Poor Gordon Brown

patricia

Correct.

A friend on the Sun newsdesk last night took a call from a soldier who was so angry she was trembling when she put the phone down. His disgust at what the Sun had done and was planning to do this morning had left him completely incandescent with fury. She said his articulation and argument was completely unassailable, and wondered how low Murdoch and the Sun still have to fall, if that is at all possible.

It's just a shame that the Tel/STel/Spectator aren't all that far behind.

Watt Tyler

OK, whatever.

Fergus Pickering

A free press is like this. Journalists are like this. Maybe you are not but then you are not really a journalist, are you? Have yiou ever hard the term 'the gutter press'. The gutter press is all of you, more or less. The rage of Caliban seeing his face in the mirror, don't you know? Very Alistair Campbellish I'd call it. And just what any sane person would expect. In fact I would argue it is the very lack of morals that makes our press so powerful. They will go for the story ALWAYS and to hell with principles, morals etc etc. As for Gordon, this is most unfair, but he had it coming. As a great kicker of people when they are down, he will understand I'm sure. Oh, nd he is not blind. he has poor sight. David Blunkett is blind. A very different thing as you may find as you get older.

Rhoda Klapp

You are right, the execution of the letter may have been inept, but the intent was honourable.

Publius

Brown is not an honourable man. Even the death of a soldier is an opportunity for spin. Honourable men do not lie and lie and lie. Honourable men resign when they mess up. Honourable men do not engage in character assasination of their political enemies.

Dave Weeden

Totally agree, Alex. I think the Sun has got this wrong. There are good reasons to dislike Brown, and there are good reasons for thinking we should leave Afghanistan, but using a spelling mistake by an extremely short-sighted man feels desperate, and using the family of a dead service man (and they were used) is disgraceful.

Tiberius

It's no more wrong for a red-top to have a go at Brown than it is for any of their other victims. Indeed many of the other victims are far less deserving of such an attack, whether personal or not.

You either have a free press or you don't. I would rather have the free press, but I choose not read the more unsavoury elements, even when they're attacking a traitor like Brown.

Publius

Labour have encouraged this vile intrusive emotionalizing life-as-soap-opera mawkishness, with its attendant tears and "unreserved" apologies, so they really should not be surprised when the beast eventually turns on them.

Patricia Shaw

Tiberius - the issue isn't free v censored press.

The issue is the tone of the tone of the Nation's Conversation, when so many of its interlocutors are centrally controlled.

Neither News International nor Press Holdings give Britain a 'Free Press'. They give us a site for propagandists with agendas.

If the UK were to apply for EU membership today, there s every chance if would not be allowed in, given the offshore, centralised control of so much of its media.

Simon Levack

I have no idea if Mrs Janes is being paid by the Sun. But no-one would be surprised if she were.

Oh, very neat. Accuse the woman on no evidence whatever, and try to excuse yourself in advance by claiming that it would not be surprising if it were so - as if that in itself amounted to evidence.

I suppose it's possible to pity Brown, although wouldn't waste any sympathy on him myself - rather reserve it for the victims of his ineptitude and dishonesty. And then again, do we a want a Prime Minister we can "pity"?

THX1138

I agree with Alex I have very little sympathy for Gordon Brown but this was a nasty attack.

As I recall Donald Rumsfeld had a machine sign standard letters that were sent to the families of US service personnel killed in Iraq.

At least Brown has the decency to write to victims families personally and who cares that he got a few spellings wrong.

Tiberius

Thank you for the session in room 101, Patricia. I shall no longer think the wrong things.

Richard Calhoun

It is not that nasty, why is Brown writing letters to bereaved relatives??
Because he sees a political spin off, and he is cheap enough to take it.
He deserves all he gets!!!

Snowman

Spot on, Massie-san. Not only is it undignified, it’s also counterproductive. Personal attacks only turn the target into an underdog that engenders sympathy, they aren’t the same as the parody of the Spitting Image, or jokes on HIGNFY.

Patricia Shaw at 3.27: whatever the point of your posting may be, it’s unlikely that barking at Gordon for spelling mistakes and poor handwriting will solve it. No harm intended.

Rob

Gordon Brown has worse than "poor sight". He is totally blind in one eye and has extremely poor vision in the other. Comparing his level of blindness with that of David Blunkett is wholly inappropriate.

Alex has the press bang to rights and his comments are all the more powerful coming as they do from a self-professed non-fan of Brown. The issue here is Afghanistan itself and the war, not the PM's handwriting and spelling.

Vulture

This is a pathetic example of the 'I don't agree with Gordon - in fact I hated him before you plebs did - but he's an honourable man' school of thought.
Bruin - and Balls, and Straw, and Mandelslime and the whole putrid shower wouldn't know what honour was if it rammed them in their fat arses and rang a tram bell. Bruin is a brutal manipulator, and we heard nothing of his 'blindness' until his poll ratings started to slide. Now we are expected to support him out of ...wait for it ..pity. Well, you can feel sorry for him if you like. My pity is reserved for the men he sent to their deaths because he was too goddman mean to pay for helicopters, body armour and tough armoured vehicles to protect them. If Bruin caught fire I would not piss him out - he's ruined my country.

cmp

A grieving mother could have many motivations for recording this conversation and passing it to the Sun. Anger may be her motive instead of, as you imply, greed.

Beefeater

The Massie-Klapp reaction to the poor dogged fellow doing his duty with old-fashioned etiquette even though it is hard for him with his bad eyes and all, is understandable.
But then one recalls that this dogged fellow's sense of duty is so profound that he refused to resign on the grounds that his country was in such trouble he could not abandon ship.
Further, why is Brown writing these letters? The senior officer is correctly charged with this duty. If there were more deaths, Brown would not be able laboriously to pen his "personal" condolences.
And then one concludes that Brown is ridiculous and his well-intentioned actions smack of moral vanity.
As for the press, they are still waging an anti-war campaign and will pounce upon any potential Cindy Sheehan to promote their cause.
Horrible confusion of manners and morals.

Sir Graphus

Looking at this in isolation, then, yes some sympathy, the man was trying to apologise, and Janes seemed to have his lines quite well rehearsed.

However, Brown has certainly dished out worse in the past. Live by the sword and all that.

DavidDP

Who's Bruin?

Bunnykins

DavidDP.......Who's Patricia Shaw?

THX1138

London Tonight just misspelled name strap of one of war dead! Darren Chant became Darrebn Chant.

I hope The Sun are on ITV's case for disrespecting our war dead.

Derbyshire Ben

Well said Alex. This is an ugly, shameful episode when the national debate should really be about troop numbers and strategy. I'm also surprised and very disappointed nobody from Tory HQ has gone on the record to say so. Gutter journalism at its worst.

Watt Tyler

THX80085 can't tell the difference between a news channel mispelling a dead soldiers name in their reporting, and the Prime Minister of the UK misspelling a dead soldiers name in a scrawled letter to that soldiers mother.

As I said on another post,Jesus wept!

AAE

Brown is Prime Minister for ggodness sake so surely his staff are as aware as he is telling us he is, that he has a sight problem and his handwriting is not clear. Does no one in No10 therefore have responsibility to check his letters as a matter of courtesy to the office of Prime Minister and to the recipients of his letters? Mrs Janes' senses and nerves will be on a hair-trigger because of her grief, compounded by the feeling that her son's death may have been preventable. Presumably someone from No10 primed her for Brown's call, and it is understandable that she would want to record this. Her son died in our service, the least he could do is to send a letter with the correct name even if decent grammar is beyond him. He can't even graciously acknowledge his errors, but blames her for misreading! He has all the advantages, Mrs Janes none.

Mike Godfrey

I have no sympathy for a blundering fool of an unelected PM who can't lead the country in a manner demanded of someone in that position. Quite apart from his dismal attempt at a consolation letter, his behaviour at the Cenotaph was equally appaling. It says something about a man supposedly brought up with strict christian values thats his instinct didn't include lowering his head in respect of the dead. Most people of his age know instinctively what is the right behaviour when entering a church, attending a funeral or a comemoration service but Gordon Brown apparently doesn't. It shouldn't need advisors to tell him what to do, it should be instinctive despite all the own goals he plied upon himself. Arrogant people like this need reminding over and over again and maybe one day they'll get it and if it seems like bullying, well if the cap fits.........etc

gareth

Presumably you don't like Gordon's policies and don't care about the man's personal failings. It's a pity you didn't bring these policies to our attention before it became profitable to do so Alex.

Brown's handwriting is particularly sketchy and malformed when you bear in mind he is in the communications business and is well educated. It's not so important but worth a comment.

DavidDP

"DavidDP.......Who's Patricia Shaw?"

No idea. Why?

ChrisP

I am commenting here from the standpoint that I dont read the sun and wont listen to the tapes.

I do feel slightly sorry for Brown. However if you are going to personally write to grieving families then you are dealing with people in a heightened emotional state, often needing someone to blame for their loss.

In this context writing barely legible letters and getting the names of those involved wrong defeats the object. Put yourself in Mrs Janes position - the prime minister cares so much he has misspelt both my name and my sons. You would be livid.

That the Sun chooses to publish this is up to them. They do not have to be balanced, and I think all the Labour piggies squealing foul are the one's politicising the issue. They used to get support from Murdoch - no complaints then were there. If Sun wants to blame the most powerful man in the country for the war then it is hardly a massive issue.

All this highlights Browns poor people skills (insisting to the mother that he hadnt misspelt sons name i.e. I am always right), poor administration (no-one checking letters) and poor judgement and temperament (we presume that no-one is allowed to check due to his rages at being told he is wrong).

So in short I feel a little bit sorry for him, but when you are in a hole, stop digging.

THX1138

The Sun closed it's comments thread under the story because they were mostly supportive of Brown- The backlash begins.