![Reply to topic](templates/ca_aphrodite_green/images/lang_english/post_reply.gif) |
Page 1 of 1
|
Author |
Message |
admin
Site Admin
Joined: 11 Feb 2006
Posts: 98
|
![Post Post](templates/ca_aphrodite_green/images/icon_post.gif) The ORBAT of the Fight4thePJM Association
Following the London Presentations there has been much discussion on the Forum regarding the ongoing fight and the funding thereof - and many offers to add to a fighting fund.
It is very humbling to have such support from all over the world.
We feel that this is an opportune moment to talk about The Fight4thePJM Association.
The Fight4thePJM was inaugurated on the 31st January 2006. Many of us had fought for a year to prevent the PJM being rejected out of hand and to have it approved for acceptance and wear. At no time did we ever consider a keepsake as an acceptable answer. The day the keepsake Ministerial Statement was promulgated three things happened:
• A group of key supporters agreed to continue the fight for the right to wear the PJM.
• An association of those people created a web site called Fight4thePJM.
• 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).
And so the Fight4thePJM Association was born:
• Our aims: To promote the campaign to win the right for British citizens to wear their medal.
• Our Logo: The Fight4thePJM Lapel Badge
• Our Motto: “Pingat Kami - Hak Kami” - “Our medal - Our Right”
We have a fully financed budget. We are determined that membership of this Association will not cost a veteran or any supporter any money - the mean-spirited recommendation is costing them enough already. There are no fees and no subs. We just ask for your support.
Membership: In addition to the 8 who form the nucleus of this campaign, everyone who has registered on the forum will be automatically an Associate Member - no fees, no subs, no responsibilities.
Your Team: Our Chairman is John ‘Jock’ Fenton. Our Press Officer is Gerald Law. Then there is the supporting cast of Andy Nicoll, Paul Alders, Hamish Waters, John Cooper, John Feltham, and Barry Fleming.
Most importantly, there is you. Those who support the fight for the right to wear the Pingat Jasa Malaysia. Two of our team were present at the first British PJM Presentations. In our now halting Malay we were able to exchange a few memories and a few words of ‘thanks’. We now know, first hand, how the Malaysians feel about our right to wear the PJM - they simply cannot understand how civil servants are allowed to determine our rights arising from our selfless (their word) service resulting in us not being allowed to wear their medal while the Aussies and Kiwis do, with honour, and with the support of us Brits.
Over 40,000 visits to our web site. Over 1,000 Members of The Fight4thePJM. From four Continents. Two of the twelve living VCs support us (as we are told does a third but he has been as yet unable to tell us in writing - that would make two VC holders who are eligible for the PJM who support us) as do Field Marshals, Generals, and through all the ranks of servicemen and women, and civilians.
The Fight4thePJM Association has established a full-time office with three ladies willing to give up their time to ensure we do not fail - three Honorary Members. We have representatives North America, Australasia, Asia, and Europe.
So … onward. We have right on our side. We have you on our side. We have the means. We shall never give up.
From all of us at The Fight4thePJM Association HQ
|
Sat Jul 22, 2006 9:37 am |
|
![](templates/ca_aphrodite_green/images/spacer.gif) |
f Robertson
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 1
|
![Post Post](templates/ca_aphrodite_green/images/icon_post.gif) Re: The ORBAT of the Fight4thePJM Association
admin wrote:
• 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).
Hi, Is there any specific reason for the three years of funding or is it just an ad hoc period of tiem?
I do not intend any deep meaning here, but I am just interested.
Keep up the good work. Don't let those bastards get you down. When the call for funds is made, count me in!
Frank.
|
Mon Jul 24, 2006 7:44 pm |
|
![](templates/ca_aphrodite_green/images/spacer.gif) |
BarryF
Joined: 11 Feb 2006
Posts: 2721
Location: Berkshire, United Kingdom
|
![Post Post](templates/ca_aphrodite_green/images/icon_post.gif) Re: The ORBAT of the Fight4thePJM Association
f Robertson wrote:Hi, Is there any specific reason for the three years of funding or is it just an ad hoc period of tiem?.
Hi Frank,
In about three years time we shall have an election in this country - and perhaps a change of political persuasion. Irrespective of the party in power, we wish to ensure that if the discredited recommendation is still in place at that time, thus perpetuating the twin myths dreamt up to try and justify both it and the discrimination arising therefrom, this campaign will be strong and healthy and ready to contribute to an enquiry into, amongst other things:
(a) the methodology employed by civil servants in the PJM case including the origins and legitimacy of any rules that have been employed, how they applied any documented rules, and whether they applied them equitably and without their own subjective intervention, and
(b) whether civil servants have wielded inappropriate power (one has told us they run the country not the politicians) and
(c) whether the cost to the country of this recommendation is in keeping with any benefits - at least two senior civil servants and many others have spent most of their time trying to defend the indefensible, an action that we contend has nothing to gain for this country.
We understand that such an enquiry is a real possibility, particularly in the context of Tony Blair's statement that he felt civil servants have over recent years imposed too much inappropriate influence over matters that were outside their remit and have interfered in matters that should be more properly dealt with by politicians.
There is a another reason. We believe that the recommendation has led to discrimination as between British citizens. We wish to ensure that we have sufficient funding to rigorously examine that contention in the public domain.
But let's hope that common sense prevails. It's clear that we have right on our side when a member of the MoD, referring to the two reason the PJM was turned into a keepsake, says that the double medal issues is no longer an issue and the 5-year rule 'is written in folklore'!
All the best,
Barry
_________________ BarryF, who fought for the Right to Wear the Pingat Jasa Malaysia
|
Tue Jul 25, 2006 3:49 pm |
|
![](templates/ca_aphrodite_green/images/spacer.gif) |
BarryF
Joined: 11 Feb 2006
Posts: 2721
Location: Berkshire, United Kingdom
|
![Post Post](templates/ca_aphrodite_green/images/icon_post.gif) Re: The ORBAT of the Fight4thePJM Association
PS It's not all down to the civil servants. If push comes to shove, and we have to go for an appeal or enquiry, we shall be asking:
1) whether the Malaysians did offer the PJM to the British at the same time as the rest of the Commonwealth (in late 2004), and
2) whether Baroness Symonds allegedly misled the Lords (in January 2005) when she said that no request had been received.
We are sure there is a simple explanation for this apparent inconsistency - but we'd like to know what it is. Why? Because we need to be reassured that politicians are playing a straight bat because when they don't, it is we taxpayers who invariably pick up the tab. In particular, we don't get to wear the PJM on entirely spurious and misleading grounds, and HMG spends a lot of the country's money (your taxes!) trying to prop up not only an inconsistency in Parliament but also a dodgy and mean-spirited recommendation that doesn't stand close scrutiny ... but does touch on the lives of ordinary men and women.
Barry
_________________ BarryF, who fought for the Right to Wear the Pingat Jasa Malaysia
|
Tue Jul 25, 2006 4:18 pm |
|
![](templates/ca_aphrodite_green/images/spacer.gif) |
John Feltham
Joined: 12 Feb 2006
Posts: 764
Location: Townsville, North Queensland
|
![Post Post](templates/ca_aphrodite_green/images/icon_post.gif) Re: The ORBAT of the Fight4thePJM Association
BarryF wrote: If push comes to shove, and we have to go for an appeal or enquiry, we shall be asking:
1) whether the Malaysians did offer the PJM to the British at the same time as the rest of the Commonwealth (in late 2004), and
2) whether Baroness Symonds allegedly misled the Lords (in January 2005) when she said that no request had been received.
The answer to the first question is - Yes, the offer was made at the same time to all Commonwealth Countries.
The answer to the second is again yes.
This information comes from a creditable source in Malaysia. It is apparently, no secret there.
So, are you surprised?
_________________ Merdeka, Merdeka, Merdeka,
from the HD Committee and its decision.
|
Tue Jul 25, 2006 4:41 pm |
|
![](templates/ca_aphrodite_green/images/spacer.gif) |
bob_bryant
Joined: 17 Feb 2006
Posts: 82
|
To deliberately mislead the house of commons is seriousley frowned upon.
Does the same apply to the lords and more importantly was this deliberate?
Any ideas!
Bob Bryant
|
Tue Jul 25, 2006 4:53 pm |
|
![](templates/ca_aphrodite_green/images/spacer.gif) |
jireland
Joined: 20 Apr 2006
Posts: 566
Location: Wiltshire
|
Barry, if there is a prima facie case here of Parliament being misled then you should put all the known facts together and put it to an MP that would carry this forward. It is a serious offence to mislead the house and the Lords is no different in that respect. I am sure that if you spoke to Ian Ramsey tomorrow at his office (10 to 5) on 01672 512675 he would be able to point you in the right direction.
John
Last edited by jireland on Tue Jul 25, 2006 8:54 pm; edited 1 time in total
|
Tue Jul 25, 2006 5:01 pm |
|
![](templates/ca_aphrodite_green/images/spacer.gif) |
BarryF
Joined: 11 Feb 2006
Posts: 2721
Location: Berkshire, United Kingdom
|
bob_bryant wrote:To deliberately mislead the house of commons is seriousley frowned upon.
Does the same apply to the lords
Bob,
Yes it does. Baroness Symons provided her written answer in her capacity as a Foreign Office Minister - a member of the Government.
As for whether it was deliberate, Ministers have plenty of time to prepare a written answer (no need to think on your feet - and no excuse) ... one can only speculate ...
Barry
_________________ BarryF, who fought for the Right to Wear the Pingat Jasa Malaysia
|
Tue Jul 25, 2006 5:06 pm |
|
![](templates/ca_aphrodite_green/images/spacer.gif) |
BarryF
Joined: 11 Feb 2006
Posts: 2721
Location: Berkshire, United Kingdom
|
jireland wrote:Barry, if there is a prima facie case here of Parliament being misled then you should put all the known facts together and put it to an MP that would carry this forward. It is a serious offence to mislead the house and the Lords is no different in that respect.
John, We shall do that. It is a question of time now. Hopefully, by the time we have the time to gather all the facts, this matter wil be resolved.
But if the Queen is told to reject both our Petition and our appeal against the recommendation set out in the Rebuttal, then we shall deal with this matter and much else.
We stand by all we say in both the Petition and the Rebuttal (in fact we have even more evidence available to us since drafting those two documents). Whatever 'they' may rebut, my advisers have told me that there is more than sufficient in our case to warrant a review and a reversal.
Barry
_________________ BarryF, who fought for the Right to Wear the Pingat Jasa Malaysia
|
Wed Jul 26, 2006 7:08 am |
|
![](templates/ca_aphrodite_green/images/spacer.gif) |
BarryF
Joined: 11 Feb 2006
Posts: 2721
Location: Berkshire, United Kingdom
|
George F wrote:Lord Chadlington (Tory spokeperson on Foreign affairs in the HOL) is the one who may have the answer. Why did he ask Baroness Synoms ( labour spokeperson on Foreign affairs in the HOL) the question regards the PJM medal issue in the HOL's if he had no knowledge HMG had been approached by the Malaysian Government prior to 11 January 2005?
Indeedy, George.
And I have a note somewhere amongst my 2,500+ archived documents that, in answer to my question "Why was the UK offered the PJM months after the rest of the Commonwealth" there is an answer to the effect that the offer was made simulataneously to all Commonwealth countries.
Barry
_________________ BarryF, who fought for the Right to Wear the Pingat Jasa Malaysia
|
Wed Jul 26, 2006 7:11 am |
|
![](templates/ca_aphrodite_green/images/spacer.gif) |
|
The time now is Sun Sep 01, 2024 4:04 am | All times are GMT
|
Page 1 of 1
|
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
|
|
|