Canuck wrote:



Why are the flags at half staff? (half mast being incorrect)

"Jim Breckenridge" > wrote in message
...

> Why are the flags at half staff? (half mast being incorrect)

"Half-mast" is not incorrect in Canada:
http://www.pch.gc.ca/pgm/meb-hm/index-eng.cfm. "Half-staff" is the less
conventional usage here.
--
Andrew Chaplin
SIT MIHI GLADIUS SICUT SANCTO MARTINO
(If you're going to e-mail me, you'll have to get "yourfinger." out.)

Andrew Chaplin wrote:
> "Jim Breckenridge" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>> Why are the flags at half staff? (half mast being incorrect)
>
> "Half-mast" is not incorrect in Canada:
> http://www.pch.gc.ca/pgm/meb-hm/index-eng.cfm. "Half-staff" is the less
> conventional usage here.
It wouldn't be the first time the Government got it wrong. As far as
I know, the media etc. not withstanding, if it is NOT on a ship then
the flag is at half staff.
>

"Jim Breckenridge" > wrote in message
...
> Andrew Chaplin wrote:
>> "Jim Breckenridge" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>>> Why are the flags at half staff? (half mast being incorrect)
>>
>> "Half-mast" is not incorrect in Canada:
>> http://www.pch.gc.ca/pgm/meb-hm/index-eng.cfm. "Half-staff" is the less
>> conventional usage here.
> It wouldn't be the first time the Government got it wrong. As far as I
> know, the media etc. not withstanding, if it is NOT on a ship then the
> flag is at half staff.

I am not certain why the flags have been lowered to the half way position. I
saw them in that state and the wind was quite strong so they were flapping
around quite a bit. It made for a nice shot because the sky was fantastic
too. The next time I drive by there, I'll have a look and see if anything
has changed.

Usually, the flags are lowered to show respect for the dead who have already
passed some time ago or for those who have recently passed as a sign of
national mourning. Since it wasn't a national holiday of any sort
commemorating fallen soldiers, I'm at a loss to explain it.

Take care,

Nick

"Jim Breckenridge" > wrote in message
...
> Andrew Chaplin wrote:
>> "Jim Breckenridge" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>>> Why are the flags at half staff? (half mast being incorrect)
>>
>> "Half-mast" is not incorrect in Canada:
>> http://www.pch.gc.ca/pgm/meb-hm/index-eng.cfm. "Half-staff" is the less
>> conventional usage here.
>
> It wouldn't be the first time the Government got it wrong. As far as I
> know, the media etc. not withstanding, if it is NOT on a ship then the flag
> is at half staff.

Where did you get that idea? It sounds more like U.S. usage than what is found
in the Commonwealth. Here is a couple of Google searches to illustrate:
http://preview.tinyurl.com/lwxtx2 and http://preview.tinyurl.com/nhgxsx.

In Chapter 4 of A-AG-200-000/AG-000, The Honours, Flags and Heritage Structure
of the Canadian Forces, "half-staff" is not used, while "half-mast" is. This
was written by professional bunting ******* and flannel bosuns, so presumably
they know what they are talking about.

You can find a copy of the book here:
http://mgray.hopto.org/ArmyPubs/Publications/cfp200.pdf. It's pretty hefty --
about 20 megs.
--
Andrew Chaplin
SIT MIHI GLADIUS SICUT SANCTO MARTINO
(If you're going to e-mail me, you'll have to get "yourfinger." out.)