The problem handing them in the loo is where… Lots of men in the house, above the toilet - lots of women, across from the toilet… lots of men, across from the toilet would be looked at longer but less often….
We’re still deciding, Andy - I’ll let you know!
OK, Admin can remove yet another one of my posts now…
I’m not bothered. Whatever all of you decide. It wasn’t done to be used on the website it is an illustration for my new book. If the powers that be decide they want to use it on their website it’s up to them. I just want to see the Society prosper and grow and grow and GROW ! If there is ever anything I can do to help make that happen please let me know. 90% of my clients are in America now so I have a personal stake in seeing heraldry thrive in your country.
Andrew Stewart Jamieson;89879 wrote:
I’m not bothered. Whatever all of you decide.
I think Kathy was talking about whether to put your emblazonment of her arms in the loo. We will find a place for the AHS arms on our site. It would be silly not to.
It doesn’t pay to speed read does it ??? Especially when dealing with some one as quick-witted as Ms. McClurg.
Andrew Stewart Jamieson;89884 wrote:
It doesn’t pay to speed read does it ??? Especially when dealing with some one as quick-witted as Ms. McClurg.
:animlol:
Kenneth Mansfield;89882 wrote:
I think Kathy was talking about whether to put your emblazonment of her arms in the loo. We will find a place for the AHS arms on our site. It would be silly not to.
We don’t have a Loo here! :idea:
OK, I’ll stop now!
Joseph McMillan;89726 wrote:
I find the army terminology to be irritatingly complicated. They distinguish between "positional colors," which are "authorized to indicate the official status or rank of certain civilian and military officials of the Federal Government," and "individual flags," which identify the grade or rank of general officers and members of the Senior Executive Service, but not the particular position they hold. To make things worse, the "positional colors" are not "of the President," "of the Secretary of the Army," etc., but "of the Office of the President," of the Office of the Secretary of the Army."
The need for the distinction arises from the practice of giving everyone and his brother of any significance a distinctive flag to go with the position he holds, from the President down to the Director of the Army Staff and the principal staff assistants to the Secretary of the Army. Most of these people are concurrently either general officers or members of the SES, meaning they have both a positional color and an individual rank flag.
The problem is that the term "Office" can mean either the position occupied by the official or the staff organization supporting him or her, but usually means the latter in bureaucratic usage. Yet the blue flag with the Presidential version of the U.S. arms is not the flag of the Executive Office of the President, it is the flag of the President himself, and the red flag with the national arms and four white stars (in the picture I posted) does not symbolize the corporate Office of the Secretary of the Army but the Secretary himself.
The navy custom of simply calling all of these "personal flags" is just so much more straightforward.
Thanks, Joe. This is very helpful and I understand the complexity, now. Sorry that I didn’t answer earlier, but have not been on here in a while. Again, thanks for the thorough information.
Kathy McClurg;89886 wrote:
We don’t have a Loo here! :idea:
She’s prior service Navy, Andrew. Apparently, she will be hanging her arms in the head, not the loo. At least that’s the skuttlebutt I picked up down at the gedunk machine. As you were… :rolleyes:
We really do need a "like" button!
Never forget that a camel is a horse designed by a committee!
:facepalm:
Did the Society ever assume for itself a crest or a motto to go with its arms?
steven harris;89936 wrote:
Did the Society ever assume for itself a crest or a motto to go with its arms?
No, it didn’t.
(Mildly relevant anecdote: When the U.S.-Canadian 1st Special Service Force was created during World War II, it was granted a U.S. Army coat of arms—Argent a fighting knife bendwise Sable—to put on its U.S. regimental color. When the time came to decide on a motto to put on the scroll, the commanding officer said, "Just leave it blank until someone says something heroic." This is the unit on which the old Cliff Robertson movie "The Devil’s Brigade" was based, and the arms are now those of the 1st Special Forces Regiment, the umbrella regiment for the Green Berets.)
Hmm - has anyone said anything heroic?...
Joe wrote:
This is the unit on which the old Cliff Robertson movie "The Devil’s Brigade" was based, and the arms are now those of the 1st Special Forces Regiment, the umbrella regiment for the Green Berets.)
Voila!
http://www.tioh.hqda.pentagon.mil/ImageProxy.ashx?n=1&t=150&id=7820
tioh wrote:
Shield
Argent, a fighting knife in bend hilt to base Sable.
Crest
On a wreath of the colors (Argent and Sable), two arrows saltirewise Argent.
Motto
DE OPPRESSO LIBER (Liberate From Oppression).
Actually, I’ve been told the motto is bad Latin and means "Of The Oppressed Book." The CHoI recommended "Liberare Oppressos" for To Free The Oppressed.