Image of the PJM Medal
Banner Text = Fight For the Right to Wear the Pingat Jasa Malaysia Medal
Reply to topic Page 6 of 17
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 5, 6, 7 ... 15, 16, 17  Next
The Queen Gives Approval for Foreign Awards to be Worn
Author Message
Reply with quote
Post Sir Walter Scott (quote) 
Bet none of us will ever grieve,
when dear old phoney gets to leave:

DD 1932 -

View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post  
I would imagine from the response that they are all having to say to each other, "Take two Asprins and call me in the morning if your not feeling any better" because the headache has returned.

The article in the Gazette was 'SIMPLE, CLEAR and CONCISE' without any flower or lawyer waffle/gobbledeegook inserted.

It was a decree from Her majesty pure and simple. ANYBODY not in service to the crown has her permission.
Their were no 'If's and's or but's, nor hidden agendas inserted in the message for civil servant interjection or 'sticky finger' manipulation.

"The QUEEN has been graciously pleased! to approve
that Orders, Decorations and Medals conferred with
Her Majesty's permission upon United Kingdom
citizens not being servants of the Crown by the
Heads or Governments of Commonwealth countries
as defined above, or of foreign States, may in all
cases be worn by the recipients without restriction."

They will probably mull this over for another 18 months and say something along the lines of 'Double Medals' are excluded etc. Same old 'codswallop'..

They should get over it, this made their starched collars curl and they are as mad as the 'Hatter at a Tea Party'.

Slam dunk my foot! They need to admit this got in under the rug and blindsided them and it has been, 'So ordered' and the rule for the last 39 years and it eluded the best researchers and 'Waffle mongers' they had on the pay role.

Oh dear, what will they pay the legal minds to write another 6 page convoluted message of 'why not' on expensive headed paper, instead of printing one page saying,>

"Oops, we goofed" You have the 'FORMAL' permission it seems, covered under...ALL CASES and 'without restriction'...

Keith.


________
Gong bongs



Last edited by KJF on Thu Mar 10, 2011 10:04 am; edited 1 time in total
View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post  
KJF wrote:
Slam dunk my foot! They need to admit this got in under the rug and blindsided them and it has been, 'So ordered' and the rule for the last 39 years and it eluded the best researchers and 'Waffle mongers' they had on the pay role.


Indeed.

A classic case of an own goal.


_________________
Merdeka, Merdeka, Merdeka,
from the HD Committee and its decision.
View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post  
I might have missed something here and perhaps some time back. We have had this thrown at us several times, 'To wear a restricted medal would be a grave discourtesy to HM The Queen' or words to that effect.

Has HMQ actually ever promulgated this herself or is this again, the work of The Civil Servants?



Rolling Eyes


_________________
--------------------------------------------------------------
HD Committee: Amateurs in a Professional World
---------------------------------------------------------------
View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post  
John.
I believe if the answer were simple we would have heard it in very short order. They are indeed having to go back and find the documentation and reasons related to the issuing of the public airing of the article in the Gazette. If it has a bearing on the article, then it should and WOULD have been taken into consideration at the time 1968! NOT NOW.

That was pointed out several times to us in the denial to us..They knew what they were doing at the time.

The PJM has been called/named everything from an 'award to a trinket' by those who claim to have the right to dictate to the Veterans. Indeed the line that states and I quote, "Orders, Decorations and Medals" would cover any description they choose to use.

As a Layman it would seem to me that even if one of these suits states we were IN service back then I interpret this to mean that it may not be worn on a Crown service uniform but you may add it to your medal bar when you leave that service?

Then we have this. "conferred with Her Majesty's permission upon United Kingdom citizens not being servants".
I doubt any of us were serving the Crown when the Malaysian government decided a medal should be offered to the Veterans involved in the conflict.

If the article was incorrect, that is NOT the fault of the countries subjects affected by its publishing. If indeed it has some portion missing, I am sure HM Government will issue an apology to us all and restate the correct wording ( Wink )...
It still does not affect what has been the rule since it was published.

No doubt the different departments are trying to find a way around this simple and to the point ruling but I don't care, it won't alter my opinion of the waste of paper, time and money used to post a reply to the rebuttle.

The simple statement in the Gazette, says it ALL!
________
SMOKE KILLS



Last edited by KJF on Thu Mar 10, 2011 10:04 am; edited 1 time in total
View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post  
Keith

The whole appointments system is in an archaic mess and these people need to move into the 21st Century (even our 'gunboats' in the Gulf today don't sound off a volley. It might not be PC to do that!). The HD Committee had the option recently of putting up their hands and saying 'Sorry, we got this one wrong', they chose not to do so and by a great stroke of fortune, the day after they rejected our rebuttal, we came across this LG Document, without a doubt unequivocal.

The suits will try and crawl out of their own self made morass, where some of you guys were waist deep in it 40-50 years, they themselves are up to their necks in it! They have been treading soggy ground for too long, their time is up, they are a dishevelled organisation not fit to serve the country let alone our Queen.

I'm also very surprised that the MoD Veterans Agency have not given their full backing to Veterans, they (VA) too are a disgrace to those they serve.

I have it from the C-in-C that She has given us the permission to receive and wear this PJM award and nothing will take that away from those 519 that have no voice of their own


_________________
--------------------------------------------------------------
HD Committee: Amateurs in a Professional World
---------------------------------------------------------------
View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post  
KJF wrote:
The simple statement in the Gazette, says it ALL!


I agree, Keith.

They do not see it that way, oddly. Denis Brennan has dredged up a defunct rule to say my understanding is wrong.

I have replied to explain why he is misguided in his interpretation.

Here is the Gazette entry and the subsequent exchange of letters:




That entry is crystal clear ... unless, of course, you're a civil servant hell bent of denying PJMers the right to wear their medal:






Having read Mr Brennan's letter, and in the context of his scandalous Commonwealth Day 'full statement' (it is any thing but), I replied as follows:










Please note: I am not setting myself up as the arbiter on what others should or should not do. Each person must make up their own minds, but I am quite content with my understanding and, in the context of their track record of prejudiced myths and legend, there is little they can say or do now to persuade me otherwise.


I remain loyal to The Queen and will abide by her known decrees. Until the Gazette Notice is rescinded or amended by Her I shall wear my PJM with honour. I am not going to let a handful of civil servants dictate to me that I should do otherwise.

Thank you for your support. It is that, above all, that has served to defeat this squalid act of out-dated and misplaced imperialism by a privileged group of unelected civil servants who were not prepared to take any notice of the views of the majority of our elected representatives or of the will of the people of this country.


_________________
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 Reply to Mr Brennan. 
Barry, had same letter word for word. Here is my reply to Mr Brennan.


Dear Mr Brennan, (Secretary of the HD committee)

HD COMMITTEE FINAL DECISION ON THE PINGAT JASA MALAYSIA

Thank you for your unofficial prompt reply (enclosed) to my email (below) which arrived 22/3/07.

I notice your letter is unofficial as it has no reference number. Why is this?

I know in your job you wear many hats including the one of Cermonial Officer, I sent my post to you as (Secretary of the HD committee)

You state that my reading and interpretation of the 1968 London Gazette was incorrect, and you enclose another quote (Section A paragraph 14) as produced in 1969 to prove your case.

Why if such a statement was important was it not placed in the public domain namely: 3RD MAY 1968 5057 London Gazette, and why is it contradicted here in MOD medal wearing rules: 2006DIN10-002 dated Jan 06 1.

Wearing of medals after leaving the Service

21. On leaving the Service personnel cease to be bound by these instructions but they are expected to conform to the general instructions published in the London Gazette ............ The wearing of unauthorised awards is a grave discourtesy to Her Majesty The Queen. http://www.arrse.co.uk/cpgn2/Forums/viewtopic/t=35737.html

The AUTHORISED PJM medal was awarded to me for my service to the Malaysian Crown not the British Crown, furthermore I was not in service to the British crown when it was awarded in 2006. The statement in the THE LONDON GAZETTE, 3RD MAY 1968 5057 has given me and my fellow veteran recipients official authority from The Queen to receive and wear the PJM medal.

It is obvious that The Queen had no need to give permission to wear the PJM medal in the 31 January 2006 Ministerial Statement because Her Majesty had already given permission back in 1968. The false non wearing clause was inserted by meanspirited civil servants after the document had been signed by The Queen.

The six page Pingat Jasa Malaysia - Update March 2007 is another fudge not worth the paper it is written on. It is time this jingoistic doublespeak language from our emperial past is challenged in 2007. So much for great speeches by present members of HMG at the Fabian Society about promoting egalitarianism. The cabinet double speak used by you and others civil servants at Whitehall want us all to go back to feudalism and the reign of 15th century Tudor Queen Elizabeth 1. It has been said that when Sir Nicholas Clifford came home with a foreign decoration bestowed upon him in France, The Queen cursed and raved at him, telling him, "My dogs only wear my collars."

Mr Brennan neither I nor my colleagues are dogs, and this nonsense that we can wear the PJM medal anyway because the rule is not policed has to be challenged. A rule, regulation or law passed by HMG that cannot be enforced is Irish baloney.

Malay Borneo Veteran
http://www.fight4thepjm.org



Last edited by lo_rre on Tue Mar 27, 2007 2:42 pm; edited 1 time in total
View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post  
That is one letter that there is no 'get out clause' attached to it, I wonder how they are going to try to fudge the issue again? They no doubt will try some trumped up rule somewhere hidden in their medieval retrieval system.

Rolling Eyes


_________________
--------------------------------------------------------------
HD Committee: Amateurs in a Professional World
---------------------------------------------------------------
View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post  
Barry....... I think that all of us expected the suits to try and hide behind their eloquence and obfuscation but I believe that we have the right and should exercise it. The HD committee are trying to protect their pensions and knighthoods at our expence.... how arrogant can they be to slur the Queen and to hide behind the sovereign. It seems to me that none of our letters and petitions even got past the outer fringes of the palace, and how convenient that the Queens private secretary is also part of the HD committee. Where do we go from here, to the floor of the HofP? Yes it would be easy to say
we can wear the PJM, and get on with our lives but it grieves me to think that that bunch will still be able to upset and intimidate those that may follow us. Just to accept that we have won with no official acknowledgment seems a very hollow victory indeed.
LET ALL OF US MAKE THE HD COMMITTEE EAT THEIR WORDS BEFORE WE END THE FIGHT!!


Roger Spencer
Costa Calida
SPAIN

View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Reply with quote
Post Up to their armpits? 
I was always told, when iI was n the RAF, that if I was in the poo, to stop digging.

Unfortunately, none of these suits seem to have served HM The Queen in any of the Armed Forces. And, if they have, they have forgptten this important lesson.

Can you believe it - they're still digging.

And, we all know what the result of that action is, don't we?


_________________
Merdeka, Merdeka, Merdeka,
from the HD Committee and its decision.
View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post  
All Senior Civil Servants rely on junior’s to carry out research on their behalf.
Well in my opinion some junior somewhere has their hands between their legs hanging on to their pension for dear life.

When over these past weeks you have read the amount of Government papers I and others have going back to the 1850’s I am convinced that I can wear my PJM and now will.

I now know there are two things that can make you go blind, reading Government papers is one, doing the second is how Civil Servants got their nickname.

I thank you all for the support you have given and I know if need be will continue to give.
I thank you.
Paul.

View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post  
WHAT AN AMAZINGLY QUICK RESPONSE!

View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post  
roger spencer wrote:
Yes it would be easy to say we can wear the PJM, and get on with our lives but it grieves me to think that that bunch will still be able to upset and intimidate those that may follow us. Just to accept that we have won with no official acknowledgment seems a very hollow victory indeed.


Roger, It's not over.

First, remember that we have already won a review of what these people are up to. A written commitment by the Conservative Party! Now ... what could be more copper-bottomed than that!! And they will review the PJM alongside their revised rules. The result is that PJMers will receive formal confirmation of their right to wear their medal because those in the Shadow team making the commitment have already called for the medal to be worn. The days are numbered of of privileged amateurs mis-managing an out-dated 'system' that is more screwed up than my granny's ball of wool.

In my opinion Mr Brennan has made several dodgy decisions recently. One was to send his six-page 'full statement' to the Scottish Parliament and to MPs making out it was an even-handed brief. We intend showing that that document misrepresents our case by omitting essential information that MPs and MSPs need to make a judgement on our Petition and our case generally.

ro5=6372 wrote:
WHAT AN AMAZINGLY QUICK RESPONSE!


Yerrrrs, Pete I have been waiting 8 months for some responses - including 4 months for an initial ack of a FoI Act request ... the requests that were made the day before Chris Edge mysteriously 'retired' as Honours Secretary.


_________________
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: Reply to Mr Brennan. 
lo_rre wrote:
Barry, had same letter word for word. Here is my reply to Mr Brennan.


Well said, lo_rre.

Theses people have treated us with contempt. And have shown contempt for Malaysia and Malaysians.

They actually called the medal and what ir represented sub-standard!

I am going to publish pages from their files going back many years. It's the same old story of privileged imperialism.

Did you know that when the Malaysians offered a medal to the men in the 1960's Borneo campaign, it was rejected and an alternative suggestion was put up by the suits that perhaps it would be much better if the force commander should get a medal instead!

That is what we are up against. A medal for the men? No chance - they are ... err ... men. From Malaysia? No chance ... it's an ex-colony, begad!

Give a gong to the Honours Secretaryfor just doing his job? Of course ... make it an OBE, why don'tcha!

Barry

PS I told one army officer of General rank who was horrified that the civil servants should even think of taking a medal from the men to give to one officer. But these uncivil civil servants just can't help themsleves. They have to try and ingratiate temselves - but they failed and now we see them for what they are.


_________________
BarryF, who fought for the Right to Wear the Pingat Jasa Malaysia
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:
Reply to topic Page 6 of 17
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 5, 6, 7 ... 15, 16, 17  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