Armed Forces Day

Click image to visit the website

....

Bravery and banners.

Several times over the last few years Mrs R has mumbled to her family that the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan are seen as something completely different by some sections of the British and international community. That idea has been brought home, again, when a bunch of Muslims decided to shout and wave banners at soldiers of The Royal Anglian Regiment during their homecoming march in Barking - that's in Essex, England, by the way.

These Muslims shouted things such as

'British troops go to hell'

and

'murderers, murderers, murderers'

They also resorted to using Godwin's Law by mentioning Hitler and one protester, safe behind his Police protectors, apparently shouted:

'This is a protest against parading in a Muslim area. We love death the way you love life.'

Errm!

As Mrs R has already said, Barking is in Essex, England. Let's quickly grab a bit of history from ever-reliable Wikipedia.

The manor of Barking was the site of Barking Abbey, a nunnery founded in 666 by Eorcenwald, bishop of London, destroyed by the Danes and reconstructed about a hundred years later in 970 by King Edgar. At the Dissolution of the Monasteries in 1536, Barking Abbey was demolished: the parish church, St Margaret's stands upon its site, where some walling and foundations are all that otherwise remain. The Norman church of St Margaret was where Captain James Cook married Elizabeth Batts of Shadwell in 1762.

Sounds to Mrs R as if it's a typically British sort of place, with ancient roots and quite a bit of Christian heritage too.

So, how come these relative newcomers to Britain reckon it's a Muslim town area? - Actually, Mrs R can't answer that, she doesn't recall visiting Barking and has only the Wikipedia article and other stuff on the internet to refer to and so, apart from deciding that they must think it's a 'Muslim town' because they're Muslims and happen to live there, she'll move on.

Quite a few bloggers are a bit miffed by the way this incident has been reported, as are one or two of the commenters in the Mail - but she won't say much about that either, except to simply show what's been written (my bold):-

The [40] Muslim protesters chanted ... as they had an uneasy stand-off against a [100-strong] mob, some waving St George's Crosses, Union flags and an English Defence League flag.

It would seem that the want-to-get-some-publicity protesters belong to a little group calling themselves 'Muslims against the Crusade'. Mrs R has taken a look at their website (No, you don't get a link, you'll have to find it for yourself). She noticed that the group doesn't seem to come from Barking, and she thought some of the things written on the site were quite inflammatory, with death threats and so on. It also had pictures of people in long robes attacking somebody who looked remarkably like a mediaeval Knight, and who was carrying a shield emblazoned with the Cross of St George - not the Union Flag. Historical stuff, stuff that happened centuries ago. There were winners and losers in those old battles, same as in all battles. It's history. Next!

Okay, umm, so what's next?

Just a few thoughts, and Mrs R's going to remind these brave, shouty, placard-waving, protesters what's going on in Afghanistan - where the Royal Anglians had been.

First of all she'll remind these 'protesters' that 15 men of the Royal Anglian Regiment, their ages ranging from 19 to 31 years, have lost their lives in Afghanistan since 2002. Many more Royal Anglians have been wounded, some suffering life-changing injuries.

Being incredibly simplistic, and probably wrong, it seems there are groups of 'my Islam is better than your Islam' who have for very many years been trying to make other groups of Afghan Muslims do as they're told. And they're quite nasty and brutal about it too, including stoning women to death for looking at a man and executing little children if they think they're spying for the other chaps.

Quite a lot of people left Afghanistan some years ago, on arriving in the 'West' whether it was Australia or USA they told terrible tales of oppression and brutality and asked their new countries to help those they'd left behind, so America and a few military chums from other countries, including Britain, decided to go riding to the rescue of those they thought were the least bad good guys. The idea was, they said, to get these arguing Muslims to stop fighting each other - to stop arguing, and be a bit more friendly towards each other. The idea was to try to get these different groups to 'live and let live' - something that's quite common outside the world of Islam, where lots of religious groups with all sorts of different ideas rub shoulders and tolerate get along with each other, mostly by minding their own business.

Trouble is that this idea of 'live and let live' seems to be seriously against the old values of some people who've now made their homes in Britain. Some of these don't like the idea of compromise and 'getting along', they want to be in charge and tell everybody else how to live their lives - and that's probably why these chaps were waving their placards and banners in Barking, and why they've got plans to wave them in other British (not only English) towns too. What these mostly-young men don't seem to have sussed out is that they're using a loud-mouthed argument that's a bit alien and unpleasant to many modern Brits, and they don't seem to understand that some people think they're a bit old-fashioned and silly - not least because in the western, non-Islamic, world women tend to have equal rights to western men these days, and don't like to be told what to do, what to wear and which deity to worship. Others think these noisy young men and their friends are almost, literally, biting the hand that feeds them and so they should go and live somewhere else, and take their protests with them and see what happens to them in a different country.

Those protesters are protesting in Britain because they can - that's all.

They're 'exercising their Freedom of Speech' too. It's one of those Human Rights, enshrined in International Law, but is something that's denied to many in Afghanistan by, possibly, the groups of Muslims these chaps claim to support. If so, it's a bit hypocritical, don't you think?

Mrs Rigby thinks there are other things these chaps could do, but they probably won't because she thinks they're cowards. By waving placards and name-calling they're doing exactly the same as many adolescents - making an easy point that makes some grown-ups a bit uncomfortable. After their little vociferous protest they walk, maybe get on the bus or train, or perhaps even drive their cars to their nice and cosy homes, where they'll be safe and sound - and then they can watch themselves on the television and pat themselves on the back for making their point so brilliantly. This is, naturally, the same sort of thing their peers in Afghanistan do, so much better than dodging bullets and not stepping on land mines whilst trying to grow their food.

Mrs R would like to tell these chaps of the Rigby's friends and neighbours youngsters - young people we've seen grow from almost nothing to near adulthood - who are planning to join the British Army, Navy or Air Force. She knows increasing maturity and increasing realism might change their minds, or their minds might be changed by a military assessment panel. Only time will tell.

Our young people are also also doing this 'because they can', because they're free to choose how to live their lives. Nobody's telling them to fight a war because of their religion, or lack of it. Nobody's telling them to go into the forces because 'it's the right thing to do' they're doing it because, for them, it's the right career choice - nothing more. On their way through their lives these young Brits have already made lifestyle choices. They've never been in too much trouble, have had part-time Saturday jobs and still managed to pass lots of exams and are now making near-adult decisions about what they will do with the rest of their lives - and, even if they don't end up in the forces, they don't plan to spend any part of the rest of their lives shouting, or waving threatening placards, at unarmed troops on the safe streets of Britain.

Frankly, Mrs R knows which of these groups of young men she'd trust if she was in trouble, or if there were a crisis - and it isn't the ones who, tucked safely behind a load of hi-vis jacketed British Bobbies, waved their banners and chanted their slogans whilst two hundred well-disciplined soldiers marched through the streets of Barking, Essex, England.

....

Military helicopters and headsets.

The father of the most senior British officer to be killed in Afghanistan spoke yesterday of his pride that his son's death had led to the armed forces being better equipped.

Lieutenant Colonel Rupert Thorneloe, who commanded 1,000 Welsh Guards, was killed by a Taliban roadside bomb after volunteering to take the most dangerous position in an armoured vehicle to inspire his troops.

An inquest yesterday heard that only three weeks earlier the 39-year- old wrote a damning memo on the lack of helicopter support in Helmand.

He complained bitterly in the email to his superiors that helicopter support for troops was 'very clearly not fit for purpose' and meant that troops had to be moved by road rather than by air, exposing them to the threat of improvised explosive devices (IEDs).

Yesterday Trooper Hammond's parents said: 'We were devastated by Josh's death and as a family his loss has left a gaping hole in our lives.

'But we are also very proud, not only of what he achieved but of the way he chose to live his life.'

All above quoted from the Mail

Poster from here

Earlier this week another inquest was told that three soldiers would not have died as a result of American 'friendly fire' if a radio operator had been supplied with a headset.

....

Labour to axe Defence?

The Daily Telegraph outlines what is contained within each party's manifesto. Mrs Rigby cast an eye over each one and particularly noted what each party says about Defence.

One of the things she was hoping to see was a pay rise, because she was quite shocked the other day to hear that young soldiers earn £6k less than their civilian equivalents in the Police and Fire Service.

Here are the bare bones of the manifestos from the Telegraph.

The Liberal Democrats say this about Defence

Liberal Democrats would "make the welfare of the men and women of our armed forces a priority."

Key defence policies are:
* Cancelling Eurofighter Tranche 3b
* Holding an immediate Strategic Security and Defence Review
* Ruling out the like-for-like replacement of Trident nuclear weapons system - planning to save £100bn
* Giving a pay rise to the lower ranks to bring them in link with other emergency services
* Doubling the rate of modernisation of forces' family homes
* Reducing the numbers of MoD staff and top brass officers
* Military action against Iran ruled out categorically

The Conservatives say

... their top defence priority will be to "repair the broken Military Covenant"

Specific defence policies include:
* Doubling the operational bonus for troops serving in Afghanistan
* Ensuring that Forces' families and veterans are taken care of
* Tracking and monitoring veterans' mental health after they leave the Armed Forces
* Launching a Strategic Defence Review
* Maximising efficiency in the Ministry of Defence
* Streamlining the procurement process

The SNP says this about Defence and International Affairs. They will

*Press the Government to spend 0.7 per cent of Britain’s national wealth on international aid.
*Call for armed forces personnel recruited in Scotland to be based as close to home as possible.
*A review of the UK’s military strategy and approach in Afghanistan.
*Scrap Britain’s current Trident nuclear submarines and plans for their replacement.
*Set up a Scottish Centre for Reconciliation and Conflict Resolution to promote peaceful alternatives to armed conflict.

The Labour Party has sub headings for

*Economy
*Health
*Education
*Tax
*Environment
*Transport
*Immigration
*Business
*Foreign
*Constitutional reform
*Police
*Council Tax
*Northern Rock
*Technology

There is something about 'terrorism' within the 'Foreign' section - but no section entitled 'Defence'.

Mr Brown and Harriet Harman/Dromey have, if you recall, accused other parties of intending to axe services that aren't specifically mentioned within their manifestos - they have talked about bus passes, dental care, eye tests, cold weather payments and so on.

Mrs Rigby uses their own reasoning and, because there is no Defence Policy within the Labour Party's manifesto (as published in the Telegraph) she must assume that, if they win the coming election, they will axe the military and we will no longer have an Army, Navy or Air Force.

Could this be a tobacco-pipe-smoke moment?

What do you think?

Is this omission an editorial error by the Telegraph, or does Labour truly not have a Defence manifesto?

....

Reasons not to vote Labour #8 (military)

Found over at Cold Steel Rain's place



By the way, Cold Steel Rain is doing a parachute jump for Combat Stress

Combat Stress is the leading charity specialising in the care of British Veterans who have been profoundly traumatised by harrowing experiences during their Service career

There's a button in the sidebar to make donating really easy.

....

Train cuts for Generals.

Kevan Jones, a junior defence minister, said the decision, “is not intended to humiliate anyone. It is about getting value for money”.

Of course it isn't about humiliation Kevan, Mrs Rigby is sure the thought never crossed your mind when you told Generals (***see P.S.) they must use 2nd Class rail travel.

For this cost-cutting, money-saving, financial exercise to be truly worthwhile there must be loads of Generals, there must be many, many, more Generals than MPs (some of whom who buy themselves fripperies out of the public purse) and there must be many more Generals than there are pen-pushers at either the MoD or the Met Office which, as you will remember, is funded by MoD and CAA, and there must be more Generals than there are top civil servants or Police Officers whose chauffeur-driven cars are funded by the taxpayer.

According to this site there are

now 65 generals in the Army, with 43 major-generals, 17 lieutenant-generals and five four-star generals

Mrs Rigby can't confirm those numbers, but she notes this chart which says that, as of 1st January 2010, there were

OF-6 TO OF-10 (NATO equivalent from Brigadier through to Field Marshal and equal ranks in Navy and Air Force)
Army = 120
Navy = 240
Air Force= 120
Total = 490 (total)

Are Kevan Jones and his chums at the MoD trying to say that the solution to Britain's financial woes rests on the shoulders of around 120 individuals from only one branch of the armed forces?

You see, Mrs R also noticed that officers of equivalent rank in the Navy and Air Force do not seem to be expected to make similar economies.(***see P.S.) So - in the same way that UOTC and Army Cadets suffered funding cuts whilst URNU and Sea Cadets (Navy) and UAS and Air Cadets (Air Force) were left unscathed - this is a highly selective ruling.

It's hard to understand why this is happening, and it's hard to understand how it is allowed to happen in these equality driven, equal-opportunity, times - but it is.

It's even harder to understand why the current government continues to expect our soldiers to risk their lives overseas when it so clearly despises the Army. It despises the Army so much that our Prime Minister was willing to lie to both the Chilcot Inquiry and Parliament about levels of funding. It despises them so much that it tried to keep the outcomes of military inquests secret, and it's now trying to humiliate military top brass by making them use 2nd Class rail travel.

The hatred felt by these powerful individuals must go very deep for them to put so much effort into such pettily, vindictive, rulings.

It won't work though.

The Generals didn't get to be Generals by being yes-men or women. They got to be Generals by passing exams and proving themselves worthy of the rank, and, right at the beginning of their military careers, not long after growing out of their short trousers, each and every one of these Generals will have passed through the tough initial training at Sandhurst. If their training and subsequent military service didn't break them, then travelling in a cramped railway carriage isn't likely to either. They'll just smile and start chatting to their fellow passengers - who could even be ex-squaddies - it'll be like water off a duck's back.

None of these Generals will be seeking counselling as a result of their transport hardships - after all, Britain's overcrowded trains are still probably more comfortable than a tank, helicopter or personnel carrier.

And that, you see, is something this government can't understand. It can't understand people who aren't cry-babies. It can't understand people who grin and bear it. It can't understand people who aren't dependent on them, and it can't understand people who follow rules without flinching, even though it might mean they die.

This government, you see, values hurt feelings much more than hurt bodies - and legislates accordingly. It puts more man hours and legislative muscle behind protecting 'us' from the imaginary effects of a single particle of third-hand tobacco smoke than ensuring our soldiers are protected from bullets and bombs.

So, government is going to have to work out yet another wheeze, it's going to have to try another way of attacking the Army and it'll be interesting to see what it will be.

Imagine all those civil servants having meetings and discussing ways to 'break' the Army. That thought should, at least, raise a smile on a damp Sunday in March 2010.

They really haven't a clue, have they?

......................................
***
P.S. @ 20:15 hrs

Times article now says

"admirals, generals and air chief marshals to travel second class to help cut costs.

All armed forces personnel must now sit in standard class on trains and planes, whatever their rank, under a new rule that has provoked anger across the political parties. "

So this policy is not limited to the Army, as previous cost cutting initiatives have been, which meant that this government has decided to try to demean the armed forces as a whole - all of them, all at once.

Good idea!
The one who thought that one up will probably be elevated to the Lords in superfast time - and whoever it is will probably demand their own chauffeur driven car.

....

146 medals

Well done.

Without government medals quotas the list of awards would be longer.

A larger copy of this image is here
Quoting from Defence News

Operational Honours and Awards List: 19 March 2010

AFGHANISTAN

George Cross (GC)
Staff Sergeant Kim Spencer HUGHES, The Royal Logistic Corps
Staff Sergeant Olaf Sean George SCHMID, The Royal Logistic Corps (Killed in action)
(their 'story' here)

Commander of the Order of the British Empire (CBE)
Brigadier David Arthur HOOK, Royal Marines
Colonel Greville Kenneth BIBBY, MBE, late Coldstream Guards

Officer of the Order of the British Empire (OBE)
Lieutenant Colonel Simon James BANTON, The Mercian Regiment
Lieutenant Colonel Charles Simon CALDER, The Royal Anglian Regiment
Lieutenant Colonel Michael Robin James CAMPBELL, The Royal Logistic Corps
Lieutenant Colonel Stephen John CARTWRIGHT, The Royal Regiment of Scotland
Acting Colonel Douglas McKenzie CHALMERS, MBE, The Princess of Wales's Royal Regiment

Member of the Order of the British Empire (MBE)
Staff Sergeant Thomas Edward John BRENNAN, Royal Army Medical Corps
Major Oliver Jerome KINGSBURY, The Parachute Regiment
Major Eldon Nicholas Somervile MILLAR, Corps of Royal Engineers
Major Samuel Joseph PLANT, The Light Dragoons

Bar to Distinguished Service Order (DSO)
Lieutenant Colonel Angus George Costeker FAIR, DSO, The Light Dragoons

Distinguished Service Order (DSO)
Major Giles Richard HARRIS, MBE, Welsh Guards
Brigadier Timothy Buchan RADFORD, OBE, late The Light Infantry
Acting Colonel Robert John THOMSON, MBE, The Rifles

Associate Royal Red Cross Medal (ARRC)
Captain Gail Lesley WHITTLE, Queen Alexandra's Royal Army Nursing Corps

Conspicuous Gallantry Cross (CGC)
Sergeant Alan Gordon DENNIS, The Mercian Regiment
Gunner Steven William GADSBY, The Royal Regiment of Artillery
Sergeant Marc Kevin GILES, The Mercian Regiment
Serjeant Jaime MONCHO, The Rifles
Lance Bombardier Gary PROUT, The Royal Regiment of Artillery
Lance Corporal Kyle Patrick SMITH, The Mercian Regiment

Military Cross (MC)
Warrant Officer Class 2 Mathew Robert TOMLINSON, CGC, Royal Marines
Corporal Craig ADKIN, The Mercian Regiment
Captain Edward Robert BROWN, The Mercian Regiment
Major Jo BUTTERFILL, The Royal Regiment of Fusiliers
Corporal Steven Graham CHILDS, The Rifles
Corporal Richard CLARK, The Royal Regiment of Scotland
Major Neil Darren GRANT, The Mercian Regiment
Lieutenant Tresham Dames Rowley GREGG, The Light Dragoons
Major Karl Christian HICKMAN, The Rifles
Lieutenant William James Archie HIGNETT, The Rifles
Private Alexander Robert KENNEDY, The Mercian Regiment
Corporal Paul Edward MATHER, Army Air Corps
Lieutenant Alexander John PHILLIPS, The Royal Regiment of Scotland
Corporal Christopher Sean REYNOLDS, The Royal Regiment of Scotland
Corporal Craig Richard SHARP, The Royal Regiment of Scotland
Lance Corporal Alexander James SMITH, The Parachute Regiment
Warrant Officer Class 2 Simon Nicholas THOMPSON, The Rifles
Lance Sergeant Matthew Philip TURRALL, Irish Guards

Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC)
Flight Lieutenant Marc Alan HEAL, Royal Air Force

George Medal (GM)
Rifleman Paul Raymond JACOBS, The Rifles
Captain Daniel Marc SHEPHERD, The Royal Logistic Corps (Killed in action)

Queen's Gallantry Medal (QGM)
Warrant Officer Class 2 Peter John BURNEY, The Rifles
Captain Wayne Edward James OWERS, The Royal Logistic Corps
Corporal Carl Peter THOMAS, The Rifles
Lance Corporal David James TIMMINS, The Royal Logistic Corps

Mention in Despatches (MiD)
Acting Sergeant Sean Conor BINNIE, The Royal Regiment of Scotland (Killed in action)
Corporal Samisoni Naisabo BOILA, The Royal Regiment of Scotland
Lieutenant Robert Alexander Macpherson BUCHANAN, The Rifles
Captain Owen Alastair Ralph CANDY, The Royal Regiment of Artillery
Warrant Officer Class 2 Paul David COLVILLE, The Royal Regiment of Scotland
Rifleman Gary CRANE, The Rifles
Lieutenant Mark Alexander CRIPPS, The Rifles
Sergeant Grant Leslie CUTHBERTSON, The Light Dragoons
Warrant Officer Class 2 Mark Andrew DOBBS, The Light Dragoons
Lieutenant Christopher Stuart Nicholas FENTON, Welsh Guards
Lance Corporal Buddhibahadur GURUNG, The Royal Gurkha Rifles
Lieutenant Duncan Simon Whittick HADLAND, The Mercian Regiment
Lieutenant Andrew John HALLIDAY, The Royal Regiment of Scotland
Sergeant Darren Justin HANRAHAN, The Royal Regiment of Fusiliers
Rifleman Kevin HOLT, The Rifles
Captain Howard Robert HOOPER, Corps of Royal Engineers
Corporal Paul INNES, The Royal Regiment of Scotland
Lance Corporal Christopher Paul JAKEMAN, The Rifles
Sergeant Jamie Stuart LAWSON, The Light Dragoons
Lance Corporal Rhodri Wyn LODWICK, Welsh Guards
Sergeant Terence Albert LOWE, The Royal Regiment of Scotland
Sapper James Ewan MCINTOSH, Corps of Royal Engineers
Sergeant Andrew Peter MCNULTY, The Mercian Regiment
Lance Corporal Nigel David MOFFETT, The Light Dragoons (Killed in action)
Private Edwin Goitseone MOTETE, The Royal Logistic Corps
Warrant Officer Class 2 Paul Simon MUCKLE, The Mercian Regiment
Captain Matthew Bromley O'HARE, The Royal Regiment of Fusiliers
Lance Sergeant Michael Ellis PARRY, Welsh Guards
Rifleman Prakash PUN, The Royal Gurkha Rifles
Lance Corporal Tilakkumar RAI, The Royal Gurkha Rifles
Sergeant Gary Richard REYNOLDS, Corps of Royal Engineers
Private Lauren Louise RICHARDS, Royal Army Medical Corps
Corporal Anthony RICHARDSON, The Light Dragoons
Corporal David Joseph ROY, The Royal Regiment of Scotland
Guardsman Lee SKATES, Welsh Guards
Major Alasdair Fortune Lyon STEELE, The Royal Regiment of Scotland
Lance Corporal Matthew Paul TURNER, The Parachute Regiment
Lance Corporal Matthew David VITEL, The Rifles
Major Richard David WALLWORK, The Royal Regiment of Artillery
Rifleman Daniel Christopher WILD, The Rifles (Killed in action)
Flight Lieutenant David James GRINDAL, Royal Air Force
Flight Lieutenant Adrian PARKINSON, Royal Air Force

Queen's Commendation for Bravery (QCB)
Rifleman Edward Kenneth William BENTON, The Rifles
Corporal Leslie John BINNS, The Light Dragoons
Lance Corporal Sally Patricia CLARKE, Royal Army Medical Corps
Rifleman Ricky Dean EDGAR, The Rifles
Rifleman Robert Craig FLANAGAN, The Rifles
Lieutenant Charles James Richard FRASER-SAMPSON, Welsh Guards
Captain Judith Lorna GALLAGHER, The Royal Logistic Corps
Rifleman Liam John HARGREAVES, The Rifles
Fusilier Rory HUGHES, The Royal Regiment of Fusiliers
Corporal Timothy Kenneth JONES, Corps of Royal Engineers
Corporal Ian Paul PASCALL, The Royal Regiment of Fusiliers
Corporal Henry Edward SANDAY, The Rifles
Sapper Matthew Robert WESTON, Corps of Royal Engineers

Queen's Commendation for Valuable Service (QCVS)
Surgeon Commander Sarah Ann STAPLEY, Royal Navy
Acting Captain Michael James BRIGHAM, The Mercian Regiment
Private Charlotte Angharad BUTLER, Royal Army Medical Corps
Lieutenant Aloysius Coleman CONNOLLY, The Royal Gurkha Rifles
Captain James Alexander CORBET BURCHER, Welsh Guards
Captain Mark Robert CRANLEY, Royal Army Medical Corps
Warrant Officer Class 2 Andrew DAVIDSON, Adjutant General's Corps (Royal Military Police)
Major Darren John DENNING, The Rifles
Major Robert Woodd GALLIMORE, Welsh Guards
Captain Mark James HALE, The Rifles
Major Ion Cameron Walter HILL, The Rifles
Colonel Peter Francis MAHONEY, OBE, late Royal Army Medical Corps
Acting Corporal Nathan Derek Leon MURRIN, The Royal Logistic Corps
Major John Edward Keith OLDROYD, The Royal Regiment of Artillery
Corporal Jonathon Simon PRECIOUS, The Parachute Regiment
Major Jeremy Andrew ROSTRON, The Parachute Regiment
Warrant Officer Class 2 Declan Brian SIBLEY, The Rifles
Major Guy Charles Gideon Rees STONE, Welsh Guards
Warrant Officer Class 1 Richard Charles TAYLOR, Corps of Royal Engineers
Rifleman Thomas John THOPPIL KEZAKETHIL, The Rifles
Lieutenant Colonel Rupert Stuart Michael THORNELOE, MBE, Welsh Guards (Killed in action)
Major Stuart Peter WILES, The Light Dragoons
Air Commodore Kenneth Leslie O'DEA, Royal Air Force
...................................................

IRAQ

Commander of the Order of the British Empire (CBE)
Brigadier Thomas Anthony BECKETT, late The Parachute Regiment

Officer of the Order of the British Empire (OBE)
Commander James Robert DEAN, Royal Navy
Colonel Andrew DENNIS, late The Duke of Lancaster's Regiment
Major Simon Peter HAMILTON, Corps of Royal Electrical and Mechanical Engineers

Member of the Order of the British Empire (MBE)
Captain Keith TATE, Intelligence Corps

Queen's Commendation for Valuable Service (QCVS)
Commander Henry Alworth Hamilton MEREWETHER, Royal Navy
Brigadier Rupert Paul STEARNS, Royal Marines
Major Christopher James BELL, OBE, Scots Guards
Captain Nicholas David Guise COWLEY, The Queen's Royal Hussars
Lieutenant Colonel Ludwig Karl FORD, MBE, The Royal Regiment of Artillery
Colonel Ian Alexander RIGDEN, OBE, late The Royal Gurkha Rifles
Lieutenant Colonel Gavin James THOMPSON, The Royal Tank Regiment
Captain Timothy WALVIN, The Royal Logistic Corps
Flight Lieutenant John Gerard Hughes MCFADDEN, Royal Air Force
Mr Richard CARD

REST OF THE WORLD

Companion of the Order of St Michael and St George (CMG)
Colonel Nigel Malcolm Tree STAFFORD, late 9th/12th Royal Lancers

Queen's Commendation for Bravery (QCB)
Petty Officer Richard Griffiths HICKS, Royal Navy
Petty Officer Air Engineering Technician Alan MURPHY, Royal Navy
Leading Seaman Carl THOMAS, Royal Navy

Queen's Commendation for Bravery in the Air (QCBA)
Sergeant Keith Stewart BEST, Royal Air Force

....

Job discrimination.

An employer from Somerset was contacted by Forces Recruitment Services and asked if he would consider taking on ex-soldiers.

His written reply?

Personally, I'd rather recruit ex-drug dealers, convicts and even child molesters rather than consider anybody who has been in the pay of the British Government.

Anybody who has been in the pay of such a military force, and by their silence and complicity has condoned such illegal and immoral actions while accepting a monthly bloodstained pay-packet, certainly won't be considered for employment by us.

The reality for the families of their victims is that there will never be any justice, and there never will be any closure, for the loss of a son, a husband, a child, or a family member who has fallen victim to British Military personnel who are going beyond 'just doing their job'.

Please remove us from your email list.

Regards, Karl.

That's nice and welcoming, isn't it?

Come on Harriet, let's see if all your anti-discrimination laws have teeth.

....

A thankyou from Afghan Heroes

If you'd like to see what those who took part thought of yesterday's 'ride through' or 'ride out' then pop over to the Afghan Heroes blog.

There are two threads running, one about the day and another about wristbands, both contain a lot of comments showing how both residents and participants felt about the day.

Here's a taster

new resident of Wootton Bassett from 2009 – have attended as many re-pats as I am able, so was delighted that such an event held in and around the town yesterday 14th March – walked up to town and spent about 2 hours there watching the riders come down the high street – proudly waved my AH flag, wooped, clapped and high-fived some of the pillion riders – what a way to spend a sunday morning – thank you so much for coming to the town and making it a happy day to remember amongsts so many sad and reflective ones.

and

I would firstly like to thank the organisers, the mothers, the police and everyone involved in what I think was the best bike event I have ever been to. I will never forget the first sight or the runway that was being filled for the second time by the time we left the base on route to Wootton Bassett. I was blown away by the numbers of locals that lined the streets families, pub go-ers all in the carparks and gardens.I wasnt expecting to be thanked for taking part and I certainly was’nt expecting to be choking back tears when thanked by a woman in Wootton Basset on the ride through.Lastly and by no means an after thought a huge heart felt thanks to every one who was in Wootton Bassett yesterday bless you all not only for yesterday but for what you do for our fallen soldiers.You live in a very special place and everyeone who attended yesterday got a small taste of the emotion that your wonderful village has to offer.Again many thanks

and

They say that Woodstock defined a generation, well perhaps Wootton Bassett mothers day ride out by bikers defines the feelings of this generation.

My ticket number is 12033. With my wife Maggy as pillion (and a lot of others) that’s around 15000 people riding through Wootton Bassett in support of British troops, perhaps the biggest motorcycle ride out in history?

But enough of numbers, the constant roar of bikes and the cheering crowds says much about British support and feelings right now. I saw a chap with a hastily painted board by his front gate declaring “Well Done!”, locals with flags or just applauding and cheering. They were not cheering me, just the sentiment of the day, support for our troops.

By 11.00 the taxiway at Hullavington was about full and the first group of two lines was led off by a police escort, with blue lights flickering.

When our turn eventually came, we were led through a maze of country lanes by police motorcyclists with blue lights flashing, enjoying a beautiful sunny day. Wherever a small hamlet, Farm or just a lone house was passed, the people came out and cheered and waved flags, we answered as best we could by revving our engines and tooting the horns. This seemed to encourage them to even louder cheering.

Eventually we came into the now famous Wootten Bassett high street. I felt humbled to be riding through there, somehow not worthy to follow the path of so many brave troops. The street was lined just as we had seen on TV, not this time by grave and dignified crowds, but by happy, smiling people of all kinds. From the youngest to the oldest all were cheering and waving flags, perhaps glad of something bright and cheerful to see in their street.

As I rode out of Wootten Basset toward the M4 I felt humbled, and yet filled with joy that British pride still exists, its just not so easy to find now-days. But if you look hard enough its still there. I feel proud to be British again.

Thanks to all the Police and organisers who made this possible, but mostly, thanks to the people of Wootten Bassett.

Now if only the people who sent our troops to these far flung places could recognise the core of feeling in the British public.

There's a slight note of sadness that the event didn't hit the headlines which is quite right, it should have done, shouldn't it? Don't 15,000 people doing something good count, or are we supposed to be miserable all the time?

it was a brilliant turnout well done everyone. shame the press felt it was not news worthy enough though only a short mention at the end of the news broadcasts and not one national paper put it on the front page. i guess it still stands the biker saying when we do good no one listens when we do bad everyone listens. oh well i suppose we should be used to it by now. once again well done everyone.

There's nothing Mrs R can add, except to say well done to everybody who was involved in this event.

....

The children of Wootton Bassett.

Keeping with the theme of Wootton Bassett, with a great deal of help from both Subrosa's "This Week at Wootton Bassett" and Old Rightie's  "Out of the mouths of babes". (You really should read both of these before continuing, otherwise you won't have a clue what this is about.)

Mrs Rigby would like to help you find the video the young people of Wootton Bassett School  made for the BBC's "School Report", which isn't, unfortunately, linked from the BBC's own news report about the children and their video (on Subrosa) - which seems a bit mean, so Mrs Rigby has decided to fix it.

There's no point in paraphrasing the school's own words, so it's best to send you off to their site to see what they did, and how much effort they put into making their video.

Mrs R eventually discovered the school's video, it was tucked deep inside the "School Report" pages. They say it's possible to "embed" BBC videos within personal sites, but as they don't provide the right sort of url they aren't altogether correct, so, sorry, you'll need to follow this link

"Wootton Bassett through our eyes" by students of Wootton Bassett School.

And if your eyes don't at least feel a bit gritty after watching that then you're more hard hearted than Mrs R.

....

Words as weapons.

From the Coffee House, on today's PMQs

[As] Cameron was calmly dissecting the prime minister’s underfunding of the Afghan war when he quoted two former defence chiefs who’d called Brown ‘disingenuous’ and ‘a dissembler’.

Yep, seems he was right to ask, especially if reports from defence chiefs, serving members of the military, Chilcot and Coroner's Inquests are believed.

Then someone shouted, ‘they’re Tories!’

This same 'shout' was picked out for comment during Guido's PMQ chat. Mrs Rigby didn't hear it, she can no longer bear to watch the charade that is Prime Minister's Questions.

The BBC reports thus:

1206 Tory leader Mr Cameron is up, paying tribute to soldiers killed in Afghanistan and Michael Foot. He asks the PM to apologise over comments by a minister after the deaths of service personnel in 2008, saying they were linked to the vehicles used. Mr Brown replies, promising to look at the details of their inquest. He says engineering and surveillance capabilities in dealing with roadside bombs was improving.

1209 Mr Cameron notes Mr Brown's apology and moves on, with angry scenes from Mr Cameron as Labour MPs shout that the former military personnel criticising the PM over funding are "Tories".

Mr Cameron asks Mr Brown to disassociate himself from the comments. Mr Brown says parties must find "common ground".

Mr Cameron says Labour MPs have sullied the names of the military personnel involved and repeats his call for the PM to disassociate himself from them.

1211 Mr Brown says he wants to applaud the patriotism of all serving the UK.

Mr Cameron says he has not got the character to tell off his own MPs.

1212 Mr Brown says he put the facts on military spending to the Iraq inquiry last Friday. He adds that the chief of the defence staff says UK forces are the best equipped they have ever been. The PM says he will take no lectures on character from the Tory leader, citing the Lord Ashcroft affair.

Edited slightly for spacing, because the BBC has a strange habit of trying to put "Mr Brown” at the beginning of every paragraph, even when he's replying, whilst "Mr Cameron” is tucked away in the middle, even if he's starting a discussion or asking a question.

It will be interesting to see what Hansard shows.

Anyhow, it looks as if Mr Brown was, as usual, sidestepping and ignoring the point, and then repeating something, as well as relying on what has been written down - as if being written down makes it true.

But Mrs Rigby wants to look at what happened today from a slightly different perspective. You see, she isn't linked with any political party, nor is anybody she knows - but, without exception, any conversation that turns to things military ends up discussing the underfunding, the budget cutting, the dissembling and the end result - which is the death of fine young men and women who are 'repatriated' via Wootton Bassett and, because they are laid to rest close to their home rather than in a national war cemetery, the increasing numbers pass unnoticed.

Whoever it was that heckled Mr Cameron clearly thinks it's fine to ignore, or dismiss, reports of military equipment shortages, failures in the military supply line, inadequate supplies of the right sort of kit (such as skis and forest camouflage for desert troops). The MP thinks it's reasonable to dismiss reports of the wrong vehicles, too few helicopters, inadequate training opportunities, in fact anything that disagrees with the party line, or contradicts what Mr Brown has said - and they can do this because the person, or people, who said it might, possibly, vote Tory.

Since when was a private individual's political preference a matter for public discussion. Provided they do not belong to a political party there is no reason to know an individual's vote. It is, and should always remain, a secret. Members of the armed forces, by the way, are not allowed to belong to a political party - it's a good sort of rule, it means they stay apolitical. But today's events suggest some believe otherwise.

Does that particular heckling MP think this country has sunk so low that only those who can be seen to overtly support the political party that's in government will benefit from appropriate and adequate taxpayer funding? If so, is this why the Met Office is still a major beneficiary of MoD cash? Are those who sold out to the religion of AGW and climate change proud of their new car, or their holiday abroad? Will they be as pleased when they realise that, collectively, their bonus money might have cost a soldier his life? Will they truly think it doesn't matter - if that dead soldier might have voted Tory - one less vote for the opposition?

It's odd how one little thing seems to tip the balance, and Mrs Rigby thinks that today was a terrible day for democracy if that, or those, MPs who shouted out escape censure - but she knows they will. The comment will either disappear or their chums will rally round them, we'll be told it was a joke, be told they can't see what the fuss is about , we'll be told to "move on", "put it behind you", "don't be boring" - or some such phrase we hear so often.

On a lighter note though, and exercising Mrs Rigby's over-vivid imagination, it would seem that that particular MP might have allowed themselves to have the mindset that, unless an individual can prove they support Labour, they must vote Tory. LibDems, Greens, UKIP - eat your hearts out, you don't count any more, you don't exist in the minds of Labour. There are only two schools of thought and opinion - Labour and Tory.

It made Mrs R chuckle, ever so slightly, when she though there might be MPs who have allowed themselves to become so indoctrinated, so brainwashed, so single-minded, so self-seeking, that they believe everybody else is the same, and these MPs could be really worried that all those powerful generals are themselves being controlled by the horrible, evil, Tories. If so - talk about paranoia! In the real world most people don't care about another's politics, until it comes the time to put an X on a piece of paper, and afterwards all they expect is that whoever is elected will do a decent job - and do it for the whole of the country, not just those who they think might have put their X in the "correct" box.

Let's also look at 'responsibility' though. It's a little-used word these days, we more often hear of 'rights', an individual's 'rights' - that somebody else has to ensure, although nobody really wants to.

The government, whatever their political colour, is meant to be responsible for proper funding of the military. It is government that allocates money and also guides the MoD regarding allocating, and sourcing, of equipment (otherwise how else could Mr Brown demand (reduced numbers of) landrovers?). Nobody else does it - and should be impartial, outside political pressure, but today's events suggests that it might not be - and that's a little disconcerting. It's worrying to think that somebody, somewhere, might have taken a dislike to a general and decided to make sure they don't have enough money to do their job, without fully realising that this decision can kill young soldiers.

"Responsible" members of the armed forces have spoken out against the MoD, criticized decisions – maybe the MP that shouted out reckons these high-up military people can't be impartial, they can't have complained because they take their position of responsibility seriously, they can't have done it because they actually care about those under their command (after all, who cares about underlings these days?) Perhaps that MP truly believes these generals, coroners and military experts have said any of these things because they, personally, will get something out of it, either that or they're plotting to unseat Mr Brown, and his wonderful government, so they all must be Tories. M.QED - Master's Degree in Logical Thinking.

Let's look at words now, which was where all this started - with some words that were said in Parliament.

We know all too well that being proud of your country, being patriotic, (even though Mr Brown uttered the word today) results in being termed xenophobic. If you're English you get called a "Little Englander" but the Scots don't get the same treatment, they're allowed to be proud of their heritage. We know that in New Labour's Britain letting somebody smoke a 'dirty, filthy, smelly' cigarette is more likely to lead to imprisonment than being a rapist and now, the lowest of the low, military funding is used as a politic football in the House of Commons, and challenging MoD is the same as being a Tory - a subject of derision.

So, if some MPs believe that criticism has political roots then, maybe, the new 'dirtiest word in the English language' is "Tory". It lets the BNP off the hook! Is "Tory" to be the new "racist"? Imagine the phrase "Dirty Tory smoker"! Will "Tory" become the next "paedophile"? Is "Tory" to be the new "Marxist" - ah, probably not, but hey, you never know!

All the military wants, all the military needs, is the right equipment to do their job, and to do it with the minimum loss of life. Is that too much to ask?

It wants paratroopers to be able to practice jumping out of real aeroplanes during their training - but they can't because there aren't enough spare aircraft. It wants TA soldiers to be properly trained before they're sent overseas - but there aren't enough bullets for regular live-fire exercises, and not enough money to pay them properly.

You know, sometimes Mrs R shouldn't have time to think, but the more she thinks about this, the more she realises that the 'good guys' (whoever they may be) simply haven't a clue what they're up against. Every time they try to ask a question it's bounced back and used against them. Every time a politician has a good idea it's mocked and derided, or stolen. Every time ordinary people try to speak out against some petty new rule or other, they're denounced as being old-fashioned, 'establishment', boring, out of touch. But, every time an 'establishment' cheat is unmasked they are protected, anybody else is mincemeat - and the media goes along with it, fuelling the flames, without truly realising what they're doing.

So it looks as if being in charge, these days, equates to using words as weapons. If so, our soldiers had better learn to shout really loud - because it looks increasingly as if all that's available is words, especially if our government equates being a soldier to being a Tory, and we know what they'd really like to do to the Tories, so our troops won't get any real weapons to use against the Taliban, just words and numbers written down in Hansard.

....

Met Office and the MoD

Did you know that the Met Office is part of the MoD?

It says so here

In 1996 the Met Office became a Trading Fund within the Ministry of Defence. As a Trading Fund we are required to operate on a commercial basis and meet agreed performance targets as set by our Ministerial Owner.

It also says

The Under Secretary of State for Defence and the Minister for Veterans, currently Kevan Jones, is the individual charged with directing and overseeing the Met Office on behalf of the Secretary of State for Defence.

The ultimate responsibility and accountability lies with the Secretary of State for Defence, currently the Right Honourable Bob Ainsworth MP.

There has to be a list somewhere that shows fairness, and will show how much the Met Office 'earns' and how much has been cut from its' budget.

After all, the MoD is cutting military funding, including that of the youth branches of the Army (ACF and UOTC)  and the TA (whose soldiers have to go into battle).

Number 10 closed for business?

From the Times, dated 6th December and reporting an event on 2nd September. Mrs R has no idea why it took them so long to publish the details, maybe all eyes are meant to be on Copenhagen and they thought nobody would notice.

Gordon Brown was snubbed by badly injured Afghan veterans when they closed curtains round their beds during a hospital visit and refused to speak to him.

More than half the soldiers being treated at the Selly Oak hospital ward in Birmingham either asked for the curtains to be closed or deliberately avoided the prime minister, according to several of those present.

The soldiers, who have sustained some of the worst injuries seen in Afghanistan, described his visit as “opportunistic” and a “waste of time”.

Furious about equipment shortages and poor compensation for their injuries, one soldier said: “It is almost as if we are the product of an unwanted affair ... he has done nothing for us.”

The article continues

Sapper Matthew Weston, 20, is one of the most seriously injured soldiers to have survived. He lost both legs and his right arm when a bomb exploded on a dirt track outside Sangin.

He said: “I didn’t want to speak to him, I didn’t want to waste my time talking to someone who was just trying to make themselves look good. I spent the day with my family instead.

“Half the lads didn’t want to speak to him and those that did pretty much blamed him for everything. Many of the lads just closed their curtains and hid themselves away.

“I met Prince Charles and Sir Richard Dannatt [when they visited Selly Oak]. I have respect for them. Prince Charles spoke to me for two hours. I really didn’t want to speak to Gordon Brown.”

More straight talking ...

Another soldier, who lost his right leg after being caught in a mine blast in Afghanistan, said that more than two-thirds of the 25 soldiers on the ward closed their curtains. He, however, decided to speak to Brown.

“I wanted to find out how the guy’s head worked,” he said. “I was interested in what he had made of his trip to Afghanistan and what he had learnt from it.

“I feel that even if someone is a moron, he should have the opportunity to defend his moronity. [His response] all seemed rather textbook and not from the heart.

“It is quite obvious to anyone that Brown is not concerned, it is almost as if we [the soldiers] are the product of an unwanted affair.

“The straight fact is this: we don’t like the man, he has done nothing for us and continues to kick us in the teeth over equipment and compensation.”

So what did Mr Brown say about his visit? Did he mention increased compensation? Did he heck!

Here you go!

Two days after his visit to Selly Oak, Brown paid tribute to injured soldiers during a speech in London. He said: “There is nothing more heartbreaking than, as I did this week, meeting a teenager who has lost a leg.”

So he didn't say he would throw money at the problem, didn't say government would provide either additional military resources or an urgent injection of cash to back up the charitable donations that Help for Heroes receives and spends on Headley Court. He said nothing about matching monies raised by limbless soldiers who do things like climb Kilimanjaro so their mates can get treatment if, and when, they're seriously injured. Nothing about pumping public finance to help fund the urgently needed extension.

Zero - zilch - just a, "Look what I've seen", a bit like a child talking about visiting Disneyland. Yet this same government can send millions overseas as an example of the country's largesse.

Maybe the soldiers' behaviour is rooted in the government's failure to acknowledge and act on the High Court ruling that said, as reported in the Guardian in April 2008

Sending British soldiers out on duty with defective equipment may breach their human rights, the high court ruled today.

In a potentially significant verdict for operations in Afghanistan and Iraq, Mr Justice Collins ruled that a soldier "does not lose all protection simply because he is in hostile territory carrying out dangerous operations".

In another blow to the government, he rejected an attempt by the defence secretary, Des Browne, to stop coroners using phrases such as "serious failure" in inquests concerning troops who died on active service. Browne had argued this might prejudice subsequent civil action.

The judgement – which the Ministry of Defence said it would appeal – raises the possibility that families of soldiers killed on active service could sue the government for compensation.

The MoD did, of course, appeal and lost, as reported in May 2009

Deploying British troops on battlefield operations with inadequate or defective equipment could breach their human rights, senior judges ruled today, opening the way for potentially huge compensation claims from bereaved families.

Dismissing arguments by the Ministry of Defence (MoD), the court of appeal backed last year's high court ruling that sending a soldier out on patrol or into battle with defective equipment could constitute a breach of article 2 of the European convention on human rights, which enshrines the right to life.

and more

Three appeal judges, headed by the master of the rolls, Sir Anthony Clark, said the defence secretary had conceded before the hearing that soldiers who died on a UK base, such as Smith, were covered by human rights laws.

"It seems to us to make no sense to hold that there is a distinction between a person inside and outside of premises controlled by the UK," the judges said.

"If in a British base, why not in a British army vehicle? If in a vehicle, why not when a soldier gets out of the vehicle?"

The judges noted that soldiers were subject to British military, criminal and civil laws, no matter where they were.

"Soldiers serve abroad as a result of, and pursuant to, the exercise of UK jurisdiction over them.

"Thus the legality of their presence and of their actions depends on their being subject to UK jurisdiction and complying with UK law."

Mrs Rigby can understand why the soldiers in Selly Oak were reluctant to speak to their Prime Minister, because it would seem that it was his policies as Chancellor that led to serious cost cutting which now means that soldiers are expected to walk across an areas that are likely to have been mined because there is not enough equipment for them to travel in either wheeled transport or in helicopters.

And meanwhile some nasty little thugs are let loose because the Judge thought their 9 month sentence was too harsh, and an HBOS executive would like £600,000 compensation after being taken to a lap-dancing club.

Civilian MoD staff, who have already received whopping bonuses (whilst soldiers are short of equipment due to funding restrictions) are to be awarded the Operational Service Medal for duty in Afghanistan (interesting to note the ratings of comments left on this story) ... and a Falklands Veteran sells his MM after his security company employers refused to keep his job open while he had surgery to remove an Argentine bullet and pieces of shrapnel from his hip.

Today also marks a sad day because another soldier has died in Afghanistan. It is the hundredth death this year and brings the total of lives lost in that country to 247.

Maybe all this is why the Telegraph is showing a picture of the door of Number 10 with a notice that says

Door Out of
use

Please use
No. 11 entrance

Mr Ainsworth says criticizing the MoD is unpatriotic.

.
Mrs Rigby notes that recently promoted to Secretary of State for Defence Mr Bob Ainsworth says that "criticism of the MoD is unpatriotic", and claims the public's "defeatist" attitude is letting troops down.

Mrs Rigby thinks that, as a politician, he should know better than to use the "patriotism" card against those he is supposed to represent.

Mrs R reckons she is as patriotic as they come. She is intensely proud of being British and staunchly defends Great Britain against all comers. She'd probably fight too, if necessary, but isn't suitable material for the military. But none of this means she thinks that everything about Great Britain, and the way it's being run, is perfect.

Here's an analogy.

The Rigby children know we love them dearly and are incredibly proud them - because they aren't drug-taking, hoodie-wearing thugs; because they are polite; because they study hard and have time to play; because they are reliable and, well, because they are nice and have nice friends too. Sometimes we pat ourselves on the back too, because we reckon we're doing a fairly good job of parenting.

The junior Rigbys know there are times when their behaviour is criticized. As they grow older they realise that this is because we love them so much, rather than the opposite, although it's sometimes tough love and causes arguments - that we all learn from.

They are coming to understand that all this is part of the learning process, part of our attempts to guide them in the right direction, so that as adults they will make a useful contribution to their country - and so that they will also be able to accept praise with dignity and learn from constructive criticism.

They are learning that praise means what it says, that they've done good, it isn't an empty gesture intended to placate.

They are also learning that nobody ever truly stops learning from others, that they too have a role in shaping the attitudes and opinions of us, their parents, and our own outlook on the world.

Some of our childrens' friends are planning to join the Army, others are planning to join the Navy, Air Force or Territorial Army. These are young people we have watched grow up alongside our own flesh and blood.

When we and these children's parents question the behaviour of government departments and politicians it isn't being unpatriotic, far from it, it's voicing an opinion intended to help make things better and improving the way the country is being managed. It is also done in the hope that somebody, somewhere, will listen to us and make sure they take appropriate action to ensure our young people are kept as safe as possible.

Those who join the military are not the dregs of society. Few, if any, of them would ever presume to be a burden on the state in civilian life and each and every one of them has sworn allegiance to the Crown, indicating a willingness to fight to the death for their country if need be.

The least the country can do in return is ensure that they are properly provided for, and offered the best possible equipment to do their job effectively and efficiently.

In May 2009 a court ruled that military personnel were protected by the Human Rights Act, even in battle.

The ruling means that sending soldiers on patrol or into battle with clearly defective or inadequate equipment could breach their human rights.

We are now in August 2009.

Military chiefs, politicians and members of the public continue to voice their fears that the MoD is failing to supply front-line troops with the right equipment at the right time. Here are some of the things that have gone wrong.

* They have failed to supply enough bulletproof vests - a third are without protection at any one time.

* They have failed to supply enough helicopters - so supply movements are overland rather than airborne.

* They have failed to supply the new vehicles designed to withstand roadside bombs - even though those in use have known deficiencies and have resulted in loss of life. Some vehicles are held in Kuwait, awaiting transportation - but apparently there aren't enough British helicopters to carry them.

* They have failed to supply the right colour uniform - wearing sand-camouflaged gear some of our soldiers are sitting ducks, so they try to dye their own.

Mrs Rigby has read of other supply failures, but is satisfied that these examples are enough for now.

Mrs Rigby is sure that Mr Ainsworth took the time to read the letters from 19 year-old Rifleman Cyrus Thatcher to his family, published after his death in July. She would like to know if Mr Ainsworth read Ian Sadler's article, in which he tells how his son begged him to send a helmet that fitted. Trooper Jack Sadler died, aged 21, in December 2007. Did Mr Ainsworth read how Sally Thorneloe felt after her husband, Colonel Rupert Thorneloe, died in July?

Last week a terribly injured soldier died from wounds, he was the 200th to die as a result of the conflict in Afghanistan. That his death marks this numerical milestone will not ease or reassure his grieving family and friends.

Today we learn that three more soldiers have died whilst on patrol.

Those who have died overseas are repatriated through RAF Lyneham, their flag-draped coffins pass through the small town of Wootton Bassett, where townsfolk silently line the pavements in honour their sacrifice. During the summer many holidaymakers have taken time to do the same. If Mr Ainsworth has taken a break from his three month holiday from Westminster to join them it hasn't been publicised.

Mrs Rigby wonders if either Mr Brown or Mr Ainsworth have taken a moment to think beyond party politics to try to relate to the emotions of bereaved families when they learn that essential equipment, held in Kuwait or in storage here in UK, might have saved their sons or daughters lives or may have saved them from suffering terrible injuries - or have these men become too desensitised because so many have died, and are they too concerned about their own political future?

It is an unequivocal right of the electorate to question our parliamentary representatives, irrespective of their political persuasion, more especially if it appears that they are getting it wrong and failing in their duty to protect the interests, and lives, of those people who have signed on the dotted line - and whose job involves risking far greater injury than RSI of the wrist.

It is, surely, the duty of a responsible politician to listen to both the electorate and experts, and offer significantly more than platitudes or condemnation in return.

Mrs R cannot understand why the government isn't hurrying things along to respect the Human Rights of our troops - as is their right - in the same way as they ensure that people like this are properly provided for, and protected, by the state.
.