Off Topic

Nonbeliever

it would be nice to know how much the lady got paid :?:

Incidentally I watched a bbc4 documentary on Arlington cemetery in Washington last night and the casualties of the current war. Now that was a choker...one thing shone through however and that was the fact that not one parent,spouse,partner or visitor displayed the vitriol that the sun newspaper has in the last few days

The woman probably isnt even thinking straight to be honest (and in her defence) but the fact that the sun can use her despair as a political tool is beyond reason

Scum..no more no less

always_tyred

biondino wrote:

Wallace1492 wrote:

I do not think it is a stunt in any way, shape or form. The only people profiting from it are The Scum, I genuinely believe that Brown was heartfelt in his letter(s) he writes. After all it was The Scum that brought it up, not Labour saying how great we are, we write to mothers.

The gutter press have a lot to answer for.

The woman may have lost her son but her reaction is shocking. The PM calling her up, trying to apologise and explain, and her recording his stammering attempts to do a decent thing by recording the conversation and selling the tapes to the Sun. What a conniving cow.

Sure its not a fairly simple woman being egged on by some insidous tabloid press ba$tards who have lobbed a few quid at her to boot?

linsen

now I have some things to say here
just thoughts....

1. I do not envy Brown - he has a sh*t job
2. Most people were delighted when Labour got in, they've just been in too long now
3. The Sun were rather insensitive themselves getting involved (understatement)
4. Everyone knows how underfunded everything is. The simple fact is that there is not enough money to go around
5. There have been many many people killed while serving in the armed forces and I am sure many of them would have been aided by a helicopter to airlift them for medical attention.
6. I feel for that mother, and I also feel for anyone who loses a child. To put yourself through the potential media attention seems to be exacerbating the grief further.
7. I was brought up with the Sun for reading matter my whole childhood. The biggest problem with that was that I was always going to feel flat chested.... I find it frightening that it has the biggest readership of any newspaper in the country and they pretty much decide who runs the country.....

attica

biondino wrote:

The woman may have lost her son but her reaction is shocking. The PM calling her up, trying to apologise and explain, and her recording his stammering attempts to do a decent thing by recording the conversation and selling the tapes to the Sun. What a conniving cow.

I can't help but wonder where this woman got the recording equipment from, Surely professional journalists would'nt be so cynical as to have provided her with it on the off chance?

I sympathise with Brown at the moment, but his actions are cheapened by earlier phone calls such as the one made to SuBo (shouldn't he be running the country rather than watching Britain's Got Talent?)

bigmat

Attica wrote:

biondino wrote:

The woman may have lost her son but her reaction is shocking. The PM calling her up, trying to apologise and explain, and her recording his stammering attempts to do a decent thing by recording the conversation and selling the tapes to the Sun. What a conniving cow.

I can't help but wonder where this woman got the recording equipment from, Surely professional journalists would'nt be so cynical as to have provided her with it on the off chance?

I sympathise with Brown at the moment, but his actions are cheapened by earlier phone calls such as the one made to SuBo (shouldn't he be running the country rather than watching Britain's Got Talent?)

Apparently her mate was there so she put Goggsy on speakerphone and her mate recorded it on her Blackberry. She doesn't come out of this looking very good in my opinion, but she's a grieving mother so I think deserves the benefit of the doubt to some extent.

attica

I stand corrected

SmellTheGlove

WheezyMcChubby wrote:

symo wrote:

6-Not elected PM

You seem, like many others, to misunderstand the British electoral system

+1

Whereas a lot of people once actually liked Blair, has anyone ever warmed to Crash Gordon? He has no talent, merely ambition. And his judgment and that of his advisers is now in greater question; did he really believe a phone call would take the heat out of the situation? I don't think he would have been keelhauled for failing to pick up the phone in this case.
All that said, I think anyone with a decent bone in their body could cut the guy some slack for having poor handwriting as a result of his eyesight. And that the Sun will get what it deserves when Camergoon and his chinless mates are blundering around Downing Street bumping into the furniture.

CiB

linsen wrote:

now I have some things to say here
just thoughts....

2. Most people were delighted when Labour got in

Maybe in your world, not in mine. I don't recall many of my contemparies being pleased at the idea of that grinning idiot flouncing into No 10, supported by his army of flag waving toadies lined up in Downing Street. It made me gag then and it still does. Granted there was a sense that the Tories had been in for long enough, but the idea that Blair's Brave New World was the answer was anathema to a lot of people where I come from. Brown has just taken the whole project down a new level of being a second-rate, useless ineffective administration. The sooner he goes the better.

The comment earlier about the position of PM meriting more respect than shown over this incident rather misses the point that Blair & Brown between them have run down the three great offices of state to the point that the country no longer knows nor cares who's running them, and what they're supposed to do. That's what New Labour has done, amongst many other things.

Include me out of your assumption that 'Most people were delighted when Labour got in'. Most people weren't. The BBC successfuly led the way in having us believe that May 97 was a bright new dawn. It wasn't, I thought that at the time and fervently believe it now. Out with em, as soon as is reasonably possible. Thursday would do me.

garrynolan

Here's my tuppence worth - looking in from across the Irish sea. The writing in the letter is shocking, but some of the "mistakes" look like bad writing e.g. "O" that looks like a "U". Lots of people have an open "O". The middle letter in the surname - the so-called "M" instead of "N" could just as easily be a "W". Think it's just bad writing. As for the poor soldiers mother - God knows what she was thinking. Might not be thick - just not educated, ended up being taken advantage of by the "newspaper". The Sun has a crap reputation over here as well. Doubt it would sell in Catholic Ireland without Page 3! No opinion on Gordon Brown (I'm in Ireland) but it looks like he's been stitched up like a kipper.

alfablue

Brown personally writes a letter of condolence in his own (flawed) hand - the fact that this is written in his own hand rather than typed by No 10 staff and signed by himself with little thought, is to his credit.

He made several mistakes, apart from the one that seemed to cause most offence (writing James instead of Janes), he also

wrote "greatst" for greatest, "condolencs" for condolences, "you" instead of your, and "colleagus" for colleagues.
He failed to dot the letter "i", wrote security as securiity and repeated the word "sincere" in two adjacent sentences.

The man is visually impaired and possibly dyslexic - it now seems that some think it acceptable to mock such disabilities for their own political ends.

Mother is understandably grieving and angry, she seems to have then been exploited by The Sun (though of course, she must have made the first move). In her anger, the mother chose to make an assertion that her son's death was due to a lack of equipment, in particular, helicopters. Last night on Newsnight, Paxman revealed that a helicopter was in fact deployed for her son, so the association of her son's death with the alleged lack of equipment was spurious. To be charitable to this mother, it is probably best to assume that The Sun prompted her to contrive this assertion (or lie). The damage is done to Brown, The Sun walks away, job done, and now the mother is backtracking and has accepted Brown's apology. The readers of the gutter press and those with a selective view are happy that their prejudices are upheld.

A very sad affair, brought about by the misbehaviour of the Murdoch (aka "gutter") press.

I expect there will be plenty more to come.

always_tyred

alfablue wrote:

Brown personally writes a letter of condolence in his own (flawed) hand - the fact that this is written in his own hand rather than typed by No 10 staff and signed by himself with little thought, is to his credit.

He made several mistakes, apart from the one that seemed to cause most offence (writing James instead of Janes), he also

wrote "greatst" for greatest, "condolencs" for condolences, "you" instead of your, and "colleagus" for colleagues.
He failed to dot the letter "i", wrote security as securiity and repeated the word "sincere" in two adjacent sentences.

The man is visually impaired and possibly dyslexic - it now seems that some think it acceptable to mock such disabilities for their own political ends.

Mother is understandably grieving and angry, she seems to have then been exploited by The Sun (though of course, she must have made the first move). In her anger, the mother chose to make an assertion that her son's death was due to a lack of equipment, in particular, helicopters. Last night on Newsnight, Paxman revealed that a helicopter was in fact deployed for her son, so the association of her son's death with the alleged lack of equipment was spurious. To be charitable to this mother, it is probably best to assume that The Sun prompted her to contrive this assertion (or lie). The damage is done to Brown, The Sun walks away, job done, and now the mother is backtracking and has accepted Brown's apology. The readers of the gutter press and those with a selective view are happy that their prejudices are upheld.

A very sad affair, brought about by the misbehaviour of the Murdoch (aka "gutter") press.

I expect there will be plenty more to come.

You do see that all of those mistakes are the same mistake, right? i.e. Its his writing, not his spelling. Blurring one letter into another at the end of a word is supposedly a sign of intelligence.

Don't be duped by the Sun. With the exception of the guy's name, this is handwriting. Handwriting is sometimes difficult to read. Have a go at reading a hand written prescription some times.

People are so gullible.

bails87

Attica wrote:

his actions are cheapened by earlier phone calls such as the one made to SuBo (shouldn't he be running the country rather than watching Britain's Got Talent?)

By the same logic, shouldn't you be doing your job, rather than posting on internet forums?

The guy probably works 18 hour days, is he not allowed a little break to watch (some awful) TV?

alfablue

Always Tyred wrote:

You do see that all of those mistakes are the same mistake, right? i.e. Its his writing, not his spelling. Blurring one letter into another at the end of a word is supposedly a sign of intelligence.

Don't be duped by the Sun. With the exception of the guy's name, this is handwriting. Handwriting is sometimes difficult to read. Have a go at reading a hand written prescription some times.

People are so gullible.

I am not wearing the gullibility wrap! It makes no difference to me, handwriting or spelling, the issue is trivial nonsense blown up out of all proportion to attack someone acting in good faith where others may not have bothered.

always_tyred

alfablue wrote:

Always Tyred wrote:

You do see that all of those mistakes are the same mistake, right? i.e. Its his writing, not his spelling. Blurring one letter into another at the end of a word is supposedly a sign of intelligence.

Don't be duped by the Sun. With the exception of the guy's name, this is handwriting. Handwriting is sometimes difficult to read. Have a go at reading a hand written prescription some times.

People are so gullible.

I am not wearing the gullibility wrap! It makes no difference to me, handwriting or spelling, the issue is trivial nonsense blown up out of all proportion to attack someone acting in good faith where others may not have bothered.

So, what, you don't think the distinction between GB writing a perfectly acceptable letter in handwriting that the lady couldn't read (for whatever reason - mainly because she was already angry and wanted to find fault, perhaps) and GB writing a letter riddled with careless errors, is in the least bit significant?

You think it is riddled with errors because the Sun tells you it is.

It is not, you kind of realise that when its pointed out to you, but you have somehow forgotten the significance of the fact (i.e. it means that actually, there is no point whatsoever to the whole "story")

Gullible. You and millions of others.

alfablue

I am afraid your post is riddled with errors, well one in particular, I do not think it is riddled with errors because the sun told me (my quote was from a different source), and I CARE NOT whether they are errors, style, handwriting, a sign of great intelligence, whatever, and I reproduce this source purely for information, I have no opinion on the veracity of the allegations of errors. There is only one point in the whole story, to try and destroy Brown's reputation. I think you see that, the whole argument about errors is a red herring. I would like to accuse you of being gullible, but you probably aren't, maybe just a little bit trigger happy.

Sewinman

symo wrote:

6-Not elected PM

Name one in history.

always_tyred

alfablue wrote:

I am afraid your post is riddled with errors, well one in particular, I do not think it is riddled with errors because the sun told me (my quote was from a different source), and I CARE NOT whether they are errors, style, handwriting, a sign of great intelligence, whatever, and I reproduce this source purely for information, I have no opinion on the veracity of the allegations of errors. There is only one point in the whole story, to try and destroy Brown's reputation. I think you see that, the whole argument about errors is a red herring. I would like to accuse you of being gullible, but you probably aren't, maybe just a little bit trigger happy.

I have no idea what you are talking about.

The whole story is about the letter, as a vehicle for criticism for GB. You post about the errors, then when it is pointed out that there aren't any, you state that you don't care about the errors.

My point is that if there weren't any errors reported, you wouldn't have hopped onto the bandwagon in the first place. This has gone over your head.

As an aside - if the Sun started the story (I beleive it was an exclusive) and other organisations subsequently reported it, then unwittingly, you DID obtain your information from the Sun. That's today's lesson in how the world works.

always_tyred

Sewinman wrote:

symo wrote:

6-Not elected PM

Name one in history.

2007 Gordon Brown Labour
1990 John Major Conservative
1976 James Callaghan Labour
1963 Sir Alec Douglas-Home Conservative
1957 Harold Macmillan Conservative
1955 Sir Anthony Eden Conservative
1940 Winston Churchill Conservative
1937 Neville Chamberlain Conservative
1923 Stanley Baldwin Conservative
1916 David Lloyd George Liberal
1908 Herbert H. Asquith Liberal
1905 Henry Campbell-Bannerman Liberal
1902 Arthur Balfour Conservative

You are going to ask how many of these were SUBSEQUENTLY eleced, now, aren't you? I have no idea, I just copied and pasted that lot!!

CiB

Sometimes I don't mind when the rest of the world is out of step with me - you get used to others having to catch up. For once though I'm not on my own - here's a page full of sensible well-balanced comments that seem to chime with How A Lot Of People View The Situation. Marvelous - a pleasing amount of vitriol and disdain for Brown, all in one handy location.

alfablue

Oh FFS, the point of my post was that he is being vilified over nonsense, be that nonsense about errors or nonsense about handwriting or nonsense about signs of intelligence. I am agreeing with you, it is a non-story (though it becomes a story about the nature of this piece of "journalism").. The whole issue of errors is a subjective one, I don't particularly feel the need to judge one way or the other. Whilst the Sun did lead with the story, many media sources have since pontificated on the nature of the issues with the letter. I accept I would not have commented on the story if there were not any errors reported, and neither would you, because there would be no story. I understand that you don't like the lack of precision in my original post, or the way I have refined my comments, i deeply and sincerely apologise - no, really! But that is the way the world works.

Now, back to the point, to summarise: Brown is being vilified because of "issues" (can I get away with that?) with his letter, mother is exploited by gutter press and makes up a lie about equipment. Just my opinion, right?

PS: please accept my sincere apologies

Wallace1492

Jeeeesus, and I thought Always and Alpha seemed to agree on it. Honestly some people would argue with a statue.... or a mirror....

If you really don't like Brown, you can use this against him, and fair enough. I think most people believe that it is a tad unfair.

alfablue

Wallace1492 wrote:

Jeeeesus, and I thought Always and Alpha seemed to agree on it. Honestly some people would argue with a statue.... or a mirror....

If you really don't like Brown, you can use this against him, and fair enough. I think most people believe that it is a tad unfair.

I sort of thought so too! Arguing with mirrors is a special skill . . . I'm hoping to perfect it with the help of forum members

the_hundredth_idiot

Always Tyred wrote:

Sewinman wrote:

symo wrote:

6-Not elected PM

Name one in history.

2007 Gordon Brown Labour
1990 John Major Conservative
1976 James Callaghan Labour
1963 Sir Alec Douglas-Home Conservative
1957 Harold Macmillan Conservative
1955 Sir Anthony Eden Conservative
1940 Winston Churchill Conservative
1937 Neville Chamberlain Conservative
1923 Stanley Baldwin Conservative
1916 David Lloyd George Liberal
1908 Herbert H. Asquith Liberal
1905 Henry Campbell-Bannerman Liberal
1902 Arthur Balfour Conservative

You are going to ask how many of these were SUBSEQUENTLY eleced, now, aren't you? I have no idea, I just copied and pasted that lot!!

I'm guessing Sewinman's point was that we don't elect PM's in the UK, we elect a local MP. The political party with the most MP's gets to choose their "leader" to be PM. But we don't elect the PM, at least in theory if not in practice. Compare with the US where they explicitly do elect a president.

Sewinman

The Hundredth Idiot wrote:

Always Tyred wrote:

Sewinman wrote:

symo wrote:

6-Not elected PM

Name one in history.

2007 Gordon Brown Labour
1990 John Major Conservative
1976 James Callaghan Labour
1963 Sir Alec Douglas-Home Conservative
1957 Harold Macmillan Conservative
1955 Sir Anthony Eden Conservative
1940 Winston Churchill Conservative
1937 Neville Chamberlain Conservative
1923 Stanley Baldwin Conservative
1916 David Lloyd George Liberal
1908 Herbert H. Asquith Liberal
1905 Henry Campbell-Bannerman Liberal
1902 Arthur Balfour Conservative

You are going to ask how many of these were SUBSEQUENTLY eleced, now, aren't you? I have no idea, I just copied and pasted that lot!!

I'm guessing Sewinman's point was that we don't elect PM's in the UK, we elect a local MP. The political party with the most MP's gets to choose their "leader" to be PM. But we don't elect the PM, at least in theory if not in practice. Compare with the US where they explicitly do elect a president.

Exactamundo. It is actually the Queen who appoints a Prime Minister. Due to convention she appoints the leader of the majority party but she has no actual obligation to do so.

bigmat

ChrisInBicester wrote:

Sometimes I don't mind when the rest of the world is out of step with me - you get used to others having to catch up. For once though I'm not on my own - here's a page full of sensible well-balanced comments that seem to chime with How A Lot Of People View The Situation. Marvelous - a pleasing amount of vitriol and disdain for Brown, all in one handy location.

You'll be posting links to The Daily Mail comments pages next......

NGale

As something of a campaigner for those with dyslexia and visual difficulties (I have dyslexia myself and while my eyesight is dodgy I am glad to have what I have) this whole story has made me totally ******* angry at both the gutter press and the mother for making political captial out of a mans disability. It truely shows that predjudice against people with disabilities is alive and kicking in the UK in the 21st Centruy.

He made a few spelling mistakes, SO WHAT!! this was a hand written letter and these things do happen. He took the time to write this letter himself rather than get some under secretary to photocopy a mass produced standard letter.

Brown is damned if he does and damed if he dosen't. To be honest if I was in his shoes I wouldn't be so restrained. :evil:

DonDaddyD

Everyone should vote Dondaddyd (well actually my real name in full...)

That would set the country right.

could you imagine my census questions....

Sorry, derailed, you all may continue squabbling constructively.

hugh1982

Agree with those posters who think this has been blown out of all proportion by the press.

I actually don't think Brown ought to be praised for writing these letters by hand - that should be a given considering the sacrifices made by soldiers and their families. I think it is very honourable though that he phoned the mother in question in order to apologise for the supposed errors in his letter. I guess it's a damning indictment of the world we live in both that the mother felt compelled to record and report the conversation to the press, and that the Sun thought that this was something newsworthy for its readership.

Can't see how this could be seen as a failed PR stunt by Labour - you'd have to be quite the moron to try and suggest that :roll:

always_tyred

DonDaddyD wrote:

Everyone should vote Dondaddyd (well actually my real name in full...)

That would set the country right.

could you imagine my census questions....

Sorry, derailed, you all may continue squabbling constructively.

But, DDD, all of your press releases and speaches would be more verbose than Neil Kinnock's. That wouldn't do at all.