspicious that a distinct minority of the CF was chosen as the "poster-child" for modern veteran status?



They forgot to make her an Inuit though.... ^-^

I agree with your sentiments Mark - it is obvious that the Mint was gunning for a "PC" look to the coin; it is the same reason that the 10 doller bill features two females (1 with binos on a UN mission and the other at a war memorial).  Oh well, we have some kid playing hockey on our 5 while other countries put landmarks or historical buildings on theres.

My comment on Ms Mondou's service still stands - sure, there may have been others with a more storied claim to represent the modern "veteran" (Tess with his scars and tattoos would have went well!), but it doesn't mean she needs her service ridden into the ground for it.


----------



## KevinB

Infanteer said:
			
		

> I agree with your sentiments Mark - it is obvious that the Mint was gunning for a "PC" look to the coin; it is the same reason that the 10 doller bill features two females (1 with binos on a UN mission and the other at a war memorial).   Oh well, we have some kid playing hockey on our 5 while other countries put landmarks or historical buildings on theres.



Finally --- 

Look yes the CF has women - but when you do the math -- what is the percentage - especially what percentage are cbt arms...
 Now if you look at a gov't article, picture, coin, presentation or whatever - you'd swear 
1) All male infanteers are black
2) 50% of the Cbt Arms are female.
3) 75% of the CF is non caucasian.
4) For the SHARP folk - he can't be gay - he's a native...  

I dont begrudge anyone anything - but lets stay grounded in reality.
 I does not do anyone any favours when people starts skewing with "census data" in order to fit in with the warmer fuzzier and fresher smelling world we seem to be living in these days


----------



## marshall sl

If you look close ,Ms Mondou is wearing a suit that is similar to DEU in cut and style


----------



## Infanteer

This reminds me of when people wanted to alter that one 9/11 memorial of the 3 firefighters who put the flag on the wreckage - some people wanted to "correct" history by putting a black man in the picture; they didn't like the fact that the 3 FF's were all white.... :


----------



## 2 Cdo

Mark C, extremely well said. Don't think I need to add anything except "Opinions are like a##holes, everyone has one!" People on both sides of the issue will say/believe what they do and no amount of arguing or common sense will change what their belief is.
Have a nice day.


----------



## Dirt Digger

Speaking of "altering"....a few years back I posed for some pictures that were going to be drawn into the Army Fitness Manual.  Imagine my surprise when one of the pictures in the draft copy came back as a poorly copied female.  Credit to Kelly Dukeshire for the male version...who knows for the female version of me:


----------



## KevinB

and I see the vile phallic symbol of a magazine had to be editted too...


----------



## Michael Dorosh

Dirt Digger said:
			
		

> Speaking of "altering"....a few years back I posed for some pictures that were going to be drawn into the Army Fitness Manual.   Imagine my surprise when one of the pictures in the draft copy came back as a poorly copied female.   Credit to Kelly Dukeshire for the male version...who knows for the female version of me:



I have a copy of that manual - I seem to recall that the figures were male, as in the first drawing (I actually thought I might adapt some of the line drawings for my own website on uniforms which is why I remember it).  Is it possible there were two versions of the manual - male and female?


----------



## Dirt Digger

Michael Dorosh said:
			
		

> I have a copy of that manual - I seem to recall that the figures were male, as in the first drawing (I actually thought I might adapt some of the line drawings for my own website on uniforms which is why I remember it).   Is it possible there were two versions of the manual - male and female?



Nope.  All of the large, uniformed line drawings are of me.  The smaller ones in the "alternative exercises" section are myself and two other members of the Canadian Scottish (in 1999).  I got the "job' because I was working in the OR on a Class B contract. 

I was actually very surprised when the final version came out with the hatchet job to his picture, because I personally would never allow anyone to alter my artwork like that (but when it's a contract, who knows).  I'm sure that somebody noticed that the male/female ratio of the pictures was off (even though I believe Kelly's wife is the female in the shots) and decided to make a change.  You can cleary see that they added a huge amount of facial detail that none of the other pictures have.

What really bugged me was that one picture was the one that I insisted he take.  Originally, the only "moving with a rifle" photo is one later in the guide that has the sling around the back of my neck.  I told him that nobody would ever carry a rifle that way and showed him the alternate method.  So I got morphed into a women for the good shot, and the weird sling carry still made it onto page 92...sheesh.


----------



## ZipperHead

I'm kind of disappointed that nobody has lambasted MarkC. It must be the delivery.... It's that officer edumacation that makes the difference      ;D

As to be expected though, excellent points brought out. I finally looked up what the difference between "dogmatic" and "pragmatic" was the other day: you definitely fall under pragmatic in your assessment of this issue. Others though......

I got to thinking about all the "it's just a coin" comments: unless I'm mistaken (which seems to be fairly often) no living person, other than the Queen, is USUALLY placed on currency (or is that stamps???). So, in reality, it is a big deal, and an honour. And seeing as how my "old man" comment seems to have been taken out of context (my point was/is, when Joe Six-Pack looks at the the coin, he no doubt thinks "hey there's an old man and a chick on that coin". Unless, of course you topped your Diversity and Sensitivity Trg course, and thought to yourself "There is a gentlemen of age beside a womyn on that coin" (womyn of course being the feminist version of woman - no 'man' in it..... don't ask me why I know these things). 

So, all things considered, if I were in charge of the selection for the coin, to keep things simple, I would have opted for Mr. Pike alone. Or, as a nod to Smokey Smith, Mr Smith (a true Canadian hero) to represent deceased vets, and Mr Pike, as a surviving vet, and yes, a true Canadian hero, for serving his country when it, and the world, needed him. 

If anybody doubts the respect that I have for Veterans (that's capital V veterans, not 20 year old veterans zooming around a base near you in their Fast and the Furious Civics), feel free to PM me (or phone me... look me up on the DIN) and I can discuss it with you, without the subtleties that get lost via posts on the 'net. 

I just wanted to get that bit straight.....

Al

Editted: for spelling and grammar


----------



## muskrat89

See? That all makes sense..


----------



## Gunner

I have to admit that I am starting to become frustrated towards the social engineering that continues to rear its head, each and every time the military is showcased in some fashion.  

For example, the peacekeeping monument in Ottawa depicts 3 persons conducting various "peacekeeping" duties. One soldier happens to be a female.  Ok, no problem there.  
$10 bill comes out with a very nice poem, old vet with a couple of children at the war memorial in Ottawa, and a soldier (blue beret IIRC) observing with binoculars.  The soldier happens to be female.  Recruiting ads a couple of years ago, female soldier/sailors and aircrew prominately displayed.  Canadian Mint comes out with a commercial advertising its new coin. ex CF officer (who the discussion has been focussed on), who happens to be female, plays a prominent role.

Now, I support women in the CF in any trade or classification.  Doesn't matter to me.  However, lets stop showcasing them in our own version of reality TV, move on past the social engineering, and treat everyone like soldiers, sailors and aircrew.  Nothing more, nothing less.


----------



## Fishbone Jones

I'd just like to swing it back to the commercial and the original topic of the thread, and say "well done" to all who participated. At least the people I've spoken to have gained more understanding for what we do, without all the cheap politics we're seeing here. They see the commercial as recognition for our soldiers, young and old, and it makes them more aware, and they're saying "Thanks" and shaking hands and clapping. That can only be good. Thanks to Tess and the rest. 

OK, you've got your schoolyard back, you can resume throwing sand around.


----------



## Michael Dorosh

Dirt Digger said:
			
		

> Nope.  All of the large, uniformed line drawings are of me.  The smaller ones in the "alternative exercises" section are myself and two other members of the Canadian Scottish (in 1999).  I got the "job' because I was working in the OR on a Class B contract.
> 
> I was actually very surprised when the final version came out with the hatchet job to his picture, because I personally would never allow anyone to alter my artwork like that (but when it's a contract, who knows).  I'm sure that somebody noticed that the male/female ratio of the pictures was off (even though I believe Kelly's wife is the female in the shots) and decided to make a change.  You can cleary see that they added a huge amount of facial detail that none of the other pictures have.
> 
> What really bugged me was that one picture was the one that I insisted he take.  Originally, the only "moving with a rifle" photo is one later in the guide that has the sling around the back of my neck.  I told him that nobody would ever carry a rifle that way and showed him the alternate method.  So I got morphed into a women for the good shot, and the weird sling carry still made it onto page 92...sheesh.



And the arms got shrunk...well, you're a piece of history now either way.  Be sure and donate a signed copy to the National Archives; one day some bright young researcher will eat info like this up.


----------



## SHELLDRAKE!!

After reading through all the threads I seem to have found a pattern. Everyone has taken bits of the advert and come up with a particular thing that erks them. 

a)Its just a commercial about a veteran coin so leave it at that.
b)Theres a woman soldier portrayed
c)Shes got dangly earings
d)her medals dont make sense

 The purpose of a forum is to have civil discussions on a topic therefore without pro's and con's the discussion would get dry pretty fast. I think the thing that everyone can agree on is that the "PC" stance the media/government tends to portray will never change. What does get to the goats of CF members is inaccuracies in the portrayal of service men/women.

 How many of you watched rambo before you got in and then after. You never noticed that endless m-60 belt before did you. We are a proud military and hate to see a slob or even a collar dog out of place when its shown to the public. And IMHO thats something to be proud of. I think we can all agree that its great to see vets and service members on tv but we will always be looking for that problem in the dress, wrong words of command or even the guy who's a little slow on the present arms.

  Oh yeah, and howcome no one said anything about the sideburns on the hazy guy in the background of the commercial?


----------



## brin11

Personally, I rather liked being represented by a fellow female CF member on the coin.  Perhaps the examples you've given have irritated some here (the $10 bill, etc.) but, in general, I find there isn't alot of representation that the *public* sees of females in uniform.  I've actually been mistaken for a cadet since the individual was certain there were no females in our military at all.  Another example, today at our Remembrance Day ceremony the esteemed chaplain proceeded to discuss "Men of valour" who had given up much to their country for us to live in freedom.  It was only about the third paragraph of her tirade where she finally mentioned "Men and other persons of  valour".  Well, I guess women just aren't born with that valour stuff.  At least I'm a person now, unlike years ago when I wasn't one.  Just splitting hairs here folks to fit in.  Let's just say I believe I felt the same degree of irritation that the rest of you have when discussing females veterans on the quarter.  

I really, really avoid these female/male discussion (for personal reasons) but I just had to make a comment regarding this one.  I agree that the dangly earrings should be gone.


----------



## Armymedic

SHELLDRAKE!! said:
			
		

> Oh yeah, and howcome no one said anything about the sideburns on the hazy guy in the background of the commercial?



They guy in the back with the kilt..yes, I did notice his haircut was rather "hollywood" like.



			
				brin11 said:
			
		

> Personally, I rather liked being represented by a fellow female CF member on the coin.



I would have like to see a serving female CF member on the coin.


----------



## 3rd Horseman

I gota chuck one more in.

  Id rather see a decorated soldier (valour) and has been wounded in action. Someone who can bring credabilty to the position of standing beside a WW2 vet. There are enough of them and a better choice scroll up I vote for tess.

  Its a great commercial but if we are going to do it lets just do the right thing and that honour should go to those that deserve and not an expediant recruiting ad for wowmen.


----------



## brin11

3rd Horseman said:
			
		

> Its a great commercial but if we are going to do it lets just do the right thing and that honour should go to those that deserve and not an expediant recruiting ad for wowmen.



I'm glad to see that you decide who deserves these honours.   :


----------



## NCRCrow

Shes is hot and fit!!!


----------



## Fishbone Jones

HFXCrow said:
			
		

> Shes is hot and fit!!!



Yep, and the only people in Canada that seem to be bothered about it are all right here. Not one civvie I know, who have favouable comments on the quarter, the commercial, etc could care less. They're gaining interest, respect and understanding. The end result is what really matters, not the execution.


----------



## Armymedic

Not just right here. Talking with my coworkers, I have yet to meet someone who likes the commercial. 

But everyone likes the idea of the coin.


----------



## Griswald DME

Hahaha oh lord have mercy.  Camochick check your pm's.  I have to at least share with one person here.

DME


----------



## the 48th regulator

Well sorry to shake up this "school yard shuffle", but I got a package in the mail.

Pictures, DVD, and a coin package with a letter of thanks...proud as punch hehe..decided to upload a pic of the crew from the commercial.

Hey look some people had bell bottoms, and who is that chap with the friggen side burns??....

I am second from left...in between Herb Pike and Ms. Mondou....

dileas

tess


----------



## the 48th regulator

BTW,

If anyone recognizes this fella , please PM me with info.

He Stated that he was a CApt. in the Navy.  I will pass on further info via pm if you know him, so as I can verify I have the right Chap...

dileas

tess


----------



## GO!!!

the 48th regulator said:
			
		

> BTW,
> 
> If anyone recognizes this fella , please PM me with info.
> 
> He Stated that he was a CApt. in the Navy.  I will pass on further info via pm if you know him, so as I can verify I have the right Chap...
> 
> dileas
> 
> tess



I don't know who he is, but that is the most perfectly formed beret I have ever laid eyes on!


----------



## Fishbone Jones

Benny Hill? 

Do I get a prize?


----------



## the 48th regulator

Hmm good answer...

Did Benny Hill spend time in Yugo doing Spec ops in the predecessor unit of JTF??

Apperrantly that is where you learn to where the beret that way, so recceguy and GO!! I would suggest you kewl the jets! whew, guys like that are to busy takin' care of bidness to "form" their berets..

dileas

tess

Really though, anyone recognize him?


----------



## Infanteer

GO!!! said:
			
		

> I don't know who he is, but that is the most perfectly formed beret I have ever laid eyes on!



Looks like a US soldier with a black beret.... ;D


----------



## the 48th regulator

ok my bad..

how about this to jog the memory of our spec operators...

dileas

tess


----------



## Good2Golf

the 48th regulator said:
			
		

> ...I am the blurry guy in the back ground with the Glengarry on,  no blue beret, *regimental all the way*.  But I guess if I did, maybe I would not have been so blurred...ah that is for another story hammy hamster..
> 
> dileas
> 
> tess



Tess, 

1.  How can you be regimental in pants? ???   Doesn't that chafe with wool trousers?  ;D

2.  Hammy Hamster rocks!  (Well, him and GP and Matty Mouse and everybond else down on the Riverbank.....)

Cheers,
Duey


----------



## Old Ranger

Duey said:
			
		

> 2.  Hammy Hamster rocks!  (Well, him and GP and Matty Mouse and everybond else down on the Riverbank.....)



Too bad his "voice" died last year (co-workers dad).  

Maybe the picture was taken with "a magic camera?"


----------



## NCRCrow

But thats another story..........................................


----------

