Friday, April 30, 2010

Immigration: they finally tell the truth

Finally after how many years and the three leaders of the tired, old parties have a debate on immigration.

Listening to it I actually think the most harmful policy is that of the Conservative Party. Why? Well as Nick Clegg and Gordon Brown correctly pointed out one can't control immigration within the European Union.

Let's leave aside the fact that Labour, Tory and Lib Dems voted for unlimited immigration and expansion of the European Union and support Turkish entry to the EU. The fact is that you either have immigration controls which treat everyone coming to this country for economic reasons the same or you don't.

It's not the highly skilled Kiwis I have a problem coming to Britain it's the Bulgarian pimps. Under Cameron's system what we'd end up with is companies not being able to employ the best people for the job based on their country of origin and that is not good for our businesses and so fundamentally, for our economy.

Wednesday, April 28, 2010

Whilst the country tightens its belt

It's been an interesting day on the financial markets following Greece having it's credit rating demoted to 'junk' as Spain has its credit rating cut from AA+ to AA. A much bigger economy that Portugal or Greece, investors had their eyes on the much bigger country as an indicator of how a country in deep financial mire could get itself out of the mess. Not easily, it would seem and losing control of interest rates and control of the currency makes the whole process a hell of a lot harder.

Meanwhile, back in the UK and away from our moronic Prime Minister calling a woman who didn't agree with him a bigot, the fundamental policy people are concerned about is also the economy.

So here's a number we should all be looking at: £7 billion. This is the increase the European Commission have decided to hoist upon us tax payers, blithely ignoring the fact that they are a detriment to our democracy and our economy.

As the UK is the second biggest contributer to the EU pig trough this will see our contributions soar by £450 million a year.

Experts last night pointed out that the final budget is likely to be higher still as the Commission has not including the cost of setting up the EU’s new diplomatic service, which is expected to add billions to the total.
EU Budget Commissioner Janusz Lewandowski said the huge spending increase was needed to allow Brussels to help aid the economic

And you can rest assured that it won't go on anything beneficial for this is an institution which requires two parliamentary buildings, one which is only in use for 40 days a year, that hasn't had its accounts signed off for 15 years and which is stuck in some soviet system of economics where ten year plans are rolled off the production line by seemingly unembarrassed bureaucrats who ignore the inconvenient truth that every plan they've put in place turns to shit. They're hailed as successes by plastic politicians who have as much economic sense as a fused 1960s toaster.

No. Instead our hard earned money; what remains once the Treasury have bent us over their mahogany desks and taken us roughly from behind; will go on a variety of pointless, nay harmful projects, including an 18% rise in 'regional funds' which can't be accounted for but examples include your money being spent on underground systems in Eastern Europe. Also on the list is a 14% increase in spending to 'tackle climate change'. With their eyes screwed shut and their hands over their ears they miss information like statistics and great fucking volcanoes spewing more ash than 50 years worth of Sloanes in their 4x4s. The politicians are right; the people are to blame.

Remember that when they say that 'Europe' isn't relevant to this election: that it's all about the economy, squabbling over £6bn 'will they, won't they' taxes on jobs...

Remember that when you look at Clegg and wonder if he's worth the risk: the man who used to work in the European Commission and who says he thinks that the reason we don't like the EU is because it reminds us of losing our Empire. Not the democratic deficit or the huge waste, the massive injustice and the fact that they could not give one fuck about us. No; it's all about the Empire.

Remember that next Thursday.

It may not be illegal but...

Via this blog post I have just discovered comes some very interesting news regarding 'anti sleaze candidate: self appointed' John Stevens:

And yet, when Stevens was an MEP, he received a set payment, currently worth around £40,000 per year, to run a constituency office. As MEP for the old Euro constituency of Thames Valley, when he first was elected in 1989, he listed in the 'grey list' - the European Parliament's official list of MEP contact details, an office at 70, High Street, Sunninghill, Ascot. However, by the official list published on the 18th February 1991, that address had disappeared, and his official contact addresses were listed as 40 Smith Square, London SW1, and 15 St James's Place, London SW1.

40 Smith Square is a house (in the most expensive area in London), while 15 St James's Place were the offices of his employers, Rothschild Asset Management.

So how much money did squeaky clean John Stevens get from the tax payer to have an office in the UK?

In today's money he would have received over £300,000.

Comments from Mr Stevens, anyone? Should I call Lib Dem HQ and ask them, as he's such a supporter?


According to information from the European Parliament office, Stevens only had a constituency office for 19 months out of the ten years he was an MEP.

This means there's about £212000 meant for his office which didn't go on one.

Monday, April 26, 2010

The Britblog roundup is here!

Friday, April 23, 2010

And why would you vote Labour?

Just a quick reality check in the form of a blast from the past, chaps.

Why would anyone vote Labour when we still are in doubts over the truth of the Hutton Inquiry?

You know, when three men resigned over investigative journalism in the public interest, a weapons expert died in quite obviously mysterious circumstances having spoken to the press and the PM's spin doctor was trapped, Aragog-like, circa 'Return of the King' but got off scot free...

And we forgive these cunts and almost one third of the voting population want them back in power?

Seriously? This is not some student party where my warm vodka and tonic comes mixed with mind altering drugs?

We appear to be a nation engrosed with Belle de Jour and her saucy tales of S and M for we desire a mentally deficient crag of rock to beat us before taking us against our will and charging us for the pleasure.

And why would you vote Labour?

Thursday, April 22, 2010

In, Out, shake it all about

This leaders' debate is really much better when you watch it with the sound off. And read text on a different web page.

Last week I was involved. I listened to all of it, hurling insults at the screen and seriously reducing my life expectancy by dramatic raising of blood pressure. And for what? The Three Musketeers couldn't hear me and even if they could they would have responded the way they do to the rest of the population by simply ignoring me.

But tonight they managed to spend about three minutes having a quick discussion about the place where most of our rules are made: Brussels.

Beforehand we have been treated to some round ups by various news outlets including some pushing the line that Clegg, gang-banger of the EU social model, wanted to have a referendum on in or out.

I'd like to think that my darling readers, as well as being aware of my natural attributes, are also smart cookies who wouldn't trust a Lib Dem as far as they could throw one. But it's often best with these rather important topics to hammer the point home, as it were.

The Lib Dems were the party who denied the country the right to have an In-Out referendum on our continued membership of the European Union.

They denied us the right to have a referendum on Lisbon.

Shall I remind you?

Hold 3 line whip to abstain; ignore snide comments that 'only the Lib Dems would have a three line whip on not doing anything from prominent opponents of the EU.

Do complete u-turn. Ignore comments that you should be supporting the amendment in the House of Lords calling for a referendum on membership since you have been calling for it, including on high profile morning radio programmes.
9. Vote against the referendum you desired to avoid a referendum on what you promised. Send out anonymous spokesman to talk about why you want a biased referendum on an issue you think you have the better chance of winning even though the amendments requesting a referendum by you and another party were identical.

Look; I know you don't trust the bastards. Just make sure you tell your friends as I bet they aren't half so intelligent as you



Tuesday, April 20, 2010

Did the earth move for you, darling?

There are times when these stories just write themselves and this, as you can probably guess, is one of those occasions.

A senior Iranian cleric says women who wear revealing clothing and behave promiscuously are to blame for earthquakes.

Where do I go from there? This is a part of the world where a woman revealing any part of her barnet is tantamount to the scandal which would be created in Western society if a stripper decided to receive the Body of Christ in Church by smearing it on her erect nipples. And yet these whores are now responsible for tectonic plate movement?

Hands up, I'm an atheist. There is little one could do to convince me of some great and wondrous being short of actually proving it and it's fairly simple to correlate any religious fundamentalism with the restriction of freedom of speech and the freedom of women in particular.

But it's a sad state of affairs when people are taken seriously for this kind of nonsense:
"A divine authority told me to tell the people to make a general repentance. Why? Because calamities threaten us," said Sedighi, Tehran's acting Friday prayer leader. Referring to the violence that followed last June's disputed presidential election, he said: "The political earthquake that occurred was a reaction to some of the actions [that took place]. And now, if a natural earthquake hits Tehran, no one will be able to confront such a calamity but God's power, only God's power ... So let's not disappoint God."

Why hasn't the centre of SoHo been hit with some calamity, aside from litter and drunken tourists? Given the propensity of crotch-skimming skirts and boob tubes, shouldn't the businesses there be struggling to get insurance given the number of divinely driven disasters which rock the streets in outrage at the blatant two fingers to the strict moral code of religion?

Why are the bars serving anything but communion wine, I ask myself.

We are heading straight for a disaster and it's all the fault of underwired bras. And hormones.

Monday, April 19, 2010

A bit rude at shell?

I'm not sure what my friend was searching for when he found this website but it made me laugh. It made my colleague a little confused because she took the survey and it started telling her about swinging.

Britblog roundup: the Eyjafjallajoekull edition

Apologies for the delay in this week's edition but I've been stuck on an island in the North Sea and I've only just made it back to the mainland. It was tough going: I only had a fun sized mars bar (which as a vegetarian I cannot eat anymore and thus had to use it as a paddle) and a lilo in the shape of a crocodile.

This volcano has been something of a fag for all those wishing to commute anywhere apart from Dunstable or similar but luckily Mr Eugenides has flagged up this incredibly useful BBC site keeping you abreast of all your ash cloud related enquiries.

For those not just concerned with travelling, there is also a handy BBC article on ash related health questions. Thank goodness for that.

But of course the General Election is still on. It must be quite frustrating for candidates that despite their best efforts to get voters involved, they are being outdone by an inconvenient cloud of dust. As exciting as it is that for the fifth day people can't travel, might it not also illustrate that this campaign is really quite dull?

And this is despite the 'historic' leaders' debate which saw three men stand in front of lecterns clearly demonstrating the difference in their parties through the medium of ties in primary colours.

Not a Sheep has written about the one topic which saw the largest increase in support from those who were being monitored during the debate: immigration.

Meanwhile Letters from A Tory asks if the country can extricate itself from Cleggmania and looks at some stats being released this week which should have an impact on the news agenda.

Keeping on the subject of television, this week had a big impact in our world when The Devil decided to, well, dream up imaginative ways of killing people following an interview on The Daily politics.

Jackart doesn't think he should have apologised so quickly and although I agree, it's much easier to say that from behind a computer screen.

Does anyone think Chris, Old Etonian and decent chap would actually feed someone to a bath full of fire ants? Or make them suffer "Candiru fish craziness"? Any more than I would Skull-fuck the entire Labour cabinet to death or fire them into the North Sea using trebuchets? No. It is just saloon-bar invective, in Chris' case well written and, in context, highly entertaining. I think the apology and retraction were a mistake.

Meanwhile, Stumbling and Mumbling" picks up on Gordon's claim that Labour will be 'relentless reformers'.

Wat Tyler has been canvassing and finds that people aren't loving politicians, despite the promises to 'clean up politics'. [But then they did elect a speaker who was also embroiled in the expenses scandal himself: perhaps not a wise move?] The result of this apparent move towards a hung parliament is that this coalition people might wish for will instead be a 'Lib-Lab wash up'.

Technically this was last week, but Charles Crawford writes about the the legacy of Lech and maria Kaczynski.

Meanwhile, whilst we've all been looking at domestic politics and sqabbling over whether we should have a £6bn tax or not, A Place To Stand points out that we may have sight of the end of the cold war.

That's all from me, and for those of you wondering why it was a slightly right of centre round up it's because I only had one nomination this week.

When we're at Charlie's place next week, please do send in nominations to britblog [at] gmail [dot] com or I will send obo round to lead the entertainment at your children's birthday party.

Until then, pip pip!


Wednesday, April 14, 2010

Bercow's new buddies?

New to my blogroll is Skeptyk Blog which takes an interest in the assorted collection of nutters who spend their time creaming themselves over the thought that UKIP have done something wrong.

It's very remiss of me being so late to the party on this one [that damned 'work' nonsense keeps getting in the way!] particularly as apparently I write the thing. Gosh, well done me!

The latest post raises a couple of interesting questions also flagged up by The Common Man regarding none other than our esteemed Speaker, Mr Bercow:

The Common Man has been out on the campaign trail once again, and saw a very interesting meeting yesterday in Buckingham. While sipping a G&T in the White Hart, who should appear - miles from where they should have any business - but Nikki Sinclaire and Gary Cartwright, the liberal nazis. Surprising as that was, it was even more of a surprise to see incumbent and soon to be unemployed speaker of the Commons John Bercow enter with his campaign team shortly afterwards.

In a day of surprises, and just to top it all, they then all greeted each other cordially before the two elected members left together, with their entourages, out of the back door.

It's generally quite hard to miss Nikki Sinclaire although lofty John Bercow could skate under the radar. Perhaps this is the UKIPper the Guardian was talking about, handing out Lib Dem former Tory MEP John Steven's leaflets?

It's odd that someone elected on a UKIP ticket who decides that she doesn't want to sit in the EDF group where there is an obligation to pool allowances to fight continent wide campaigns is all of a sudden appearing to support pro-EU candidates.

A little bird did tell me that in one of her many conversations - honestly, the beauty of the prose and the well meaning statements can easily lead you to confuse the woman with Katherine Hepburn or similar - she told former UKIP leader Farage that she would ruin him. Makes a change from threatening to sue people, I suppose.

Maybe this is all part of the plan? She's throwing EU withdrawalism to the wall and climbing firmly into the Pro EU camp. Or perhaps it's that more traditional political trait of mud slinging? My enemy's enemy and all that...

Still, it does point to Bercow being concerned about holding his seat, which is a positive thought.

Monday, April 12, 2010

Discrimination more costly than amputation

It really does fuck me off when I read about women who sue their employers because they get knocked up and want the world to revolve around them. But it really winds me up when these women are in the Army, and an Army at war, at a time when one only needs to open a paper to see real courage whilst the defence budget gets slashed.

Sadly, Tilern DeBique appears to be one of those women who thinks her right to every weekend and evening off because she had sex without using contraception means that her colleagues should work more evenings and weekends.

A single mother soldier was today seeking a substantial six figure payout after winning her sex and race discrimination claims against the Army.
Tilern DeBique, 28, was serving with the 10th Signal Regiment and expected to be available for duty around the clock.

The mother-of-one was disciplined after failing to appear on parade because of childcare difficulties.

Her commanding officer told her that the Army was a 'war-fighting machine' and 'unsuitable for a single mother who couldn't sort out her childcare arrangements'.
Miss DeBique, a Foreign and Commonwealth soldier from St Vincent and the Grenadines, had two-bedroom family accommodation at Chelsea Barracks in south-west London.
But she had no-one to look after her daughter and wanted to bring her half-sister from St Vincent to the UK as a live-in carer.

I agree with the CO on this one. He has a Battalion to care about, not just one soldier.
A panel at Central London Employment Tribunal criticised the Army for not making any appropriate childcare arrangements for Miss Debique - especially after its costly recruitment drive in the Caribbean.

I'm thinking that there are better ways of spending the defence budget than child care?
It ruled that the Army had treated Miss DeBique less favourably than male soldiers and her non-Foreign and Commonwealth counterparts.

Her colleagues who didn't insist on having every evening and weekend off work. They were treated differently to her but presumably they aren't allowed to complain?

The landmark rulings are embarrassing for the Army, which must now consider the implications for its recruitment policy.

Do you remember when Godfrey Bloom said legislation pushing for 'rights' for women in the workplace was harming employment prospects for young women? A case in point here. Why would the Army make a point of recruiting women now, especially since there are only so many areas they can work in but men can work in all areas in the forces?
Miss DeBique was today seeking compensation for loss of earnings, injury to feelings and aggravated damages at Central London Employment Tribunal.

Selfish cow.
She says that had she not suffered discrimination, she would have seen out her full 22-year period of service.

Which most people don't serve.
It is believed that she is seeking a substantial six figure sum.

Funny, that. Easy street for her whilst former colleagues fight for their country.
Lawyers for the Ministry of Defence told the tribunal that the parties remained 'a very long way apart' after negotiations over a payout.
Miss DeBique told the tribunal today that it had always been her 'dream' to join the Army in England.

But to be treated differently to other soldiers because of her lifestyle choice?
She gave birth in August 2005 and made arrangements that she would work from 8.30am to 4.30pm on weekdays but would not undertake weekend duties.

Miss DeBique had childcare but in December 2006 her daughter fell ill and she missed training.

In January 2007, she failed to appear on parade for 'a reason relating to childcare difficulties'. She was told this was a serious offence and that she faced disciplinary action.

Maybe this makes me a complete bitch but I think the most important point about the Army is that it's a unit where everyone works together as a team. People risk their lives for each other and that bond is probably closer than many family units. This is called into question when certain people decide that they don't want to play by those rules.

I don't think that having children is a right, I think it's a privilege. As I have said on many occasions, I don't want children and it annoys me that because of that I don't leave work on the dot of 1700 but work unpaid overtime whilst my colleagues with kids wander off and expect us to continue filling the gaps.

But what really winds me up about this story is that Miss Childcare 2010 will get more for her one night of passion than someone will for losing a leg.

And if she thinks that is right then what the fuck was she doing in the Army in the first place?

Labour Lies go unchecked by mainstream media

Look. The government cannot impose language tests on EU workers regardless if they work as a GP, plumber or stripper.

Labour’s policy document says current English language requirements that apply only to non-EU public workers will be extended “to ensure all employees who have contact with the public have an appropriate level of…competence”.

The fact that all three parties jumped on the bandwagon last week regarding GPs when they all voted for it in Strasbourg and now Labour include it as part of their manifesto just shows that they could not give a shit what they tell you.

I haven't heard a journalist yet question Brown on his desire to break fundamental rules in EU legislation and I suspect that's ignorance.

And it makes me fucking sick.

They lie, knowing that people will vote for them anyway.

Don't vote for them.

And remember that this is the first manifesto launched by the Labour party since Gordon Brown's barrister used their inability to be trusted as a legal defence.
"manifesto pledges are not subject to legitimate expectation".

Sunday, April 11, 2010

Who said it?

If a telephone directory were published in Brussels, the Honourable Gentleman would believe that it was the forerunner of a European Constitution. We are not going to have such a constitution, so I am happy to categorically deny his statement


it will be no more binding than the Beano or the Sun,

Try this next one:
This is not a major change, There is no need for a referendum


I am not saying it has got no substantial constitutional significance. Of course it will have...
[gosh - T]

and then....wait for it
Our task is nothing less than the creation of a new constitutional order for a new, united Europe.
Whoa! Where did that admission of truth come from? Ah, DG FT....

The connection is that they both held the same job. One took over from the other one after a passport affair and was then given a job in Home Affairs (natch).

Quite a significant change in the way our country is run but obviously of no consequence to this General Election as we instead talk about tiny sums of money and allow Nick Clegg to be unquestioned in his frankly dangerous economic statements.

Essential reading

Once again comes from Christopher Booker, highlighting how little the voters realise about the importance of this election and why, by three party consensus, we are not being told just how very fucked we are.

Friday, April 09, 2010

Thursday, April 08, 2010

Political Poetry

The election appears to be progressing with the entire debate hinging around a measly £6 bn which in the grand scheme of things is fuck all. If the Tories hate National Insurance so much why don't they get rid of it.

Anyway, my contribution to the political analysis comes to you in the form of a (very short) poem.

If you want to win an election,
shag your wife without protection.

That is all.

Wednesday, April 07, 2010


Is this the kind of shit we're going to have to put up with during the General Election campaign?

Three parties are fighting over cutting £6bn in public spending when we give £45 million A FUCKING DAY to the EU.

Nick Clegg has demonstrated that the Lib Dems want to remove any incentives to start a business or be successful; the drivers of growth and yet no one picks him up on it, let alone the BBC.

And Peter Bloody Mandelson, the nightmare character from a 1990s computer game who, no matter how many times you splatter him with an axe and a chop to the temples Just. Will. Not. Fucking. Go - is not being pulled up on talking about democracy and referendums!

The Tory MP for Witney did wear a high-visibility yellow sash but no protective head-gear...

I want to discuss how the country is run, not fucking bicycling road safety. I couldn't give one. Why should I: I've seen no evidence that there are any brains there.

Zeus Like, you've kidnapped democracy

Woo Hoo! The General Election campaign is in its second day! Who gives a fuck? Anyone?

The man who has the power, the one you didn't elect, is the one you should be listening to. You'll have a tough time scouring the newspapers to find out what he thinks, though, and what the latest plans are. Why would you care when Samantha Cameron is pregnant?

Plod along and decide between three really dull fuckers who won't give you a say on the future of your country...

Tuesday, April 06, 2010

Britblog round up

Hip Hop Farage

I'm bored of the election already. Someone's dragged their wife onto the webcam to big them up (does she also provide his references?), someone else has jumped on a train and some people have gone to the hairdressers to try look more attractive.

Do they charge us for the privilege?

If you're also bored and can't deal with the thought of 30 days of non stop beige then this might raise a smile:

A click of the heels to Gawain

Monday, April 05, 2010

Do they ever bloody listen?

The Sun today has a story regarding L/Cpl Beharry VC and Gordon Brown. No prizes for guessing who I am cheering for: the man who has driven this country into the ground or the man who drove back into enemy fire to save the lives of his friends?

But this isn't just an attack on the PM over his actions to one person. I think that Johnson is a bigger person than that. But that appears to have escaped the notice of the Prime Minister and his spin doctors, who react to the story by saying:

The Prime Minister has the utmost respect and admiration for Lance Corporal Johnson Beharry, who has shown great courage.

"Mr Brown has written a personal letter to Johnson Beharry this evening to reassure him of his personal admiration and the great respect in which he is held by the whole country."

Fair enough. I would bloody well hope he had 'respect' for a man like that. He's personally not fit to bull his boots. But shall we have a quick look at what Johnson's objection was actually to?
[emphasis mine] It began at a reception in Downing Street in November 2008. I was in a line with other servicemen and he didn't look any of us in the eye when he shook our hands.

He was totally disinterested in us. It made me really angry but I just tried to forget it and moved on.

Then I saw him again in Westminster Abbey during the Remembrance Day service last November.

I was one of two soldiers laying the wreath to the Unknown Soldier.

Afterwards we all stood to attention during the two minute silence.

I picked a point to stare at so I could remain completely still and it happened to be him. Throughout the silence, he kept on fidgeting and moving. He couldn't even stand still for two minutes.

It's about the Prime Minister's reaction to the Armed Forces. It's about the fact that they went to war without the required equipment for a reason which hadn't been proven and was not allowed to be proven by UN weapons inspectors. It's about the statement to Chilcot saying that defence spending had risen every year in real terms when he himself knew that was not true because he was in charge of the Treasury.

It's a man who has no respect for the MoD, who, according to rumour, shunts colleagues he doesn't like there and who is seen by many in the military to use troops for his own popularity.

And when that statement is made perfectly clear he still can't answer the question properly.

Does Johnson Beharry VC care what a man like Brown thinks about him personally when he knows he has the respect and admiration of so many? I don't know, I'll ask him. Does he care what the Prime Minister thinks of the Armed Forces? Evidently. And I think we can see what Gordon does see them as.

Sunday, April 04, 2010

Fear of debate calmed by traditional political hypocrisy

Two things spring to mind when I hear the story of the 'scandal' which Chris Grayling has brought upon himself by daring to have an opinion.

A key Conservative has been recorded suggesting people who run bed and breakfasts in their homes should have the right to reject homosexual guests.
But shadow home secretary Chris Grayling said hotels should not be allowed to discriminate in that way.
Labour and the Lib Dems said the Tories would allow discrimination "to thrive".

Firstly, that I think that a Conservative has expressed an opinion, albeit not one he thought he was acknowledging in public, which could be considered libertarian.

Secondly, he's a bloody great hypocrite for trying to wriggle out of engaging in debate on state control by boasting that he voted for the draconian legislation in the first place.

If someone owns a building, why is it not up to them who can stay in there? They own it, not the state. The state really should fuck off.

In much the same way as a landlord should say whether people should smoke in their pub, not a group of politicians for whom the rules don't apply and who feather their nests with our cash.

I would have had respect for Chris had he said 'yes, that's what I believe in. I am allowed to have opinions, these are what they are and why don't we talk about this instead of hurling the threats of homophobia and racism around. Like the person who resorts to shouting in a pub argument because they don't have the ability to have rational debate, those special interest groups who want everyone to dance to their tune can't see that people have, and should be entitled to have objections.

Thursday, April 01, 2010

Like a man in uniform?

I am partial to a bit of Khaki myself but a good selection of them are like a shoe shopping experience.

Not only do you get a great bag and tissue paper to wander down the road with but when you get them home you rip off the packaging and have a great pair of shoes to play with.

I wrote the other day about some curious MoD behaviour but putting that to one side and remembering that in April when we're eating chocolate and getting shit sick of 'The Most Boring General Election Campaign Ever' TM there will be about 9500 members of Her Majesty's Armed Forces in Afghanistan.

Soldiers know that at some time they’ll be asked to risk everything. And they’re prepared to do it.

They know their life might be cut short or changed forever. They know that could mean never seeing their mates, their family, their children or their local again.

They’ll tell you it’s what they’re trained to do and that they’re doing their job. They’re asked to do many things. Thanks to the political will that deploys them they’re asked to win hearts and minds, often in an atmosphere of hatred and resentment.

To be nationbuilders in societies where almost nothing functions normally. To be peacekeepers and find that there is no peace to keep.

To these tasks, they bring their training, their determination, their own inimitable language and a wacky sense of humour.

And while they represent an Army with long traditions and the highest standards, they’re are not stuck in the past. These young people take their iPods to war, connect to home through satellite television and read the tabloids on their computers.

They work hard, they play hard, and they care a lot about what we think of them. And when things go horribly wrong as they sometimes do, they’d never ask for your help.

But we do. When they’ve put everything on the line it’s our job to ask for something from those of us that they serve to defend.

When they’ve risked their lives, and everything that they hold dear, we’re here to provide them and their families with lifetime support.

That’s why we’re The Soldiers’ Charity.

Cuts to services which are there for soldiers and their families, particularly in a time of war, take 'Front Line Cuts' to a whole new meaning.

This means that inevitably it'll be charities which fill the gaps that central and local government can't provide. That's not speculation, that's a fact. It's happening already with young soldiers being refused funding by local authorities for wheelchair ramps to allow them to spend Christmas at home. With amputees being told that they can't have a walk in shower but should stand up and wash because the local authority doesn't deem it essential. And yet executive officers for cycling are.

So this April while there are guys out fighting unquestioningly for this country, do something for them.

It can be as simple as joining in the Big Curry, and most people like a curry, or it can be a little bit more crazy.

Seeing as we bloggers try to break the mould in how events are covered (using facts for example) I'm going for this challenge:

Best contributor gets a kiss from me.

If you don't want to jump out of a plane or white water raft, why not just donate some money when you next order a take away? If you're a UK tax payer you can gift aid it. It's better than Gordon getting it. Or those other tedious bastards.