# Forces Halts Soldiers' UNMARKED Care Packages



## dangerboy (11 Dec 2007)

Forces halts soldiers' care packages
  
The Montreal Gazette 


Tuesday, December 11, 2007


MONTREAL - More than 1,700 care packages collected by Montreal-area community groups and residents destined for Canadian troops in Afghanistan have been grounded after the military said they could not be sent overseas.

Citing security concerns and a lack of space on transport aircraft, the Canadian Forces informed the members of the Roxboro Legion, who spearheaded the drive, that it cannot accept the packages. Parcels must be addressed to a specific soldier, the military said, and not "Any CF member."

Organizers are devastated, especially Jean Bisson, whose son, Capt. Mike Bisson of the Royal Canadian Hussars, was instrumental in starting the drive.

A peacekeeper in Bosnia, he told area Legion members how touched he was to receive a care package from Ontario while he was overseas.

"Not so much the contents, but just the fact people were thinking of him," Ms. Bisson said. "It was a touch of home."

Her other son, David, has been serving in Afghanistan since June, also with the Hussars. Aiding in the collection helped to take her mind off her worries.

Members started canvassing in June, collecting from community centres, churches, schools, and other Legions to fill boxes with shaving cream, toothpaste, deodorant, shampoo, wet wipes, playing cards and letters or thank-you cards.

"We had children, some as young as five years old, making pictures to send over," Ms. Bisson said.

Ms. Bisson was holding out hope that a solution could be found, if not in time for Christmas, then perhaps New Year's or afterward.

"The soldiers will still be there," she said.

© The Ottawa Citizen 2007

http://www.canada.com/components/print.aspx?id=23143fe3-7257-4775-b346-fce5afadf7c7


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (11 Dec 2007)

I guess that doesn't apply to letters which have been sent in bulk address to "Any Canadian Soldier"


----------



## dangerboy (11 Dec 2007)

I am guessing that this is a relatively new rule, (or they are starting to enforce old rules) as I can remember receiving care packages addressed any soldier last year overseas.


----------



## Rodahn (11 Dec 2007)

In my opinion I think that this is a travesty, I know that when I was overseas, getting packages was a high point of my tour. I realise that there are limitations on cargo space, however anything to lift the moral of the troops is a good thing, and space should be made available if only in limited quantity.


----------



## Nfld Sapper (11 Dec 2007)

Back on Dec 5 this notice appeared DND News Release

News Release

Write to the Troops, No Packages Please
NR-07.103 - December 5, 2007

OTTAWA -- Canadians have indicated a desire to do something for Canadian Forces members deployed on missions around the world. This outpouring of support and generosity is very much appreciated. Canadians should take note, however, that the CF re-supply system cannot handle care packages addressed to “Any CF member” for a variety of reasons, including security and volume.

Postcards and letters addressed to “Any CF member” are acceptable but, unfortunately, parcels cannot be delivered and will be returned to sender. A list of mailing addresses as well as detailed postal information for CF operations is available on the http://www.forces.gc.ca website. 

Family and friends of deployed military personnel are invited to explore the http://www.canadapost.ca website to learn about their program of postage-free mailings to deployed military members. 

One way in which Canadians can express their support is by e-mail messages on the forces web site http://www.forces.gc.ca. The “Write to the troops” message board is one of the preferred methods to show support. 

For a variety of other ways to show support to the troops, visit the Canadian Forces Personnel Support Agency’s website at http://www.cfpsa.com/supportourtroops.

-30-

RSS DND/CF News (What is RSS?)


----------



## PMedMoe (11 Dec 2007)

I have to admit, it must be very disappointing for both the organizers and the soldiers, however, here's the link for mailing items to "any" soldier which states "Please note that only parcels as described in the "Bulk Mail" paragraph below are acceptable. Parcels that contain items other than correspondence, such as care packages or donations, will be returned to the sender at the sender’s expense." and there is a link for Donations.

Edit: Nfld Sapper, you beat me to it!!


----------



## armyvern (11 Dec 2007)

This has ALWAYS been the policy.

Letters addressed to "Any Canadian Soldier" were acceptable & packages addressed to "Any Canadian Soldier" were not acceptable.

Is this merely news this week because the Christmas Season is approaching? I'd guess so, as there's a thread running on this site already from this time last year ... which pointed out the EXACT same policy. It just seems that Canadians themselves feel the need to collect for our soldiers at this time of year (and that's NOT a bad thing), the re-itteration of the policy is nothing new -- it's an attempt to stave off the influx of parcels that simply can't (and never have been) be sent overseas.

The CF is just trying to get the word out again -- that despite these citizens finest and much appreciated efforts -- the parcels simply can't go and to save them both the effort of organizing and putting together these packages and the disappointment/aggravation that would be expericed upon learning their parcels would not be shipped.

The title of this thread is VERY misleading. The Forces has NOT halted soldiers' care packages from home which are addressed to them. Nor has the Forces halted care packages to "any Canadian Soldier" from ordinary Canadian -- because they NEVER could be sent anyway. You can't halt what was never allowed, the Forces is simply reitterating the policy which has ALWAYS existed.


----------



## Command-Sense-Act 105 (11 Dec 2007)

If people want to do something for soldiers, but there are problems getting things to theatre, I believe we should be steering them towards assisting the families that are back here, not just of those deployed, but in general.  Sailors at sea, people away on course, young families far from their original homes, with small children, dealing the adopting to military culture, possibly unfamiliar language and environments - these things happen here in Canada every day.

Things like this should be steered towards MFRCs.  The troops in theatre generally have plenty (no flames, please, BTDT, appreciated the support but we did get a lot of things pushed to us and were never hurting for goodies to eat) but can't do a lot to help out their families while they are far away.

I am sure the MFRCs will be able to put donations to good use.

My 2 Rand...


----------



## armyvern (11 Dec 2007)

The MFRC in Charlottetown actively steered Community Groups etc towards most of the things you've mentioned below CSA. I don't know if that's a National Policy, but when we did receive bulk packages addressed to "any Canadian Soldier" we would look to make sure that they got distributed to somewhere where they were needed -- we'd also let the orginator of the parcel know the intent in case they had any objections to it. Wonderfully, none ever did.


----------



## tomahawk6 (11 Dec 2007)

Just send the packages through the BG's home base which then can send them on to Kandahar. Otherwise this is not only a PR issue but also a morale issue. Where there is a will there is a way.


----------



## armyvern (11 Dec 2007)

tomahawk6 said:
			
		

> Just send the packages through the BG's home base which then can send them on to Kandahar. Otherwise this is not only a PR issue but also a morale issue. Where there is a will there is a way.



Sure it's a morale issue, in the eyes of the Canadian public, but then those soldiers are STILL getting their carepackages from their loved ones delivered to them on a priority basis.

So, it all get's to Trenton via the BG. What do we do now? Have a shipment from a BG deemed a priority ... and bump some of those augmentees _family-sent_ care packages off the flight because they're on the opposite coast from the BG? Bump medical supplies? Ammo? Critical spares?

This is Canada and our air cargo space is extrememly limited for this trip -- if somethings got to be given up ... it certainly shouldn't be anything that the mission requires for success, nor should it be anything sent by loved ones. Sadly, in the grand scheme of things -- somethings got to be given the lowest priority for shipment.

We bump critical spares off flights_ now _ to accomodate packages from family. This policy exists for a reason.


----------



## jswift872 (11 Dec 2007)

I don't think it's right. When I was over I got a few from the MFRC, addressed to any Reserve Soldier, I was over January to August this year.


----------



## armyvern (11 Dec 2007)

J-Swift said:
			
		

> I don't think it's right. When I was over I got a few from the MFRC, addressed to any Reserve Soldier, I was over January to August this year.



The MFRC packages are a little different.

The MFRC is located on your base.

The MFRC packages are organized, packed, wrapped, labelled etc right there by staff for shipping. They are security checked. They KNOW what's in those boxes -- they pack them!! They also get funds to buy soldiers those items with while the soldier is deployed. A package from your supporting MFRC is LIKE a package from home -- your Unit. There's a HUGE difference.

I also sent shipments of packages over to "any Reserve Soldier" -- but only those packages that we did up and packed right there in Detachment Charlottetown's MFRCs. That's called security.


----------



## riggermade (11 Dec 2007)

Evil she-mod who owns a whip said:
			
		

> The MFRC packages are a little different.
> 
> The MFRC is located on your base.
> 
> ...



Anything being sent over that is not checked is a nightmare.  When 3 RCR was over there and Storring got his 15 min of fame for all the stuff that went over to the Afghans it was a nightmare, myself and 1 Cpl were  rear party QM and had to go thru over 200 triwalls of mostly junk to ensure there was no dangerous goods.


----------



## simysmom99 (11 Dec 2007)

The policy is a good one.  Let's make we give our soldiers what they need to take care of themselves and the Afghans before we start sending over more soccer balls, candy and other assorted stuff that is really not needed.  This was brought to light very poorly.  Instead of saying that we don't accept anything, why isn't the Canadian Public being encouraged to write?  Send a card, tell a soldier what is happening in their home town.  Or, are they just not hearing the whole message?


----------



## midget-boyd91 (11 Dec 2007)

simysmom99 said:
			
		

> why isn't the Canadian Public being encouraged to write?  Send a card, tell a soldier what is happening in their home town.  Or, are they just not hearing the whole message?



Because "CF encourages public to write more letters to troops"  isn't as catchy a headline as "Forces won't accept packages for troops."

Does it still count as a 'letter' if something else was included as long as it is in a 'standard' size envelope? *eg.* little clip-on keychain flashlights in the same envelope as a letter.


----------



## simysmom99 (11 Dec 2007)

Amen!  Bad news and misleading headlines are the only thing that makes the news.  Sad but true.
I am starting to get more requests, so when I tell people to write, I will make sure that there is a positive spin on it.  If we all do it, maybe the message will get through.  I know, hope springs eternal.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (11 Dec 2007)

riggermade said:
			
		

> Anything being sent over that is not checked is a nightmare.  When 3 RCR was over there and Storring got his 15 min of fame for all the stuff that went over to the Afghans it was a nightmare, myself and 1 Cpl were  rear party QM and had to go thru over 200 triwalls of mostly junk to ensure there was no dangerous goods.



Then I had to sort and store it all again on the other side. You're right. It was junk. It took the rest of the tour to get rid of it. I tried to send it up to him at Warehouse and they wouldn't take it. It was some of the most disgusting lawn sale reject stuff that I've ever seen. The logistics to send, and distribute, that stuff was horrendous and the end state was no more than a feel good news piece and a commendation for one individual.


----------



## riggermade (11 Dec 2007)

recceguy said:
			
		

> Then I had to sort and store it all again on the other side. You're right. It was junk. It took the rest of the tour to get rid of it. I tried to send it up to him at Warehouse and they wouldn't take it. It was some of the most disgusting lawn sale reject stuff that I've ever seen. The logistics to send, and distribute, that stuff was horrendous and the end state was no more than a feel good news piece and a commendation for one individual.



There was stuff so bad that the Salvation Army in Pembroke wouldn't even take it andalthough I didn't expect praise you are right *one* person gptthe commendation.  I wanted to take triwalls and dump on his lawn here in Pet but nobody thought that was a good idea


----------



## fraserdw (11 Dec 2007)

Beans versus Bullets folks, we need bullets mostest.  However, I, for one, have sent the news story to Air Canada asking them to step one to the plate.  If everyone reading this does the same guess what a little people power might do??????

Signed
Exiled in Gagetown


----------



## Fishbone Jones (11 Dec 2007)

riggermade said:
			
		

> There was stuff so bad that the Salvation Army in Pembroke wouldn't even take it andalthough I didn't expect praise you are right *one* person gptthe commendation.  I wanted to take triwalls and dump on his lawn here in Pet but nobody thought that was a good idea



We handed it out to the locals, they looked at it, left a lot of it in the field and walked away. We had an ML and two SUVs. He showed all geared up behind the MG of a Bison  ;D

Ahhhh, but it's all good........and all done. At least we did our part.


----------



## PMedMoe (11 Dec 2007)

recceguy said:
			
		

> It was some of the most disgusting lawn sale reject stuff that I've ever seen.



Sounds like the box of crap we got when in Trenton for Op Parasol.  Hard to believe that some people can be so lazy, ignorant and rude!


----------



## Fishbone Jones (11 Dec 2007)

PMedMoe said:
			
		

> Sounds like the box of crap we got when in Trenton for Op Parasol.  Hard to believe that some people can be so lazy, ignorant and rude!



Those drives are nothing more than an excuse for people to clean out their basements and attics, without having to take it to the dump. That stunt just about put the kibosh on accepting any kind of aid from uncertified sources. Many good donation efforts were shelved due to that one, poorly executed plan developed by an overinflated ego with no control of it's project.


----------



## Roy Harding (11 Dec 2007)

simysmom99 said:
			
		

> The policy is a good one.  Let's make we give our soldiers what they need to take care of themselves and the Afghans before we start sending over more soccer balls, candy and other assorted stuff that is really not needed.  This was brought to light very poorly.  Instead of saying that we don't accept anything, why isn't the Canadian Public being encouraged to write?  Send a card, tell a soldier what is happening in their home town.  Or, are they just not hearing the whole message?



The public is being encouraged to do such - re-read the press release above and I think you'll agree.

I think you hit it on the head in your last sentence - the public just isn't hearing the whole message.

I'm involved in a local Christmas charity here - and I've made a few folks angry with my view that there shouldn't be $250.00 toys in the hampers - toys, yes - but the kids we're delivering to don't need $250.00 Radio Controlled Jeep CJs - it's my view we (the charity) should be putting a variety of toys in the packages, and oh, I don't know - some snowpants, or mittens, or toques or some such in there as well.  Folks who argue with me don't seem to get the reality involved for the kids we're supporting.

It's the same thing with the general public when it comes to soldiers - they want to feel good and send packages over - just like Gramma did in WWII - but they don't seem to get the concept of an air bridge which has a limited capacity.  And they aren't paying attention to the message from the CF - I read a variety of papers daily, and I recall seeing that press release printed in various papers.

God bless 'em for their good intentions, but they don't seem to realize what the situation really is.


----------



## riggermade (11 Dec 2007)

recceguy said:
			
		

> Those drives are nothing more than an excuse for people to clean out their basements and attics, without having to take it to the dump. That stunt just about put the kibosh on accepting any kind of aid from uncertified sources. Many good donation efforts were shelved due to that one, poorly executed plan developed by an overinflated ego with no control of it's project.



I agree recceguy and I'll tell you there was often time I was afraid to stick my hand in a box...Thank God for rubbergloves and a face mask


----------



## Blindspot (11 Dec 2007)

Or send Tim Horton's certificates...? Is Dave Murphy still promoting this campaign?


----------



## Roy Harding (11 Dec 2007)

Blindspot said:
			
		

> Or send Tim Horton's certificates...? Is Dave Murphy still promoting this campaign?



Check out this thread:  http://forums.milnet.ca/forums/threads/39242.0.html


----------



## armyvern (11 Dec 2007)

Dammit Roy, you're getting too quick!


----------



## Roy Harding (11 Dec 2007)

Evil she-mod who owns a whip said:
			
		

> Dammit Roy, you're getting too quick!



That's what my wife says, too.


----------



## riggermade (11 Dec 2007)

Roy Harding said:
			
		

> That's what my wife says, too.



You wouldn't have that problem if you didn't spend so much time here...hasn't there been studies done about males and spending to much time on the computer


----------



## Roy Harding (11 Dec 2007)

riggermade said:
			
		

> You wouldn't have that problem if you didn't spend so much time here...hasn't there been studies done about males and spending to much time on the computer



Who said it was a problem?  For my wife, maybe.


Anyway - I apologize for taking this thing off track - let's get back to Soldier's Care Packages.


----------



## The Bread Guy (12 Dec 2007)

Roy Harding said:
			
		

> (....)
> 
> I think you hit it on the head in your last sentence - the public just isn't hearing the whole message.
> 
> (....)



You're more than half way there - the MSM is not REPORTING the whole message (I'd be interested to see how many stories done after the 5 Dec 07 news release included the fact that, "you can't send PARCELS to 'Any Canadian Soldier' - if you send a parcel, it must have someone's name on it".)

- edit to add following - 

And here we be, folks - right after the 5 Dec 07 news release, the Cowichan Valley Citizen carried the story on p. 34, the CanWest News Service shared it with its member papers, the Belleville Intelligencer had it on page 2 and the Vancouver Province on p. A40.... (crickets)

And now?  CBC carries it (didn't have the 5 Dec story, though), Montreal Gazette carries it on p.A1 front (in spite of having access to the earlier story, and not running it), Windsor Star on p. B8 (buried a bit, but they, too, have access to CanWest's syndicated material), and Ottawa Citizen on p. C3 (buried a bit, but also with access to earlier story).


----------



## davidk (12 Dec 2007)

While I wish Mr Bisson well, and hope that he gets a package, I'm sure that when it all boils down, the ammo and supplies will come in more useful. Besides, there's nothing wrong with Christmas in February - beats no Christmas at all!

Interesting to read this, I was on course with the guy...

Edited to add: updated sitrep here: http://www.canada.com/montrealgazette/news/story.html?id=3478b50f-6831-49ec-9c7a-3a6ebfaab73a&k=56154


----------



## The Bread Guy (12 Dec 2007)

Wonder who's going to check them all for security issues?


----------



## armyvern (12 Dec 2007)

milnewstbay said:
			
		

> Wonder who's going to check them all for security issues?



No doubt the lowest ranking troops who happen to be in the vicinity.  :-\


----------



## Roy Harding (12 Dec 2007)

Evil she-mod who owns a whip said:
			
		

> No doubt the lowest ranking troops who happen to be in the vicinity.  :-\



That would be MY solution, too - but that's just me.

Given MarkOttawa's research regarding the word getting out in the MSM - I wonder if that will make a difference?


----------



## armyvern (12 Dec 2007)

Roy Harding said:
			
		

> That would be MY solution, too - but that's just me.
> 
> Given MarkOttawa's research regarding the word getting out in the MSM - I wonder if that will make a difference?



That'd be almost anyone's solution Roy.

Hopefully, the MSM does put the WHOLE story out there this time --- these parcels are not, nor have they been acceptable since this mission's inception. It got lots of news coverage though ... so someone changed their mind. Hopefully, it doesn't now lead to a huge precedent -- I can just imagine the outcry in some other location now when they do up a bunch of parcels and get told NO in accordance with the long-standing policy. 

I wonder if my now retired fellow Sup Tech Kevin P. who collected tonnes of care packages etc way back in 2004 from a community drive for the troops will have something to say ref this flip-flop now; his all ended up going to area food banks; it too was originally intended for troops and was collected for them by Canadians who did so for the troops. No different than this situation. And, that situation also made the news (with CBC actually going so far as to air footage of a bucnh of them out picking up cases of KD from a local grocery store for inclusion in the parcels) ... but that community's stuff still didn't go.

Sorry, but this decision doesn't sit well with me. Expect more. And, who can justify saying no to anyone else now? My biggest hope is that actual care packages from the troops' loved ones or mission essential items -- don't get bumped just because the media has the focus on (I hate to say it) ... what essentially amounts to low priority cargo given the CFs current circumstances.  :-\


----------



## GAP (13 Dec 2007)

From the West Island with love: Troops get care packages after all
'It's a sigh of relief,' volunteer says. 'It's good they're going'
RENE BRUEMMER, The Gazette Published: 
Article Link

More than 1,700 care packages collected by West Island residents for soldiers in Afghanistan will be shipped to the troops after all, the Canadian military says.

Volunteers and organizers who spent nearly six months collecting toiletries, playing cards and letters had been told last week the parcels would not be delivered because of logistical and security problems, even though 1,600 of the boxes were already stacked up at the Royal Canadian Hussars Armoury on Côte des Neiges Rd.

But after a flurry of media attention Monday and Tuesday, organizers received a call Tuesday evening saying the packages will be collected today and sent in a container ship on Dec. 22.
More on link


----------



## geo (13 Dec 2007)

There is a thread around here that brings up the idea of "adopting" an Infantry platoon/Coy, Engineer/Armoured troop/sqn, Arty bty, etc...... whereby a civic group/organisation gets the names & particulars of the sub-sub formation they adopt... and to which they write & send care packages.....

If you know what you are looking for & know what you have to do, it's not that complicated a thing to do....


----------



## armyvern (13 Dec 2007)

geo said:
			
		

> There is a thread around here that brings up the idea of "adopting" an Infantry platoon/Coy, Engineer/Armoured troop/sqn, Arty bty, etc...... whereby a civic group/organisation gets the names & particulars of the sub-sub formation they adopt... and to which they write & send care packages.....
> 
> If you know what you are looking for & know what you have to do, it's not that complicated a thing to do....



No you're absolutely correct; there are indeed work-arounds to "the system."

THAT does NOT change the fact that space is still limited for shipments overseas -- and personally, I'd rather have a care package from my family. Circumventing the system in the manner that you have described, puts other items at risk of being bumped off flights etc. Possibly, my buddies parcel from his FAMILY. That's not on.

Maybe it's just me though ...

Until we have a lift schedule (AND the AC/AirCrew necessary to entertain the possibility of an increased re-sup schedule), things like this shouldn't be occuring simply due to "spotlighting in the media", because that IS exactly what happened. You know, something isn't being sent ... which should be, in order to accomodate these parcels. It's going by container ship so it's NOT bumping anything?? Well, I too can think of things the troops need more overseas that the money it cost to contract that container could have provided for.  :-\


----------



## GAP (13 Dec 2007)

It would make far more sense for the CF to announce in Aug/Sept that the cutoff date for shipping to Afghanistan for Christmas deliver is XXX month....then ship them by container....everything else is not guaranteed....Canada Post does it every year.


----------



## armyvern (13 Dec 2007)

GAP said:
			
		

> I would make far more sense for the CF to announce in Aug/Sept that the cutoff date for shipping to Afghanistan for Christmas deliver is XXX month....then ship them by container....everything else is not guaranteed....Canada Post does it every year.



But, we are talking about packages from strangers. Done with good intentions and a good heart I'm sure, but strangers never-the-less. They've never been allowed due to our extremely limited space and budget, but now all of a sudden we've found money to hire container ship room for these?? That's due to the media pressure -- nothing more. And this latest flip-flop opens the doors for it to occur again ... as I said -- possibly at the expensive of packages from family and loved ones, or (Gawd forbid) mission essential equipment.


----------



## geo (13 Dec 2007)

Vern,
I still think that these groups who adopt specific soldiers have, to an extent, become family.... (and you can never have too many family members offering you support).
Having specific people to send to would also result in your editing your "care packages" - cause it's been said before... size doesn't matter


----------



## armyvern (13 Dec 2007)

I'd agree with your sentiments on the "family" bit ... it still doesn't change the fact that, given the CFs current predicament re cargo space and budgets, that actual family should take priority.

Like I said, maybe it's just me though.

Edited to add:

AND every week, stuff is left in Trenton because there isn't room for it. So this latest DOES detract and delay the shipment of things that should be going ...


----------



## geo (13 Dec 2007)

Huh... I thought they said that all these parcels are going via SEACAN to Pakistan and then by road to our troops...


----------



## riggermade (13 Dec 2007)

I figure they may get there by April


----------



## armyvern (13 Dec 2007)

geo said:
			
		

> Huh... I thought they said that all these parcels are going via SEACAN to Pakistan and then by road to our troops...



Hmmm, they did. Hmmm .... who's paying for that? Yes, I've already said that. And, as I said, we've have stuff that remains in Trenton every flight due to being bumped for lack of space, but all of a sudden we've come up with funds to send this stuff over?? What have we just given up to get it there? Space for kit the troops needed that could have been put into that seacan (now that we seemed to have found funding to ship extras via seacan) and shipped vice bumped off a flight in Trenton to wait a while longer?


----------



## geo (14 Dec 2007)

Hope that the SEACAN is on Canada post's nickle.... (though I somehow doubt it)

(WRT media flap.....the squeeky wheel gets the grease)


----------



## Shelby67 (18 Dec 2007)

It's a shame that you can't send care packages over unless they are maked for a specific person . I was curious if anyone overseas needs/wants anything, I'd be more than happy to send stuff over to you. I have done this in the past, and it was muchly appreciated. If theres anyone reading this that would like something, just message me your adress info and I'll do my best!! ;D ;D


-Shelby


----------



## Roy Harding (18 Dec 2007)

Shelby67 said:
			
		

> It's a shame that you can't send care packages over unless they are maked for a specific person . I was curious if anyone overseas needs/wants anything, I'd be more than happy to send stuff over to you. I have done this in the past, and it was muchly appreciated. If theres anyone reading this that would like something, just message me your adress info and I'll do my best!! ;D ;D
> 
> 
> -Shelby



It _is_ a shame, Shelby - but there are reasons for it, as pointed out by others in this thread.

I think your gesture to send parcels over is very generous, and I thank you for it.  Perhaps, however, your philanthropic endeavours may be more gainfully (if less personally) deployed by supporting such efforts as this:  http://www.cfpsa.com/mfamily/

Just a thought - best of the season to you.


----------



## simysmom99 (18 Dec 2007)

I got another request the other day and sent the person to the MFRC in Calgary.  They seemed quite interested, as does the MFRC in Edmonton.  We supporting the troops overseas by supporting our families at home.


----------



## Col.Steiner (20 Dec 2007)

Bullshit like this makes me wonder why I, or anyone else, puts so much energy into joining an institution that cares little for its employees.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (20 Dec 2007)

OberstSteiner said:
			
		

> Bullshit like this makes me wonder why I, or anyone else, puts so much energy into joining an institution that cares little for its employees.



What are you whining on about now??  Did you actually read the whole thread?


----------



## fraserdw (20 Dec 2007)

Concur, please calrify your comment.  The army has pissed me off once a day for 27 years but they are still the BEST employer in Canada PERIOD.  No employer would have put up with my antics during my divorce but they did.  No employer would allow me to be the best single parent I could but they did and no employer would have ever made me feel as part of a team as they did.  If you respect the ethos, stay drug free, follow the rules and present a military bearing down to your very soul everytime you have the honour of wearing the uniform of MY army then this you would understand.  That is why my daughter is now part of My army and my next daughter will be.


----------



## ENGINEERS WIFE (22 Dec 2007)

When my husband was in Afghanistan, my daughters school wanted to send stuff to soliders there. And because they have limited space to get stuff in the planes, so, what I did was I mailed all 9 big parcels (the guy at the Post office was amazed it all came from a little school of 125 kids) to my huband, with his name, rank, customs form, etc. and when they got to him he talked to his Engineer counterpart with 2CER and then he had all the parcels sent out to the FOBs.  Which is where the kids wanted them to go. So, if she has someone over there I would send all to him.  And then he can send them out or maybe even leave them in Canada House.  I'm sure they would get to someone.  Good Luck, Robin


----------



## geo (23 Dec 2007)

Good show Engineer wife.... That's the way to do it.


----------



## Michael OLeary (23 Dec 2007)

We all have to keep in mind that Engineer's Wife had a personal interest in the collection and preparation of the packages sent on behalf of her daughter's school.  She, in the best interest of her husband and other soldiers, was aware of who was collecting the items, who was reviewing the contents of packages, and who was verifying that everything met current shipping guidelines.  It's that level of care which should be put into every package, and random parcels from unknown strangers doesn't meet that degree of due diligence in safeguarding our soldiers.


----------



## pbi (23 Dec 2007)

OberstSteiner said:
			
		

> Bullshit like this makes me wonder why I, or anyone else, puts so much energy into joining an institution that cares little for its employees.



Really? Try any civvy job-any one, just name it- and let me know who treats their people better than we do *at equivalent pay levels*. Please don't bother us with the priveliges of corporate CEOs-those don't count. And don't just focus on one little aspect in a narrow-minded, selfish "special issue" way. Look at the whole lifestyle, across the board.  Then come on back and talk. I've done this for 33 years now and I've known a lot of civvy folks along the way, employed in all sorts of walks of life, who don't get nearly the deal we do.

Oh--but...if you think of yourself as an "employee" instead of a soldier, then you're probably starting off from the wrong frame of reference to begin with.

Cheers


----------



## aesop081 (23 Dec 2007)

OberstSteiner said:
			
		

> Bullshit like this makes me wonder why I, or anyone else, puts so much energy into joining an institution that cares little for its employees.



You are more than welcome to apply somewhere else and see how they treat you. Your constant whining on here is realy getting old.


----------



## armyvern (23 Dec 2007)

Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> What are you whining on about now??  Did you actually read the whole thread?



Nope he didn't. The clash between the profile and the email addy tell me that.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (23 Dec 2007)

Milnet.ca 50


----------



## armyvern (23 Dec 2007)

Ebenezer 'the Grinch' Scrooge said:
			
		

> Milnet.ca 50





Busted by you. 

Troll identified.


----------



## ENGINEERS WIFE (23 Dec 2007)

I can definitely understand why the average civilian might not understand why they can't ship a parcel to "UNKOWN SOLIDER".  They also have to keep in mind that there are some wackdoos out there, they would send things just to be cruel and mean or even dangerous.  Just because they can send it to "UNKNOWN SOLIDER" they don't always have their best interests at heart.  Can you imagine a solider in the FOB's working his a** off and getting a parcel from someone who thinks he's a 'babykiller'?  And that's not even mentioning the cost and space needed if everyone was able to send  a parcel to "UNKNOWN SOLIDER"  Robin


----------



## The Bread Guy (24 Dec 2007)

FYI, if the photo that's part of this article is accurate, it appears the UK allows "Any Brit Squaddie" packages (assuming, of course, that the pkg in the photo didn't come "pre-screened" through their equivalent of our MFRC system) - shared with the usual disclaimer...

*UK troops prepare for Christmas in Afghanistan*
Telegraph (UK), 24 Dec 07
Article link

Christmas morning will start early for British soldiers facing the Taliban in the First World War-style trenches that criss-cross southern Afghanistan.

About 7am at Garmser, the most southerly British frontline positions in Helmand province, the sandbagged fighting positions are likely to receive their first incoming fire of the day.

It is something of a ritual, for at this point the rising sun sits directly behind part of the Taliban lines a few hundred yards of desert away and the Taliban fighters can blaze away while the British gunners squint into the glare.

The British troops, a mixture of Royal Military Police, Royal Gurkha Rifles and members of the Household Cavalry, are not expecting any let up for Christmas.

"We'll be 'stood to' until they decide to have a go," said Sergeant Kraig Whalley, a 29-year-old Royal Military Policeman from Macclesfield, who will spend much of Christmas Day looking down the barrel of a heavy machinegun.

For the Royal Military Police contingent the only concession to the season will be three local chickens, procured for $7 (£3.50) apiece from a helpful Afghan policeman, and served roasted on a spit with tinned potatoes and baked beans.

"We were thinking of challenging the Taliban to a game of football on Christmas Day, but I'm not sure they'd get the joke," said Sgt Whalley.

The trench systems around Forward Operating Base Delhi are a place of daily exchanges in static positions, which Sgt Whalley compares to the First World War, and the famous Christmas truce of 1914 in which British and German soldiers laid down their arms to play football.

Though he says that morale among the British troops is high, there are regular British casualties and for many of those serving in Helmand thoughts will inevitably turn to the 39 British soldiers who have died in the country this year, and to their families.

The last of them was Trooper Jack Sadler, a 21-year-old Territorial Army soldier from the Honourable Artillery Company, killed by a mine on Dec 4.

"Jack's death has made me a lot less naive," said Trooper Lorna Kelly, 30.

"There are only six of us from HAC in Helmand. To be honest I never thought it would happen to one of us. It has been very hard, though it's nothing compared to his family's suffering."

A highly paid investment banker for Credit Suisse in civilian life, Trooper Kelly is one of several soldiers from the City of London-based unit to give up a year of handsomely remunerated work in the Square Mile for training and deployment in Helmand.

At the main British base, the sprawling Camp Bastion, tinsel glinted in the desert sun and every effort was being made to put aside thoughts of war.

As well as church services in the camp chapel, the Church of St Michael and All Angels, which is really just a tent, there are preparations for a pantomime performance of Aladdin and a Christmas dinner with turkey in relays, at which, by tradition, officers will serve the troops.

The camp postal service contains the only people with reservations about a surge in parcels posted by the British public following calls from Army commanders to offer greater public support to British forces in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Yesterday 3,000 bags of mail arrived, many containing boxes simply addressed to "a soldier serving in Afghanistan".

There have been enough such parcels to give every one of the 7,200 men and women in theatre two each.

"It has exceeded all expectations and it shows people care," said Cpl Dave Arkel, 35, knee deep in parcels in the mailroom.

"But it's a lot of pressure on us."


----------



## armyvern (24 Dec 2007)

There's more to it than pre-screening.

There's costs due to Defence Budgets (or lack thereof  ), and very limited cargo space ... for some nations.

Apples/Oranges

Glad their troops can get them -- and that they have the resources to do such; I wish we did.


----------



## Michael OLeary (24 Dec 2007)

milnewstbay said:
			
		

> Yesterday 3,000 bags of mail arrived, many containing boxes simply addressed to "a soldier serving in Afghanistan".



Notably, there's no detail on what, if any, security measures were taken with these packages.  Were they from a specific programs, approved sources, checked by the service before shipping, etc.?

The standard regulations are:



> Q. Can charity food parcels be sent to the troops serving on Op Telic & Op Herrick?
> 
> *No, please be advised that an item of mail up to the maximum weight of 2kgs can be sent to named personnel only.* Due to the surge of mail during the freepost period to these operational areas BFPO does not wish to delay personal mail to loved ones by accepting mail to unnamed personnel.








http://www.bfpo.mod.uk/faqs.htm


----------

