2012 – 022 Degrading the morale and capabilities of UK Armed Forces

The nature of war is changing. We no longer send 50,000 men marching into a hail of machine gun fire. Pilotless drones are replacing many flying duties. Electronic surveillance is now a major weapon. However we will always have a need for ‘boots on the ground’ but it is of vital importance that the control of the British Forces is exclusively in British hands.

Howwever the British Armed forces now belong to the EU see 2016 – 003 How our soldiers can now be prosecuted.

There is a significant element within our Establishment who have complete contempt for our armed forces.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3831618/Whitehall-thinks-soldiers-bad-says-former-Armed-Forces-chief-attacks-government-witch-hunt-troops-historic-incidents.html

When he was president of the EU Romano Prodi said “there will be an EU army and only an EU army”. EuroCorps intends to take over and absorb the British Armed Forces. To this end the morale, capability and facilities of our armed forces are being steadily degraded by our own political elite. It will soon be at a point where the only option left will be to hand over our hollowed out armed forces to EuroCorps as they will incapable of operating on their own.

The Dunblane killings, by a known nutcase who the local gun club were forced to take as a member having refused him several times, is used as an excuse to disarm law abiding citizens. This is to prevent the possibility of an armed citizens uprising.

There is currently a dog fight going on between the French and Germans as to who will run EuroCorps.

“The world needs a Europe that is capable of deploying military missions”. Jose Manuel Barroso September 2012. Repeated by Junckter

The treatment of discharged military is to demoralise the armed forces Ex military should have first priority in suitable social housing. (not as the limbless ex soldier given a flat on the 7th floor). That is what the Military Covenant is about that our Gov is sidelining. Councils should be required to be pro-active in locating such ex soldiers with punitive penalties for the bureaucrats if they do not.

Soldiers are given food well below that of the standard given to prisoners.

5000 servicemen/women to be made redundant so the government can save the equivalent of three days membership fee that we give to the EU.

MoD Spends More on Accountants Than Fighter Jets
order-order.com/?p=244073pic.twitter.com/tXLLMxef6E

However as Miliband signed the Lisbon Treaty the EU can conscript British youngsters into the proposed EU Army  http://www.theeuroprobe.org/2013-013-how-the-lisbon-treaty-was-voted-through/

© Mick Greenhough 2012

ChR11jFWwAAyMEC

22 veterans kill themselves every day. Over 9,000 veterans are homeless any given night. http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/07/07/millions-of-soldiers-and-veterans-in-serious-trouble/ …

Labour is blasted for backing an EU Army

LABOUR was condemned yesterday for backing a Brussels blueprint for the ­creation of a European Union army.

By: Alison Little    
OUTRAGED-Fox-thinks-the-idea-is-irresponsible- OUTRAGED: Fox thinks the idea is irresponsible
The controversial project was voted through the European Parliament by 482 to 111 with the help of 19 Labour MEPs. UKIP and the Tories opposed the plan.The report, sponsored by German MEP Karl von Wogau, has backing from Paris and Berlin. It stated that “a common defence policy in Europe requires an integrated European Armed Force’’.It called for “further development of co-operation between national armed forces so that they become increasingly synchronised. This process and the armed forces should be given the name SAFE – Synchronised Armed Forces Europe”.The report will not directly trigger the creation of a new EU fighting force but critics have warned it would fuel calls for a European army. Shadow Defence Secretary Dr Liam Fox said: “The fact that 16 Labour MEPs voted in support of this report is outrageous. The idea of the ­creation of a so-called SAFE or Euro army is not only irresponsible on behalf of Eurocrats but also nonsensical.’’

“The fact that 16 Labour MEPs voted in support of this report is outrageous.” Dr Liam Fox

Conservative MEP Geoffrey Van Orden, the party’s European defence spokesman, warned that British ministers were “in denial’’ and “sleepwalking’’ towards the creation of a European army.Former soldier Mr Van Orden, who served at Nato HQ in the 1990s, said: “British ministers say there’s nothing going on but the French are writing the script and they are determined to create this European capability. For 50 years they have wanted to remove American influence from European security.’’A spokesman for Labour’s MEPs insisted they did not support a European Army but had backed a “wide-ranging’’ report on European security policy.
A Foreign Office spokesman said: “There will be no European army. Nato remains the cornerstone of European defence. This is spelt out in the Lisbon Treaty.’’Last year, when French enthusiasm for a EU defence force sparked speculation that the Royal Navy would have to ­surrender an aircraft carrier to Brussels as part of a permanent European navy, Dr Fox said the plan made “a mockery of centuries of British naval tradition”…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

From the report in the Sunday Telegraph this week it would seem that Sgt. Nightingale was invalided home from Iraq and was not aware of how his kit was packed and returned to the UK. His kit remained unpacked  until the police searched his house and found the weapon.

I also understand from that report that his injuries caused him to have loss of memory. Yet the JAG gave him a custodial sentence on the basis of having found this weapon in his unpacked kit. The whole business is a travesty of justice and the treatment of a man who had taken extreme risks in the discharge of his sworn allegiance to the Queen to “protect her in Person, Crown and Dignity”. 
Abu Qatada is now being released from custody, although an acknowledged threat to the security of the state which means the Queen as our Constitutional Monarch and therefore, as she said in Canada in 1964,“the personification of the Democratic State.” Qatada is in breach of the Law of Treason giving aid and comfort here to the Queen’s enemies, been released without any charges. This  makes a complete travesty of the Remembrance  Day parades and services attended by the Queen.
Of course to charge anyone with treason would now require her Sovereignty to be proved in Court according to the Privy Council. Which begs the questions on whose authority does the court exist and by what authority does the Judge preside in that court and who does the judge actually represent in that court? It would seem to question the Queen’s Sovereignty in such a place would be the height of absurdity; but then it has been said, in a recent biography, that the Queen enjoys absurdity. Dave.
The implications of this disgraceful abuse of privilege by the authorities are far reaching, not least because Judge Advocate Alistair McGrigor set aside the constitutional rights and liberties of the subject which entitles law abiding British subjects to bear arms for self defence and the protection of the Realm, a right carried to America by Englishmen along with our common law Constitution and principle of law which still stands there to this day.
It is not generally understood that it is by no special dispensation that our policemen may carry arms, it is by this very constitutional right which was unlawfully removed from the people by an establishment controlled government in 1925 when the establishment feared a socialist revolution although this reason was not revealed until many years later.
What the establishment still didn’t understand at that time was the then Liberal Prime Minister Asquith was a Fabian Socialist and that a covert socialist revolution had already taken place right under their noses when in 1911 George V was persuaded by Asquith to give Royal Assent to the Parliament Act 1911 which removed the authority of the House of Lords to protect the Rights and Liberties of the British people. Asquith had previously tried it on with Edward VII but he was shrewd enough to see what was afoot and refused his Royal Assent. Now we have Clegg another Liberal  working to do away with our House of Lords altogether as part of the plot to remove from the people their ancient common law Constitution.
Sgt Nightingale is just another victim of our corrupt political and judicial system, a system that has obviously been corrupt since the death of Edward VII, a King that despite his personal shortcomings was much respected by his subjects. Just as George V allowed his governments to ride roughshod over his people unopposed so has his granddaughter Elizabeth II who should in this instance have intervened as is her duty to ensure that justice is  administered fairly and in the spirit of the law especially as the defendant is under her direct command and responsibility.
According to the reports of this case most people would agree that unless some important evidence is being withheld this case should never have been allowed into court, which begs the question, why was it? Was it in the public interest? Very questionable. Was it in the interest of justice? What was just about it? Thieves get lighter sentences. A law had been broken, but was that law legitimate when it sought to unconstitutionally deprive the people of their lawful right to bear for their self protection and the protection of the Realm and has already been put to question in the court and hopefully will be again.
But was this draconian outburst not so much in the interest of public safety but in the interest of the safety of the establishment that is beginning to fear for its corrupt existence as it did in 1925? Doubtless many people when reading of this case will recall Dunblane shootings, the paedophile implication and the suspicions of a cover up created by a hundred year ban on the publication of the evidence especially at this particular time when the judiciary and much of the establishment is under public scrutiny.
Perhaps in its fear and desperation the establishment which makes up the anti-British army in our midst which has surrendered our sovereignty and lawful right of self governance to its foreign masters might now turn in on itself like rats trapped in a barrel. Should this happen, pilloried though he presently is, Sgt Nightingale might yet go down in history as the hero who caused the spark that ignited the long accumulated pile of refuse that has the effrontery to place itself above the law and condemn those who protest its rightful and lawful ownership.  

http://euobserver.com/defence/118226

Five EU countries call for new military ‘structure’

Today @ 09:26
Related

Military chief: EU becoming ‘marginal’ in Asia-centric world
Military spending: EU dwarf shrinks as US gets bigger
EU countries to reduce dependence on US military

By Andrew Rettman
Andrew email

BRUSSELS – Five leading EU countries, but not the UK, have said the Union needs a new military “structure” to manage overseas operations.

The foreign and defence ministers of France, Germany, Italy, Poland and Spain issued the call in a joint communique after a meeting in Paris on Thursday (15 November).

The paper said: “We are convinced that the EU must set up, within a framework yet to-be-defined, true civilian-military structures to plan and conduct missions and operations.”

It added: “We should show preparedness to hold available, train, deploy and sustain in theatre the necessary civilian and military means.”

It listed a number of EU military priorities for the coming years: helping Somalia to fight Islamists and pirates; “a possible training mission to support the Malian armed forces” in reconquering north Mali; “assistance to support the new Libyan authorities” against Islamist militias; “normalisation” of the Western Balkans; “conflict resolution” in Georgia; and police training in Afghanistan.

The communique also called for more “pooling and sharing” of EU defence hardware in the context of crisis-related budget cuts.

It identified “space, ballistic-missile defence, drones, air-to-air refuelling, airlift capacities, medical support to operations [and] software defined radio” as “high added-value” areas for pooling.

The reference to new “civilian-military structures” comes after the UK last year blocked the creation of a new operational headquarters (OHQ) in Brussels for EU military operations.

Britain’s Telegraph newspaper earlier this week cited a “senior French source” as saying that EU foreign affairs chief Catherine Ashton supports the idea of an OHQ, which will become a “ripe fruit” in the “long-term” as EU military operations multiply.

Ashton officials denied the report.

But the UK’s role in future EU defence reforms was a big topic at the Paris meeting.

French foreign minister Laurent Fabius noted the UK can join the group-of-five at any time: “The text which we have developed is open to all of our colleagues, especially Great Britain.”

French defence minister Jean-Yves Le Drian said the communique is designed to “create a movement” ahead of an EU summit on defence in 2013.

For his part, Polish foreign minister Radek Sikorski said: “If the EU wants to become a superpower, and Poland supports this, then we must have the capability to exert influence in our neighbourhood … Sometimes we must use force to back our diplomacy.”

He also called for an “ambitious” EU budget for 2014 to 2020 to help with defence co-ordination.

Speaking in a separate interview in British paper The Times also on Thursday, Sikorski criticised British “nostalgia” for its past colonial greatness as a reason why it is pulling back from EU integration and why it wants to cut the EU budget.

He touched on historic sensitivities by describing the EU budget as a kind of “Marshall plan.” He said Poland and other former-Communist-controlled EU countries missed out on the plan – a massive injection of US money to help rebuild Europe after World War II – because UK and US leaders at a
summit in Yalta in 1945 gave the Soviet Union control of eastern Europe.

“We fought Hitler alone, giving you [the UK] valuable time to prepare for fighting. But we did not enjoy freedom after World War II … Because of Yalta, we could not benefit from [the Marshall  plan]. European cohesion funds are our Marshall plan for catching up with Europe,” he said.

I have little doubt that we are now being governed by another Chamberlain – except that even Chamberlain, in the last year or two did put in place rearmament that proved vital to winning the war. This lot seem determined to lose it without even pretending to fight.

Idris

From: Kathleen Garner <kathleeng22@hotmail.com>
To: Idris Francis <idris.francis@btinternet.com>
Subject: RE: How we are being made defenceless against the EU takeover
Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2013 00:29:51 +0000
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 07 Mar 2013 00:29:51.0246 (UTC) FILETIME=[E1B032E0:01CE1ACA]

Is the sudden and unannounced removal of our troops from Germany part of this?
Or are they being brought home to deal with potential riots?

Kathleen


Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2013 00:20:09 +0000
To:
From: idris.francis@btinternet.com
Subject: How we are being made defenceless against the EU takeover

From: “Bob & Jane” <birkby370@btinternet.com>
To: “Jane Birkby” <birkby370@btinternet.com>
Subject: Fw: Important
Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2013 00:03:29 -0000
X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows Mail 6.0.6002.18197
Since 2005 I have been telling people of Eurogendfor the EU’s Military Police Force based in Vincenza, Italy, whose remit is to be a rapid reaction force to ‘help’ national police forces quell social unrest anywhere in the EU. Now 8 years later we see the plan unfolding, as our police and army are weakened by the death of a thousand cuts, to make way for fascist totalitarianism.  J
The End of British Forces Is In Sight!

Guy Leven-Torres
6th March 2013
A very reliable source tells me that the British armed services are being dismantled. With the ”laying up of MBTs” Main Battle Tanks, any potential British Army capable of fighting any kind of European war is now impossible.

 

 German soldiers, French soldiers, and private EU funded mercenary armies are the order of the day. Greece has signed up to an American corporation to defend Greece if the populace dare to rebel. Britain has  to be fully disarmed to ensure that the Euro-Soviet is supreme. Britain’s Challengers will be scrapped as has our Navy and RAF. Be under no illusions about this, we are now defenceless.
Same-sex marriage is to be the moral standard by which we are to live in contractual relations and heterosexuality to become a perversion with Christianity outlawed. The populace has but two choices of ”faith”- Atheism or Islam. Funding and political support for the latter is to be exponentially increased with many more mosques and community centres. Sharia is to be fully implemented within 3 to 5 years in an arrangement with the OIC or Organisation Islamic Cooperation and Baroness Morsi has been appointed Britain’s Ambassador to OIC to apply for ”Affiliate Status”, with a view to becoming a full member within five years as the new Islamic regime in the UK and Europe takes hold. The areas under Moslem control in the UK and within Europe will be officially declared Islamic areas, pubs closed, churches and Christianity forbidden. Our own Parliament has but 2 to 5 years left. This is going to happen…..and is happening now.
Ashley Mote was raided this morning and sources tell me further raids and arrests are to follow. This will include several Nationalist MEPs and MPs seen as ”problematic” to the ”abolition of the former territorial entity known as the United Kingdom”. Scotland will leave the UK in 2015, whether its people desire it or not. Wales will revert to a Principality and obtain separate status under EU. Other regions in England will have their own ”rump assemblies”.
Eurogendfor is to be expanded to support the coming Euro-Army.
This is not a fantasy but fact.
End of message….
From Anne Palmer:
BACKGROUND
A European army would be a military force, supported and financed by the EU member states, acting directly under the authority of the European Union. Its aim would be to ensure collective security to Member States at the hands of interference by a Great Power outside the EU. A European army has been long-desired by many of the EU member states. In 1948, the Western Union Defence Organization (WUDO) was created; it was the defence arm of the Western Union was the precursor to the Western European Union (WEU) and to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). In 1950, a plan called “The European Defense Community” was proposed, with the aim to form a pan-European defense force to protect European countries in case of conflict with USSR. The treaty was signed in 1952 but never went into effect. Since the fifties, many separate international forces revolving around the EU’s defence have been created.
http://europe.idebate.org/debatabase/debates/constitutional-governance/house-would-create-single-european-union-army
AND THIS BELOW
STATE OF PLAY
Despite many attempts and the deepening of a Common Security and Defence Policy, an EU army does not exist and military defence has remained the domain of nation states. The Treaty of Lisbon states in its article 42 that: “The common security and defence policy shall include the progressive framing of a common defence policy. This will lead to a common defence, when the European Council, acting unanimously, so decides.” Hence, a minimum number of member states can deepen integration within the EU, but the reluctant member states do not have to participate. On 20 February 2009, the European Parliament also voted in favour of the creation of Synchronized Armed Forces Europe (SAFE) as a first step towards a forming a true European military force. In 2012, an EU army still does not exist and does not seem to be a priority. There have however been a number of defence initiatives, peacekeeping operations and organizations established in the context of the European Union (EU).
CURRENT DEBATE
The creation of an EU army has always been complicated. Member states usually do not want to give up their sovereignty and there is a lack of political will. Many forces already exist and out of the 27 EU member states, 21 are also members of NATO. An EU army does not appear as a necessity and can even spread confusion given the number of existing military forces and organizations. It could actually make the EU more coherent and unified, but the difficult of conciliating the interests of 27 countries. The nature of this army is also discussed: what would be its role? Peacekeeping or also offering humanitarian aid after natural disasters and famines? Besides, member states would contribute to the financing according to their means, but then, what about the leadership? In 2008 and 2009 the European Parliament voted with a large resolution proposing that Eurocorps (an independent military force composed of 60,000 troops that can be deployed for various missions) should become the standing army of the EU, under EU command. France, United Kingdom and Germany support the creation of an EU army.
FEDERALIST PERSPECTIVE & PROPOSAL
The federalists support the creation of an EU army. They think that Europe should have its army to conduct military operations and seize the opportunity to increase added value in European defence and to guarantee Europe’s strategic autonomy. They welcomed “the provisions on structured cooperation by a group of Member States, in order to forge, inter alia, a common defence, including the pooling of military spending and the incremental integration of their defence capabilities, which should be put at the permanent disposal of the UN, and to bestow on them a permanent seat in the UN Security Council”. They are in favour of pooling and sharing of military capabilities, to reduce the costs and to unite the European Union.
REFERENCES
About Common Security and Defence Policy, Council of the European Union website: http://www.consilium.europa.eu/eeas/security-defence
“UK defence minister supports EU army”, EU Observer, 27 October 2008: http://euobserver.com/13/27000
“Germany speaks out in favour of European army”, EU Observer, 8 February 2010: http://euobserver.com/9/29426
“Eurocorps: future European army or missed attempt?”, The New Federalists, 13 July 2008: http://www.thenewfederalist.eu/Eurocorps-future-European-army-or-missed-attempt
“European Army: De Gaulle’s Alternative”, The Magazine US: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,817685,00.html
Treaty between the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the French Republic for Defence and Security Cooperation: http://www.fco.gov.uk/resources/en/pdf/3706546/3892733/21824849/TrFrance1.2010DefenceSec
“Making the European Union Capable for Action”, Union of European Federalists, 28 March 2010: http://www.federalists.eu/uef/news/making-the-european-union-capable-for-action/
“Resolution on European External Action Service”, Union of European Federalists, 28 March 2010:http://www.federalists.eu/uef/news/resolution-on-foreign-security-and-defence-policy/
“The Franco-British Defence Deal: A first move towards a European Army?”, federalists.cafebabel.com , 4 November 2010: http://federalists.cafebabel.com/en/post/2010/11/04/The-Franco-British-Defence-Deal%3A-A-first-move-towards-a-European-Army
“Towards a European Army”, The New Federalist, 21 July 2007: http://www.thenewfederalist.eu/Towards-a-European-army
http://european-federalists.wikispaces.com/EU+Army
Now the EU has admitted it will have an
EU Army         UK policy re EU army
UK Parliament 12 European Defence Agency
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201213/cmselect/cmeuleg/86xxv/8615.htm
UK Parliament. European Scrutiny Committee 25th Report 19 Dec 2012 http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201213/cmselect/cmeuleg/86xxv/8602.htm
EUROPEAN DEFENCE AGENCY (E D A)
Vacancy notice EDA/2013/108a (Agency’s Seconded National Expert)
https://www.eda.europa.eu/EDAVacancies/Notice.aspx?IDVano=249
EU Armed Force

This very short video is a year old, but even so you may not have seen it before and it is well worth watching

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kmu0D_pca1Q

It is an ‘Advert’ for the creation of the EU’s own armed forces.  I was on the Security and Defence Committee from 2004 to 2009 and I warned that the EU was doing this by means of a Common Procurement Policy, Common Command and Control Structures and Common Communications Systems; and pulling it all together under the auspices of using it for ‘humanitarian’ actions.

 The Treaty on European Union (Maastricht 1992) made it plane that the EU was to have its own Security and Defence Policy, leading to a ‘Common Defence’. Most reasonable people would interpret ‘common defence’ to mean common armed forces. The Lisbon Treaty of course estbalished the EU’s own Foreign Policy with its own ‘Foreign Minister’.  Foreign policy is of course ulmtimately useless without armed forces to back it up.

Dutch soldiers to be under the command of a German officer

Thursday 12 June 2014

The Dutch Air Manoeuvre Brigade is being fused with a similar German unit and falls under German command from Thursday.

It is the first time a Dutch and a German military unit have been combined, bringing the Dutch soldiers under the command of a German major-general.

Dutch defence minister Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert and her German counterpart Ursula von der Leyen will attend the integration ceremony on Thursday afternoon at the headquarters of the German division in Stadtallendorf.

Rapid

‘The objective is for the Netherlands and Germany to have a well-integrated unit by 2018 that can be rapidly deployed anywhere in the world, as long as both countries agree,’ Hennis told the media.

‘It is a unique step and an important milestone in German-Dutch defence cooperation,’ she said.

EU army

According to defence expert Rob de Wijk of The Hague Centre for Strategic Studies, it is the first step towards a European army. ‘It goes much further than the cooperation we have seen so far,’ he told the Volkskrant.

The new brigade will consist of 8,000 German soldiers and 2,000 Dutch soldiers. The Dutch brigade will remain at its bases in Schaarsbergen and Assen.

– See more at: http://www.dutchnews.nl/news/archives/2014/06/dutch_soldiers_to_be_under_the.php#sthash.jlolGoMl.dpuf

Army veteran left homeless after council officials did not make him housing list priority as he is ‘not a drunk or drug addict’
Matthew Dennis served in army for nine years becoming Lance Corporal
But he lost his job after his company in Dorset went into liquidation
Was evicted from flat in Bournemouth in Dorset and slept rough for 2 days
Mr Dennis asked the council for help but claims he was refused support
He was told ‘because he doesn’t have drink or drug problem not a priority’
Ex-serviceman is being temporarily housed by military charity
Under MOD covenant ex-servicemen and women should be given support
Council said it offered advice about supported housing, Mr Dennis denies
By CLAIRE CARTER FOR MAILONLINE
PUBLISHED: 13:58, 4 December 2014 | UPDATED: 22:24, 4 December 2014

2.3k
shares
1.5k
View comments
An army veteran who served in Northern Ireland and Bosnia for almost 10 years and became homeless claims he was told he is not on a council’s ‘priority list’ because ‘he doesn’t have a drink or drug problem’.
Matthew Dennis, 39, has already been forced to sleep rough once and is now concerned he could end up having to sleep on the streets again.
The former Lance Corporal claims he was told by Bournemouth District Council that as he does not have a drink or drug problem he is not on their ‘priority list’ for accommodation so has been left homeless.
In failing to find him a home the authority also is not following the armed forces covenant, which was introduced by the Ministry of Defence, to ensure service personnel are not disadvantaged by being in the army.
Scroll down for video

+3
Army veteran Matthew Dennis has been left homeless after he claims Bournemouth District Council said he was not on a priority list for housing in the area because he does not have a drink or drugs problem
Under the covenant authorities are required to give priority to help former service personnel find housing. Bournemouth District Council claimed this did not apply after veterans had been out of the army for five years – but the Ministry of Defence said there is no time limit on the covenant.
Mr Dennis said: ‘I do feel let down.’
‘I went to the council for help. They said since I don’t have any problems with drugs or alcohol, I am not a priority.’
Mr Dennis was evicted from his rented flat last week after losing his job as a kitchen fitter which he worked as since leaving the armed forces in 2000. He lost his job after the company went into liquidation.
RELATED ARTICLES
Previous
1
Next

Makeshift huts, underground homes and tons of hazardous…

Husband’s horrifying 911 call after his wife finds body of…
SHARE THIS ARTICLE
Share
He is currently being put up in a bed and breakfast, at a cost of £95 a week – which is being paid for by Homes4Heroes.
David Wood, a co-ordinator for the charity said: ‘Matthew spent a few days sleeping rough before coming to us. He doesn’t know the benefits system. He has worked all his adult life and has served his country for nine years and this is the first time he has needed help.
‘At first a guy in the housing office said there was a place available but he had to go and check with his supervisor. When he came back 10 minutes later he was told he was not a priority case as he was not vulnerable.
‘There was no more assistance offered. I was disgusted.
Army veteran left homeless in Bournemouth speaks out

David Wood (left) from Homes4Heroes said Bournemouth District Council should help the ex-serviceman
+3
David Wood (left) from Homes4Heroes said Bournemouth District Council should help the ex-serviceman
‘The Armed Forces Covenant outlines a duty of care our society owes our armed services, who have represented the country.
‘Part of that duty is to ensure they are a priority for housing when they are vulnerable, as they are when they are on the streets exposed to the elements and attacks by others.’
Mr Wood said the charity only has limited resources to pay to help ex-servicemen and women with housing.
He said he believes Bournemouth District Council should be following the Armed Forces Covenant to help the 39-year-old.
Mr Dennis claims he was told he was not a priority for housing by Bournemouth District Council
+3
Mr Dennis claims he was told he was not a priority for housing by Bournemouth District Council
Bournemouth council claimed Mr Dennis was provided with advice and offered the option of applying for supported housing and refused, although he denies this, saying little useful information was provided.
Kelly Ansell, the council’s senior strategic housing manager, said the homeless were assessed on a case-by-case basis.
She said: ‘When specifically dealing with former HM Forces personnel our decisions take account of the military covenant and homelessness legislation which was applied in this case.
‘Mr Dennis has the right to request a review of the decision made and we would be happy to re-visit the discussion on his housing options with him.’
A spokesman for the council said the officer has considered vulnerability according to the homelessness legislation, and specifically considered whether the applicant is a ‘Vulnerable former members of the armed forces’.
They said he would not have been told he was not considered a priority because of a drink or drug problem.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2860748/Army-veteran-left-homeless-council-officials-did-not-make-housing-list-priority-not-drunk-drug-addict.html#ixzz3L05b66kN
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

2 responses to “2012 – 022 Degrading the morale and capabilities of UK Armed Forces

  1. Do you even listen to yourself? Such an amount of bull**** should be forbidden… As if there was a masterplan in existence, for which the UK should be knocked out? How paranoid do you have to be? And what do think who you are, that you have the right to insult us germans, the french and others, that we want to attack the UK? Is it your curse to repeat the history over and over again? Even the french aren´t as retard as you and think, we wanted to invade them! And since Germany never managed to set a single foot on british soil, but on french soil several times, they would have had good reason to fear such a scenario.

    Yes, there will (hopefully) be a european army, but if the UK believes, that it can play superpower again and restore its empire, just go bancrupt due to budgets which are too high and believe, that you are more than just a junior partner for the US. You were already pretty well doing so in 2003, when you helped them chase nuclear weapons, which you can still search for. To be honest, I am not convinced, that a military reaction ist always the solution to go with, but at least I know, that I want my country to be in a EUrope, where the European Parliament gets more and more empowered, where there is the future prospect to elect a european gouvernement, which is responsible to all europeans. Once this is the case, with doublications of armament and required personel reduced to a minimum, between 27 and 60 bn euros could be saved for purposes like education, social affairs and so on. And if there ever again occurs the need to defend one country against an attack; this will impose a serious threat both economically as well as militarily to the rest of our continent. Just ask Poland now (who also asked for military support of the other countries, including Germany)…

    • If it is as a conspiricy theory as you suggest the why were Merkel and Van Rompuy awarded the EU Coudenhove Kalergi prize?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *