Sergeant ‘O’ And Orwellian New Speak That Is Making A Laughing Stock Out Of The British Political and Legal System

National Defence & Strategy Research Group

Exposing the incoherence and weakness in the United Kingdom’s

Defence and Security Strategies

Contact: info@defencesynergia.co.uk, Website: www.defencesynergia.co.uk

Sergeant ‘O’ And Orwellian New Speak That Is Making A Laughing Stock Out Of The British Political and Legal System

It must seem to most right thinking people that to pursue a former British soldier on a charge of ‘firing into a wall’ 46 years ago is the stuff of satire. Sadly, in Great Britain, in 2018, this is the disgraceful situation in which our political and legal system has placed a loyal serviceman. However, it does not begin or end here. From Iraq to Afghanistan, Kenya to Northern Ireland, Cyprus to Malaya an allegation against a British Serviceman however ancient, vague, spurious or already legally disposed, is pursued.

And whilst it is understandable that former Mao Mao, IRA/Sinn Fein, Iraqi or ISIL terrorists and their apologists in the British legal and political establishment would advocate such a policy DefenceSynergia says it is incumbent upon the Prime Minister, her Government, the Service Heads and the British public to support our troops. In so doing denying succour, financial reward and cheap political gain to people who are not just hostile to the United Kingdom, but who despise the very values that the Chief of the Defence Staff (CDS) referred to on the ‘Today’ programme on 3rd July 2018.

It is good that CDS has spoken out but as Sergeant ‘O’ and others have intimated Veterans require more than mere words if this persecution of serving and veteran service personnel is to be stopped. As the BBC Defence Spokesman, Jonathan Beale, has pointed out, what CDS says, however worthy, does not overcome the legalities. As things stand, no matter what our naïve Secretary of State for Northern Island, Karen Bradley, thinks, there is no legal level playing field at work here.

British service personnel operate within Defence Council Instructions, Rules of Engagement, Queens Regulations, Manuals of Military Law, and the Criminal Law system. They face internal disciplinary procedure via ‘the Officer Commanding (OC) and/or Commanding Officers (CO) Orderly Room Procedure, Boards of Inquiry, Summary of Evidence procedure, Courts Martial and Crown Courts. Despite this panoply of legal procedures ranged against British Service personnel Her Majesty’s Government has seen fit over several years to launch one inquiry after another culminating in millions of pounds and years spent over historic allegations – Iraq, Afghanistan and Northern Ireland.

Therefore, unlike the Terrorists they fight, British servicemen and women are subject to endless investigation by OCs, Cos, Summaries of Evidence, Charge procedures and investigations by the Navy, Military, RAF Police and/or the civilian Police Authority. In fact, unlike civilians, British Forces personnel face multi-jurisdictional inquiry and action, some for offences that do not break civil law. What is more, for British Veterans and some serving personnel these various legal processes are repeated over many years, almost as if there was an institutional intent to ‘March the Guilty Bastard In’.

Therefore, Karen Bradley and her Cabinet colleagues should be advised that instead of ‘a level legal playing field’ HM Armed Forces are held to higher moral and ethical standards (arguably legal too) within a highly disciplined, documented and regulated regimen than any civilian and certainly ‘terrorist’.