Maggie does it again, Lynn Jones should take note

#1
Dear All,

I couldn't help but notice the difference of opinion between Baroness Thatcher's words today -

"Fortune does, in the end, favour the brave. And it is Britain's good fortune that none are braver than our armed forces. Thank you - all."

And those of that idiot from Selly Oak

"The soldiers sem to want a little empire consisting of thier designated staff and facilities, a little fiefdom"

Like all of you I was enraged by Jones's comments, but due to my current location have no MP to lobby ref it. It is refreshing to hear words like those from Baroness T, although no suprise.

Rgds

AY
 
#2
I have always had the utmost respect (or 'spec as yoofs like to say) for Maggie, long may she live.
 
#3
ArmyYid said:
Dear All,

I couldn't help but notice the difference of opinion between Baroness Thatcher's words today -

"Fortune does, in the end, favour the brave. And it is Britain's good fortune that none are braver than our armed forces. Thank you - all."

And those of that idiot from Selly Oak

"The soldiers sem to want a little empire consisting of thier designated staff and facilities, a little fiefdom"

Like all of you I was enraged by Jones's comments, but due to my current location have no MP to lobby ref it. It is refreshing to hear words like those from Baroness T, although no suprise.

Rgds

AY
Could you not contact a family member to e-mail an MP, on your behalf. This is a serious subject, and we cannot afford to ignore it.
 
#4
Was talking to a Goose Green veteran today who said that more politicians should have "balls" like Maggie had and stand up for the Armed Forces. Can't see it happening though!
 
#5
I had the honour to meet with Maggie at MWMPH and she projected authority wherever she went.

Her support for the armed forces was tireless and totally from the heart. bLiar/Broon take note!

Best of health to her.


fastmedic
 
#6
Good for Maggie.She-at least-unlike this Jones woman,understands about Sacrifice for Country,and the Compact(which Nu Labour have broken) with our Armed Forces.
 
#7
An opinion like this was voiced at a recent debate with a junior minister in attendance. She stayed somewhat quiet when my acid laced words about the shoddy treatment of soldiers was met with a radical feminists outcry of "why should soldiers have special treatment?"

If she truly does not know, then I'm not sure she deserves to be a citizen.
 
#8
The old battle axe still has minerals it seems!
Lynn Johns - what a fcuking disgrace!
 
#9
Sir_General_Jackarson said:
ArmyYid said:
Dear All,

I couldn't help but notice the difference of opinion between Baroness Thatcher's words today -

"Fortune does, in the end, favour the brave. And it is Britain's good fortune that none are braver than our armed forces. Thank you - all."

And those of that idiot from Selly Oak

"The soldiers sem to want a little empire consisting of thier designated staff and facilities, a little fiefdom"

Like all of you I was enraged by Jones's comments, but due to my current location have no MP to lobby ref it. It is refreshing to hear words like those from Baroness T, although no suprise.

Rgds

AY
Could you not contact a family member to e-mail an MP, on your behalf. This is a serious subject, and we cannot afford to ignore it.
Sir G-J

Good call. E-mail to mother-in law in bound. Ashamed I did not think of it sooner.
 
#10
Sir_General_Jackarson said:
ArmyYid said:
Dear All,

I couldn't help but notice the difference of opinion between Baroness Thatcher's words today -

"Fortune does, in the end, favour the brave. And it is Britain's good fortune that none are braver than our armed forces. Thank you - all."

And those of that idiot from Selly Oak

"The soldiers sem to want a little empire consisting of thier designated staff and facilities, a little fiefdom"

Like all of you I was enraged by Jones's comments, but due to my current location have no MP to lobby ref it. It is refreshing to hear words like those from Baroness T, although no suprise.

Rgds

AY
Could you not contact a family member to e-mail an MP, on your behalf. This is a serious subject, and we cannot afford to ignore it.

I'll do it! :hump:
 
#11
C-M

Mate,

Of course!!! You know all the details and certainly know me. What do you need?

AY
 
#12
Lynn Jones voting record:

Has never voted on a transparent Parliament.
Strongly against Labour's anti-terrorism laws.
Very strongly against the Iraq war.
Moderately against investigating the Iraq war.
Very strongly against replacing Trident.

Now there's a surprise!

She is a member of the Socialist Campaign Group and has taken part in almost all of the backbench rebellions against the Labour government. She is also Chair of the Parliamentary Forum on Transsexualism.

Not all negative though - she is public-spirited:



From her website: "On Saturday I went to St Martin’s Church in the Bullring to help write letters to Guantanemo Bay detainees and Prisoners of Conscience held in prisons around the world."
 
#13
ArmyYid said:
C-M

Mate,

Of course!!! You know all the details and certainly know me. What do you need?

AY
Bank Account details
National Insurance number

oh, and a pair of your little gnome shoes :boogie:
 
#15
I was only 8 when the war kicked off but I have always had respect for her, she has more balls than some male MP's,
 
#16
I got this back from lynn Jones via email after i sent her a short note about what i thought of her comments, its most likely a standard reply to everyone whos contacted her, apologies if its already on the site somewhere.

I have received a large number of emails from members of the public as
a result of the inaccurate way my comments were reported in the 10 June
edition of the Mail on Sunday. There is a parliamentary convention that
I should only respond in detail to correspondence from my own
constituents. However I hope that the following statement clarifies my
position and I am glad to have this opportunity of setting the record
straight. If you are constituent, I am happy to correspond with you on
any further points you wish to raise if you would please provide me with
your full postal address and indicate you are a constituent in the
header.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------



The remarks attributed to me in the 10 June edition of the Mail on
Sunday were an inaccurate reflection of the lengthy conversation I had
with the reporter on Thursday night. This included the example of a
soldier who had had his hand successfully reconstructed after having
three ribs removed for the purpose. He would have lost his hand were it
not for the skill and dedication of the clinical staff involved - the
very staff whose morale is being constantly undermined by the barrage of
unjustified criticism coming from the media who regurgitate and
exaggerate old stories. I am informed that some staff have got so fed
up with this situation that they are looking for new jobs and such is
their skill that they will be snapped up by other hospitals. What good
will that do our troops? You will note that the particular incident
which apparently justified the headline "Muslim Women Abuse Soldier at
Troops Hospital" took place a month ago and was described by the soldier
involved as being a minor incident. Though I would condemn any
inappropriate intervention, I am told the use of the word "abuse" does
not reflect what happened. There has been another allegation that a
soldier was abused by a Muslim nurse, yet there has never been a Muslim
nurse on any of the wards where soldiers have been treated.



I informed the reporter from the MoS about this type of inaccurate
reports and I also told him of my recent meeting with one of the injured
men whose case has been given a high media profile (unfavourable to the
hospital). At the point I met the soldier, he was returning to the ward
after a weekend away, including a visit to a football match. He remains
in the ward despite the hospital's view that he is ready to be
discharged to military-run rehabilitation. At the different stages in
his treatment, he has been in three separate wards appropriate to his
condition at the time. Surveys of military personnel who have received
treatment at Selly Oak have been overwhelmingly favourable - none of
this is reported because it does not fit the picture that has been
painted by those seeking to undermine the work being done at Selly Oak.
They care more for a good story than the damage they are doing. They
are not concerned about any effect on morale caused by giving our armed
forces such a negative impression of the quality of care they might
expect to receive should they be injured!



The decision by the MoD to base hospital care of military staff in the
NHS was taken, not to cut costs, as stated in the article, but for
clinical reasons. Health care has become more specialised and the range
of specialties and depth of experience required to provide the full
range of care required by the military (such as that described above)
can only be provided by a large acute teaching trust.



Also the training and education of the clinical military staff needs to
be undertaken in an environment where the full range of injuries and
illnesses are seen and treated. This is to better equip the military
clinicians to deal with any eventuality when deployed at times of
conflict. The Royal Centre for Defence Medicine at Selly Oak provides
both these functions



It seems that recent events have sought to overturn these principles and
that considerations other than clinical need are being brought into play
to determine where injured military personnel are cared for and where
military clinical staff are placed to gain experience. These issues
should be best left to those with the knowledge and skills to make those
judgements based on the clinical needs of the patients i.e. the doctors
and nurses looking after the patients. Similarly the placement of the
military staff should be the responsibility of those who have
responsibility for the training and education of the military clinical
staff. Anything else must surely compromise patient safety, both for
those patients in Selly Oak and for those injured in the frontline
before they can be returned to UK. Yet, it is clear from my
conversations with senior members from the Armed Forces medical staff
that their views are being overridden as a response to the media
coverage, which has been stimulated by some factions in the MoD who
opposed the closure of the military hospitals. It is in that context
that I used the word "fiefdom". At no point did I say that the soldiers
wanted a fiefdom.



The reference to "clutter" also gives the wrong impression. When I
visited the ward where 12 of the 20 military patients in the hospital
were being treated (and remember their numbers can vary substantially
such that any "dedicated ward" could one day be half empty and then next
full to overflowing) I was struck by how many staff, in particular
military staff in full uniform, were on the ward. I have been told that
this is usually in double figures and on one recent occasion it was
possible to count 19 non-clinical uniformed military staff on the ward!
There is no doubt that the ward is old and cramped as is all the
accommodation in this hospital but a new hospital is currently being
constructed and by 2010 all patients will have first class facilities.
Meanwhile I do not consider it conducive to recovery, or to security, to
have so many people milling around.



In conclusion, the coverage in the MoS was deliberately slanted to give
the impression that I was not concerned about wounded soldiers coming
back from Iraq and Afghanistan when, in fact, the opposite is the case
and I was trying to put a true reflection of the excellent work that has
been going on at Selly Oak. I should also point out that the hospital
also provides elective treatment for military staff that are not being
deployed overseas. However, given the reputation of this particular
paper, I suppose I should not be surprised at the manner in which my
views have been misrepresented. I will of course be writing to them in
an attempt to put the record straight




LYNNE JONES MP

House of Commons
London
SW1A 0AA
 
#17
My original email to her was this:-

subject: remarks regarding servicemen.

You disgust me and you are a disgrace to this nation.





i feel its only fair for her side of the story to be aired.
 
#18
compus_mentus said:
ArmyYid said:
C-M

Mate,

Of course!!! You know all the details and certainly know me. What do you need?

AY

HANG ON!!!! AREN'T YOU STILL AT WORK?
Yep

And spending more tmie on this as DoD has blocked YouTube :thumbdown:
 
#19
iamaviking said:
My original email to her was this:-

subject: remarks regarding servicemen.

You disgust me and you are a disgrace to this nation.

Succinct and to the point. Have you been to Staff College?
 
#20
"Muslim Women Abuse Soldier at
Troops Hospital" took place a month ago and was described by the soldier
involved as being a minor incident.


l am absolutely disgusted regarding this. These Muslim women, are apparently those of a peaceful/meek/tolerant religion. lf this is the case, aren't they being totally HYPOCRITICAL their faith?

What right does another religion have, to INFLICT as well as INCITE such racial behaviour towards a soldier? Regardless of what sex they may be. lmagine if the situation was reversed, you can bet your cotton socks, the cops would have been straight round knockin' at the door, and arresting the suspect. Because it is not OK for anyone to speak ill of Muslims, it should be a two way street, Muslims (remember the tolerance and Meek bit?) MUST reflect on this......

To these MUSLIM women l would quote a passage from the Daily mail's letter page: 13th June 2007:-

We're the people that dread the phone ringing. We carry on with our lives while others insist on giving their opinions about our troops, 'wasting their time' in lraq.

l would say that, until you've spent three days in 40-50c heat, in the same clothes, plus body armour, being shot at and mortared, doing what's expected of you, (by NEW LABOUR - NO SHAME!) you should keep your opinions to yourself.

lf you should encounter a soldier on leave from lraq, Afhgan, or other places that they may be serving, show him respect: he's your FRIEND, and PROTECTOR. lf he's lost a colleague recently, he doesn't want YOUR opinion on what a 'waste of life' it is!

We are the mam's, wive's, sister's, girlfriends NOT of footballers, but of men that stun us with their BRAVERY, their COMRADESHIP, their SENSE of HUMOUR and DUTY.


There has been another allegation that a
soldier was abused by a Muslim nurse, yet there has never been a Muslim
nurse on any of the wards where soldiers have been treated.


This is a hospital, people move around freely from the entrance to wards throughout the hospital. lt is plausible, that a MUSLIM nurse did indeed ABUSE a soldier of HER MAJESTY'S ARMED FORCES.

SHAME on YOU, and you know who you are? Hidding behind your nursing uniform, and religion, when picking a an easy wounded LAW abiding CITIZEN that has done what NEW LABOUR has asked him. lf you should have a problem with that, please do not hesitate in contacting your local MP, and placing a complaint about NEW LABOUR, as l'm sure, without a doubt, they'd listen to you; unlike the soldier!

As the sayin' goes 'and the MEEK will inherit the earth!'............Amen
 

Similar threads

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top