Image of the PJM Medal
Banner Text = Fight For the Right to Wear the Pingat Jasa Malaysia Medal
Reply to topic Page 2 of 4
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
The Incongrous and Divisive Decision
Author Message
Reply with quote
Post  
Gerry...once again you have managed to encapsulate my innermost feelings...of course you have also managed to express them in a fashion of which I remain incapable.


_________________
...................'Jock'
Paroi...Rasah...Batu Signals Troop.
View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post The Petition to The Queen 
I'd like to add to my list.

Will the Petition to The Queen be taken into account? Our Petition seeks Her permission for us to wear the PJM with Her approval.

The s*its (go on, I dare you) tell us very clearly that Her Majesty:

1. Approves all changes to the Foreign Decoration Rules (when did she approve the change from the 1969 Regs to the November 2005 Rules, I wonder), and

2. Approves all exceptions to the Rules (was Her Majesty asked to approve an exception to the Rules retrospectively, I wonder ... and if so, when?), and

3. She is the "Fountain of all Honours" and thus has the power, Herself, to grant requests to wear a Foreign medal, a power she exercises periodically.

4. In the alternative, the matter may be dealt with under the Royal Prerogative. The Queen has sent that Petition to the Foreign Secretary, Mrs Beckett, head of the Department that administers Foreign Decorations, for her consideration. She sent it with the Rebuttal. Why do you think She did that?

Will Mrs Beckett exercise the Royal Prerogative that she has been given in order to reject the Petition? If she does, is that not tantamount to The Queen rejecting it too. Or will Mrs Beckett take into account our case?

I do not believe, and I shall never believe, that The Queen wishes to be party in any way to discrimination as between Commonwealth countries.


_________________
BarryF, who fought for the Right to Wear the Pingat Jasa Malaysia
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Reply with quote
Post Re: Discrimination 
BarryF wrote:
I'd like to add to my list.


And another ... Discrimination. Examples:

1. Between Commonwealth countries - all can wear the medal except the British.

2. Between British citizens and British taxpayers - Allegedly, Brits with Dual Nationality can wear their medal but those with Singlke Nationality may not.

3. Between units - 28 Commonwealth Infantry Brigade had three contingents, Aussies, Kiwis, and Brits (including Gurkhas). Guess which contingent is the only one not allowed to wear the PJM?

4. Between squadrons/sub-units - Some units (e.g. the Life Guards) had men serving in Borneo, while others served exclusively on the Malay Peninsula. The former have a wearable medal, the latter do not. The PJM would be the only wearable medal for those who served exclusively on the Peninsula.


_________________
BarryF, who fought for the Right to Wear the Pingat Jasa Malaysia
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Reply with quote
Post  
My Top Ten

1> The Civil servants have broken their own Code of Conduct (Hey fancy sueing me for that statement, make my day!)

2> Downgrading OUR medal to a souvenir or keepsake

3> Telling me I have no Appeal to countenance the lies (Hey, two litigation offences already HMG v Cooper)

4> Refusing me access to The Freedom of Information Act 2000 re 'Who actually signed the document HM Queen or a QUANGO'

5> I'm dreadfully sorry that I have caused so much trouble and strife regarding documentation, I didn't realise I caused this in the first place, alledgedly of course!

6> Sorry I had to unearth all those (allegedly) dreadful lies in Portsmouth Today regarding Civil Servants

7> Nice to know that all Civil Servants have to be absolutely IMPARTIAL and not toe a political line

8> That the World is watching and waiting over the next 4 + weeks of a decision that (for once) will be seen as truthful and fence mending not only with The Malaysian People but its very OWN people

9> That I can go into retirement again BY the end of November

10> But most importantly I want to see compassion from a Government that appears to show no compassion currently, where those that cannot speak for themselves have someone that can, and I mean my fellow Soldiers, Sailors and Airmen on behalf of The F4 Campaign. The Civil Servants can make it happen, I dread to think of their workload if they don't



_________________
--------------------------------------------------------------
HD Committee: Amateurs in a Professional World
---------------------------------------------------------------
View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post  
My number one must be CONSPIRACY by civil servants of the highest rank who combine to treat British Citizens in a discriminatory manner, in an undemocratic manner, and under state control (fascism) of rules and orders which will be changed to suit their needs and be altered whenever required by them.

The rules and regulations are non-statutory and it is a great big 'fib' for Ian 'poisoned dwarf' McCartney to say that Her Majesty the Queen passed the rules relating to Foreign and Commonwealth Awards and Medals. The Queen cannot pass anything without putting her signature on it, so where is this document McCartney? If he is trying to say that The Queen passed these rules thus making them legal in some way against British Citizens, then he had better stop digging as his hole is getting bigger.

We are non-political but bear with me for one sec. A certain politician said he preferred if women of a certain peruasion removed their face covering when speaking to him. It is said that the government is considering bringing out a law to ban this piece of female apparel. Now the key words are 'a law to ban'. They cannot ban anything unless it has been passed by our parliament and they still think that they can tell us that we are banned from wearing the PJM. Legally and morally they cannot do this, and now they know it so why do you think they will not tell us who ordered us not to wear the PJM and why do you think they refuse to supply us with information under the FOI Act. All the time they use a bottomless pit of taxpayers money and it matters not one iota how much they use. They can squander it as much as they like and in the end they will be found out, but what happens to them - a Lordship or a Peerage and lots more taxpayers cash to squander. We need a change and soon!!

View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post  
Andy it would appear that me and thee are singing from that same hymn sheet again, http://www.fight4thepjm.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=895&highlight= this post and yours is separated by 10 minutes!


_________________
--------------------------------------------------------------
HD Committee: Amateurs in a Professional World
---------------------------------------------------------------
View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post  
John Cooper wrote:
Andy it would appear that me and thee are singing from that same hymn sheet again, http://www.fight4thepjm.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=895&highlight= this post and yours is separated by 10 minutes!


Yes John.

I think most of us are singing from the same hymn sheet and are wondering just, if our Queen is the Constitutional Head of our Country and must act through our elected parliament then WHO told the civil service that we need permission from anyone, other than our Parliament to accept and wear a hard earned medal offered in honour by the Malaysian Government. I did not give them (suits) permission to do this with MY Pingat Jasa Malaysia.

View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post  
You have covered most of the key points. My two main points are:

 The actions of HMG on the no wear rule are insulting to the King and Government of Malaysia and a country that forms part of the Commonwealth.

 Divisive decision amongst members of the Commonwealth, and I have the ludicrous decision confirmed by the Ceremonial Secretariat that I, as a dual national, can wear the PJM with the blessing of the Queen of Australia but not with the blessing of the Queen of the united kingdom since this would be discourteous.

Hamish

View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post  
hamishw wrote:


 Divisive decision amongst members of the Commonwealth, and I have the ludicrous decision confirmed by the Ceremonial Secretariat that I, as a dual national, can wear the PJM with the blessing of the Queen of Australia but not with the blessing of the Queen of the united kingdom since this would be discourteous.

Hamish


Sorry to have to ask this question Hamish but what TV programme did you see this on? Yes Minister' or one of the Twelve Episodes of Fawlty Towers
Rolling Eyes


_________________
--------------------------------------------------------------
HD Committee: Amateurs in a Professional World
---------------------------------------------------------------
View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post  
Just one for now.

The Malaysians first offered the PJM to the British in 2004 but were sent away and told to re-offer it in 2005 why?
So that Jack Straw (or someone writing the script for him) could change the rules so that the FCO could reject it.
If this is not true then why did Baroness Symons reject the PJM in January 2005 because according to Chris Edge of the FCO the Malaysians didn’t offer the PJM until the 17th March 2005, so the Baroness turned down the PJM approximately two months before it was offered, someone is telling porkies and its not us.

View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post  
[quote="John Cooper"][quote="hamishw"]

orry to have to ask this question Hamish but what TV programme did you see this on? Yes Minister' or one of the Twelve Episodes of Fawlty Towers
Rolling Eyes[/quote
SAD PART IS THAT THIS COMEDY Very Happy KEEPS ON RUNNING Exclamation ,DESPITE HAVING PEE POOR RATINGS Confused

View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post GEORGE F. 
My opinion on your Section 1 where you say it is not illegal for HMG to use and abuse regulations on medal wearing to stop British Civilians from wearing the PJM, or words to this effect.

It is an abuse of our Democratic Rights to a Parliament which makes the laws and orders that place restrictions on British Citizens and this is unlawful (illegal) and breaching, in the least the Human Rights Act. Discrimination of British Citizens is also illegal.

Others may not agree but I am convinced this conspiracy within the British Administration connected with the PJM has been found necessary by them to prevent their unlawful acts being divulged. We have been acted against unlawfully because a pen pusher albiet employed as a Civil Servant, has no rights whatsoever in making orders or restrictions on the freedom of British Citizens. I say again, our Constitutionally elected Parliament makes our laws.

View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post  
Herewith a comment I previously posted on another thread...which I 're-run' here because it seems more pertinent to this new thread...

Fraudent behaviour?
We are all aware of praxis (habitual or established practice) on government regulatory committees. These committees are 'supported' by civil servants, who, it is claimed, have a clearer view of what should be addressed and why....supposedly possessed of superior knowledge of the subject matter than elected (or in the case of medals...un-elected!) officials responsible for decision making.

Some have suggested it may have started with simple error, a mistaken interpretation of the 'medal rules', combined with incorrectly applied guidelines, (complicated by credulous politicians?), which produced an anomaly that has now simply become too embarrassing to renounce.

To my mind, there is just no way this is a simple error !

The persistent lack of cooperation, the secrecy, and the malicious obfuscation prove that to me without any shadow of doubt.

It's very difficult to understand their position, other than to believe that certain Civil Servants, having realized that their decision was either very weak, or just plain wrong, now recognise that the implications for their own career and status have suddenly become enormous.

My question reiterates the one my friend Andy has been asking for months...

At what point does perpetuating an error degenerate into fraud?


_________________
...................'Jock'
Paroi...Rasah...Batu Signals Troop.
View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post  
I would like to draw everyone’s attention to a statement that was first made when this Fight4thepjm.org was set up.
It is as true today as it was then.

“A fund was set up within that association of 8 people to ensure that a full scale campaign was adequately funded for a period of 12 months - and there is a commitment to a fully funded campaign for the following 2 years subject to review by the fund providers (funds are provided only by us and not from any outside party - we have no affiliations whatsoever)”.

I would also like to add,

"While we are waiting for the response from the Government and HD Committee to our Rebuttal and Petition to The Queen, it is reassuring to know that if the decision goes against us, we have the resources and will to continue this fight. All right-minded people know it is a just case and we are prepared to continue the campaign until we win the right for British citizens to wear the PJM."

In other words we are in this for the duration, to quote Churchill “We Will Never Surrender”.

View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post GEORGE F. 
Apologies George. My misunderstanding on reading your post.

View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:
Reply to topic Page 2 of 4
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum