Herewith a letter sent today on your behalf, to the new Prime Minister, Gordon Brown MP...

In .pdf
http://www.fight4thepjm.org/Correspondence/Jock_to_Brown_Rev_2_Palatino_UK_letter_160707.pdf









_________________
...................'Jock'
Paroi...Rasah...Batu Signals Troop.

Spot on Jock

John


_________________
Pingat Kami - Hak Kami
651 Signal Troop,
Semengo Camp,
Kuching.

. So very well put Jock.As always


_________________
Regards Aye.Jon Windust

Jock,

"on your behalf.......".

My behalf says thank you!

Well done,

David

Excellent stuff, Jock. Thanks.

MB


_________________
Mike Barton

Jock,Many thanks on behalf of all those PJMrs who do not have the access to computers,and myself of course.


_________________
Hold the line steady boys.

Well done Gord, an excellent letter "Straight and to the Point" No punches pulled.
Regards
Terry....

To you Jock and all the committee "THANK YOU" once again for your time and commitment to the PJM cause.

Rgds Ray

In acknowlegement of my July 16th letter to the Prime Minister:

http://www.fight4thepjm.org/Correspondence/Jock_to_Brown_Rev_2_Palatino_UK_letter_160707.pdf

...I too have received an identical reply from Marion Moore pp: the PM (as recently received by so many others), but with one additional sentence...which reads


"I can assure you that your comments have been carefully noted"

I'm not sure if there is any weighty significance to this addition, which fails to satisfy my stated requests to the PM....And I'm not impressed that my comments are 'carefully noted'...I'm only interested in their being swiftly and carefully acted upon....regardless, ambiguous language will not deter me from continuing to campaign until I can witness a satisfactory result.


_________________
...................'Jock'
Paroi...Rasah...Batu Signals Troop.

One of our supporters (who will remain nameless) received the first letter (below) from Marion Moore at 10 Downing Street on 28th. August, 2007. It will be noted that she states that she is writing on behalf of the Prime Minister and goes on to make a statement, presumably still on behalf of the Prime Minister that quote ‘You may like to know that the statement in the Gazette of 3 May 1968 was clarified in 1969 by a regulation….’unquote

Surely one would expect that someone writing on behalf of the Prime Minister who says that a Royal Declaration by Her Majesty the Queen in a London Gazette entry has been clarified by a 1969 regulation could, you would expect, be able to say what actual regulation this was and would be reasonably expected to clarify such a statement made on behalf of the highest public office in our country, but we seem not to be dealing with reasonable people, even at 10 Downing Street.

Well, read the reply I received from Marion Moore on 30th. November, 2007 (below). She ignored the first letter I sent to her and I was compelled to send a second requesting the information under the FOI Act.

Her excuse for not answering my first letter is that she had to search for the information I wanted. She made the statement about the clarification of the London Gazette yet she had to take a long time to search for this information.

Also, she admits that she has stated the LG was clarified by a 1969 regulation but she cannot explain where she obtained this information or what regulation she was actually referring to and then handed over my enquiry to Eleri Pengelly at the Cabinet Office who ‘may be able to help’.

We all know just what help or information the Cabinet Office would give – manipulation of the rules, alteration of the rules, and the usual obfuscation, so I cancelled my FOI Act request and told the Cabinet Office – no thank you!

This proves that Marion Moore has no idea what she is talking about and to do so on behalf of the Prime Minister is sheer impudence both to British veterans and to our Prime Minister.

For your information, Marion, if you read this, there is no Regulation which clarifies the LG Royal Declaration of 1968, although there are many parts of the regulations of 1969 which various civil servants have ignored, changed, and altered to suit their deceit and obfuscation of the honourable Pingat Jasa Malaysia.


I wonder if Gurden Broon would like to know just what rubbish is being sent out of his office in his name.

"Curiouser and curiouser!"...said Alice.... (who was so surprised that for the moment she quite forgot to speak good English)...."

...then, a little later in that story, Alice is quoted as saying "Oh' dear! What nonsense I'm talking!"

Such letters as these, McD, cause me to wonder if the 'rules' and 'clarifications' that Ms. Moore et al are so cooperatively following were also penned by author Lewis Carroll?


_________________
...................'Jock'
Paroi...Rasah...Batu Signals Troop.

Jock and McD

SAYS IT ALL, DUNNIT?

The Prime Minister,the p/t Defence Minister and the Veterans Minister, as well as David Milliband (and their Civil Service Captors) would do well to read, digest and fully understand the implications of Dr Kim Howell's wise words:

"I have been told that the committee does not plan to reconsider the matter...................The HD Committee's plans will ultimately be determined by the decision of Parliament". And................

(Churchill's Words quoted).."Those are wise words, but they were designed not just to make the point that we must take great care in awarding medals and honours, which we do, but to ensure that there must be flexibilty and sensitivity as events unfold and circumstances and perceptions change. That is why I shall try to communiscate to my colleagues in the Government and to the HD Committee that flexibility is needed in this case. I hope that they will take the testimonies that we have heard this morning and my words seriously".

*My emphasis



Last edited by GLOman on Sun Dec 16, 2007 5:23 pm; edited 1 time in total

GLOman wrote:

Jock and McD

SAYS IT ALL, DUNNIT?

Yup, Marion Moore aka 'Alice in Numptyland'.

Perhaps my mind has become confused by reading the 'gobbledygook' contained in that letter, but it says 'the Gazette of 3 May 1968 was clarified in 1969 by a regulation......', then goes on to say 'those regulations do not relate to awards of campaign or commemorative war medals'. Surely therefore, as the PJM is awarded for their part in the Malaysian Emergency and Confrontation, the 1969 Regulations do NOT apply to the PJM?

You've made a good point there, Fred. As McD pointed out, although MM quoted a 1969 regulation, she gave no indicaton of what date, reference or the title of of the 1969 regulation; I suspect she was reeling off the contents of the conspirators crib sheet, repeating things which she, herself could not substantiate (probably obtained from down the corridor from Cabinet Office Ceremonial) and the committed the Prime Minister to an unverified answer - really bad staff work; received wisdom or received idiocy?

And right again Fred. The often quoted 1969, superseded regulations, modified by the 2005 regulations to preclude the PJM from being worn of which we are all aware, - the Part A bit which never did apply to the PJM, but never (lying by omission) quoting Part B which covered the wearing of Awards, Decorations and Medals after leaving the service which did, and was, as far as I know never brought out for an airing!

There is litte doubt that if McD's letter had been answered by the Cabinet Office, by a Deputy, of course, as McD
said, or implied, it would undoubtedly have been the same old discredited story. I think, with MM, that this is a case of 'knickers in a twist".