Mother's challenge to PM

No1Doyen


Joined: 04/07/2008
Posts: 16617

Message Posted:
10/11/2009 10:04

Details have emerged of a sometimes heated 13-minute phone conversation between Gordon Brown and the mother of a guardsman killed in Afghanistan.

Jacqui Janes had accused the prime minister of "insulting" her son Jamie, 20, by spelling his name incorrectly in a personal note of condolence.



Don’t get me wrong I have a lot of sympathy for all Mothers of our deceased troops, however not everyone can have legible handwriting. Was the Mother right in challenging GB on his handwriting? Or was it more than that?



http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8351760.stm

smithy


Joined: 17/07/2008
Posts: 5301

Message Posted:
10/11/2009 10:10

Probably more than that Bill

GB is saying its because of his poor eyesight or no eyesight in one eye that the mistake was made, in this circumstances there should have been NO mistakes in the spelling of this poor your lad Name god bless him

simbas



Joined: 16/07/2007
Posts: 5943

Message Posted:
10/11/2009 10:36

i have mixed feelings on this one , firstly i am no fan of GB , but he just didn't sign a typed letter , rather he did take the time to write the letter personally { a small price to pay } when one of our children died , supposingly defending the security of our country . His writing is quite bad , maybe he should have had it proof read before sending the letter for that reason or perhaps indeed the details he was given were wrong . From a recently grieving mother

's point of view , i think i would be mortified and so angry to think that the PM did not take the time just to double check the spelling of his name , and not get her babies name wrong , she probably thinks GB doesn't really care and couldn't be bothered , and she could be forgiven for that given the circumstances . God bless her and her family , i can't begin to imagine their pain

Brinsley


Joined: 04/04/2009
Posts: 6858

Message Posted:
10/11/2009 10:41

Bill



Please contact Mr Brown and invite him to join this Forum as this may help his writing skills!



Richard

HAPPY FEET


Joined: 18/07/2008
Posts: 416

Message Posted:
10/11/2009 10:59

If Gorden Brown was being nasty as lot of the papers say , why would he even reply, ok the letter had spelling mistakes but at least it wasn't a generated standard PC letter, I do feel the mother is milking this to feed fuel to the tabloids,we all feel sympathy for the grieving family at the loss of a loved one.

lovingcyprus


Joined: 02/03/2007
Posts: 1272

Message Posted:
10/11/2009 11:09

I am no fan of Gordon Brown but in this case I have have sympathy for him, this woman is completely in the wrong.



I understand that her conversation with GB was recorded that is against the law unless the person you are having the conversation with is made aware that the call is being recorded.

hattikins


Joined: 17/02/2008
Posts: 2793

Message Posted:
10/11/2009 11:18

I feel desperately sad for the families of all our troops who have lost their lives but when these young people join the forces surely they and their families are aware that they may have to go into war zones and so run the risk of getting injured or killed. The mothers of all those young men and women who died in the two world wars would have grieved for their sons and daughters too but they didn't have the opportunity to air their feelings or take the powers that be to task.

In my opinion the PM can't be blamed for everything and he did at least acknowledge the loss of this young life, his spelling should not detract from that, God knows he has made some terrible mistakes during his premiership, his spelling is not his greatest blunder.

No1Doyen


Joined: 04/07/2008
Posts: 16617

Message Posted:
10/11/2009 11:51

I'm in agreement that the PM's spelling should not be brought to task

Brinsley


Joined: 04/04/2009
Posts: 6858

Message Posted:
10/11/2009 12:04

If every member got banned for the slightest spelling error there would be no one left!



Richard

flossie44


Joined: 05/03/2009
Posts: 223

Message Posted:
10/11/2009 12:05

I would have had a lot more sympathy if the mother of the soldier had not invloved the Sun ? Surely she could have resolved it quietly. She was also shown on the television supposedly reading the letter yet previously she said that once she saw the mistakes she could not continue reading it. Why did she not destroy it ?



She must be going through agonies but personally I would prefer to keep my grief between myself and my family.



flossie

No1Doyen


Joined: 04/07/2008
Posts: 16617

Message Posted:
10/11/2009 12:06

Ricard. Sum of us kan spel gud, thanc yu

BillBarnacle


Joined: 20/04/2009
Posts: 167

Message Posted:
10/11/2009 12:20

This debate is fairly straight forward



If Brown has poor eyesight and cant spell then his advisers would have known this before this letter was sent



On an issue as sensitive as this you simply do not under any circumstances make mistakes and his letters should have been checked before being sent



Also what hope has UK education system got if our dear leader cant write a proper letter



Finally at this time of year all make an extra effort to wear poppies with pride

parky


Joined: 13/06/2009
Posts: 182

Message Posted:
10/11/2009 12:25

I also am no fan of Brown's, but he took the time to write in person, and then gets slaughtered for it, obviously the mother is in great emotional distress at the death of her son and wants to blame somebody.

HAPPY FEET


Joined: 18/07/2008
Posts: 416

Message Posted:
10/11/2009 13:02

How many troops in the 2nd World War got personnel letters to grieving mothers from Winston Churchill ??

nareik


Joined: 26/01/2009
Posts: 113

Message Posted:
10/11/2009 13:16

Flossie44,

I am in full agreement with you. In my opinion, Gordon Brown tried to do the right thing, but he didn't do it right. And his intent was obviously respect, not disrespect - otherwise he wouldn't have bothered. All this very bad publicity might mean that he will not write a personal letter to the families of any future deceased soldiers. And another parent interviewed on TV said that that letter meant a great deal to his family.

So who loses?

The only gain from this sorry episode is the Sun newspaper and Private Janes' mother who, no doubt, will have received remuneration from the Sun for spilling the beans.



Not how I would want my son to be remembered.

aripointer


Joined: 01/07/2008
Posts: 189

Message Posted:
10/11/2009 13:18

What a state the UK is in. The PM cannot write or spell.



Now we know why he did not go to Lisbon to sign the Treaty



I wonder what his adding up is like?





AP

BillBarnacle


Joined: 20/04/2009
Posts: 167

Message Posted:
10/11/2009 13:43

Re Msg 16



Perhaps there is potential for a legal argument to be mounted to get us out of the Lisbon Treaty if we can claim it was signed by someone who is illiterate and due to bad eyesight could not read the small print

florence1


Joined: 29/08/2009
Posts: 14

Message Posted:
10/11/2009 19:25

I agree with message 12. He did try. I think I heard him say that he knows how this lady is feeling. How can he? How can any of know how she feels, unless we have been through the same. It would have been better to say, I can't imagine how you must be feeling. I'm sure she said how the b----- h--- can he know how I'm feeling.

proger1



Joined: 18/04/2009
Posts: 2918

Message Posted:
11/11/2009 08:12

Has anyone stopped to consider how difficult it is to write a letter of condolence to the parent of one so young when you in reality of no personal knowledge of any of the parties involved. You're only involvement being that you are to blame for the deceased still being in a militarised zone.

I can understand the press jumping all over this because that is what the press do to sell news, it is a business after all but come on people, a letter, hand written from the prime minister in condolence for the loss of a child. It was obviously meant in respect and should be treated as such IMO.

If you want to find someone to blame, try all the secretaries who are responsible for bringing the PM the original information of the deceased and then checking his mail before sending it. We all make occasional spelling mistakes and as disconcerting as this one is, we don't all have a private staff to spell check for us.

Rogerdoger


Joined: 04/09/2008
Posts: 102

Message Posted:
11/11/2009 08:25

What a coinsidence that the woman remembered to press the record button her phone, I am no fan of GB either, however in this case he was set up by the Sun newspaper, they will not stop at anything to sell news papers.



What would you all say if it was you she did this to, bet she got paid!

nurseawful



Joined: 06/02/2009
Posts: 5934

Message Posted:
11/11/2009 08:47

It is a terrible thing for anyone to outlive their child and especially for the mothers of soldiers killed in a strange country. However what Gordon Brown did was done with the best of intentions I believe. Chances are the mother of Jamie Janes is going through one of the stages of grief , which is anger and who better to take it out on than the man who sent the troops out there in the first place. The surname Janes I had never heard before and when I heard this on the BBC news is did sound as if the name was James.

It is never an easy thing to do either telling a relative that their loved one has died, whether by telephone, letter or face to face, and everyone reacts differently.

And as message 19 says the press glory in things like this as it sells newspapers even ones like the Sun.

mamachina


Joined: 22/11/2008
Posts: 730

Message Posted:
11/11/2009 09:47

I agree with Happy Feet - WW11 and WW1 you got a letter saying "sorry, missing believed killed" sometime.

And GB did have a child die - yes I know it was a baby, but it must still have hurt just as much, if in a different way. Id rather get a badly handwritten letter than none at all. Soldiers join up to fight for their country, some of the people fighting get killed, get real.

cyprusairsoft



Joined: 22/06/2009
Posts: 2066

Message Posted:
11/11/2009 09:50

Its called a mothers grief and we always take it out on some one or something this time it was gb

HAPPY FEET


Joined: 18/07/2008
Posts: 416

Message Posted:
11/11/2009 11:18

If you recieve a phone call from the Prime Minister would you be ready with tape recorder in hand unless you wanted to use the recording for other means !!

One minute she forgives him the next she is slagging him off for the lack of helicopters and equipment.

My grandad died in the Somme because two tanks failed to turn up and the brigade were then a sitting target and all died, maybe I should complain to the family members of Winston Churchill !!

proger1



Joined: 18/04/2009
Posts: 2918

Message Posted:
11/11/2009 11:28

There seem to be anawful lot of assumptions of the reasons behind peoples actions here, as allways no evidence.



It might interest people to know that there are a couple of members of this forum who are actually close personal friends and until recently were direct neighbours of the family. I can confirm that they have not written any comments on here and if anyone would be in the know about the situation it would be they.



Did anyone consider that the mother recorded the call for posperity, it's not every day you get a call from the PM.

This is of course an assumption of mine and you know what they say "To Assume makes and ass of U and me"



GB may have made a spelling mistake, the mother may have been trying to get some recompence for the death of her son but lets remember, a young man died for his country and we are judging his surviving family or the leader of the country he died for. Regardless of the reasons, it is pure pettyness.

HAPPY FEET


Joined: 18/07/2008
Posts: 416

Message Posted:
11/11/2009 13:30

Maybe I'm wrong so do please correct me ,



The politicians set the military budget in consultation with the military. The military spend it.



The military are on the horns of a dilemma because they advised the government about their capabilities and then found that the equipment was not the best for the sort of campaign being faught.



The military are at least as much to blame for what is going on because they want to be involved in conflict. It's what they do.

Rogerdoger


Joined: 04/09/2008
Posts: 102

Message Posted:
11/11/2009 14:34

happy feet,



The Military tells the politcian what they need, the politicians then halve the ammount needed, then when the military cannot do it's job because lack of materials, manpower, the smug politicians blame the Generals, to take the blame away from themselve, while they sit there filling their expence forms.



MP's their a disgrace

AlsancakJack



Joined: 14/08/2008
Posts: 5762

Message Posted:
11/11/2009 14:46

Rogerdoger



'The Military tells the politcian what they need, the politicians then halve the ammount needed,'



Thats why the Military always ask for twice the amount needed. Common practice with any organisation that has to work with budgets.

AJ

proger1



Joined: 18/04/2009
Posts: 2918

Message Posted:
11/11/2009 15:22

AJ,

And that is in my opinion the worst thing about the UK system.

A friend of mine worked for our local council and informed me that we would be getting speed bumps on the cul de sac where I lived, all 150 meteres of it. When I told him that was a complete waste of money he informed me that I was absolutely correct, that was the purpose of doing it. They had to spend the budget or they would not get what they were asking for next year.

At the time I was a tax payer and was disgusted but he informed me that it was what every council department did, even when it came to inter billing between departments.

And people ask what all the tax money is used for, as for the military services, they pay standard taxes and are still left to survive on the sub standard equipment due to budgets.

girne 29


Joined: 06/12/2007
Posts: 1488

Message Posted:
11/11/2009 17:08

I am not a fan of Brown but

Brown did write instead of getting a secretary to type it and then having him sign it.

He made mistakes and apoligised,

I have absolutely no doubt that he feels saddened by the deaths, and it must be terrible having to write those letters so many times.

I would be more impressed if the lady had gone to the BBC rather than the one news organ, the Sun that would take such delight.,especially as just announced its purpose in life is the downfall of Brown.

Brown made a genuine and emotional phone call , and for it to be recorded and broadcast is the pits.I hope the law gets involved,

Comparing Browns actions and motives with the Suns ,Brown wins out, for all his mistakes.



At least Brown did not use a young mans death for electioneering, the Sun did.They should hang their heads in shame especially on a day like today.

PeeCee


Joined: 16/03/2009
Posts: 133

Message Posted:
11/11/2009 18:30

Girme 29 Couldn't agree more with your post. As a retired senior civil servand letters that come out of Govn't offices are usually written by those lower down the food chain. The fact that the PM personally hand wrote a letter of sympathy is a credit to him. Making political capital out of this beggars belief. In fact is a bit sick

DutchCrusader



Joined: 19/05/2008
Posts: 11280

Message Posted:
11/11/2009 19:12

I feel I'd better stay out of this thread with its sensitive (UK) subject. But when the thread dies or gets closed for one reason or another maybe some members could bother to count the spelling mistakes and other errors in the English language made here. What is this saying again about living in a glass house..?

Brinsley


Joined: 04/04/2009
Posts: 6858

Message Posted:
11/11/2009 19:16

'Sun' backtracking as I write, (BBC radio 4) spouting lies!



Richard

phylray



Joined: 21/09/2007
Posts: 1727

Message Posted:
11/11/2009 19:18

Exactly, DC. It goes " people in glass houses shouldnt' throw stones" and it applies to many posters.

BBC polls show far more sympathy for the PM than the mother of the dead soldier, and it has been

blown out of all proportion by the Sun for its own political agenda. G.B has sight in only one eye and

at least he wrote a personal letter and I doubt if T.B would have done the same.

MsGarnet


Joined: 04/01/2009
Posts: 989

Message Posted:
11/11/2009 20:31

He was writing a personal letter to a mother whose son was NOT killed in defending the country, but on the Altar of a Prime Minister's ego (Blair and Bush should be at the International Court of the Hague waiting to be prosecuted for war crimes - as it is, they are in the lap of luxury, surrounded by security for their lifetimes and their children will most probably never join any of the Forces). He knows his eyesight is poor, so if he didn't want all the staff at 10 Downing Street to be privy to what he wrote, as we all know most people can be bought by the media - he should have at least one member of staff who he could trust to read the letter on his behalf before it was sealed. As to spelling the deceased name wrongly, indefensible.......



As has been said, the mother is grieving - to lose a children must bring one to the brink of madness - but for your child's name to be misspelt is heartbreaking, when we all have a name that says who we are, given by our parents

BillBarnacle


Joined: 20/04/2009
Posts: 167

Message Posted:
11/11/2009 22:28

DC

Re msg 32



As stated in a previous post (msg 12) in some matters you simply DO NOT make errors.Making a few spelling mistakes on a forum is hardly in the same category as writing a letter of condolence.



I don't hold any one individual responsible but overall the whole thing was sloppy and Brown and his advisers are equally accountable

PeeCee


Joined: 16/03/2009
Posts: 133

Message Posted:
12/11/2009 17:26

Perhaps future Prime Ministers will learn from this and park their sense of sympathy and humanity and let the secretary type out a letter and put it in the "to be signed" tray. Simple. Nice neat letter carefully word processed with the PM signature.

No1Doyen


Joined: 04/07/2008
Posts: 16617

Message Posted:
12/11/2009 17:40

It's clear that GB meant no harm. It was a very compassionate thing for him to do and unfortunately a couple of spelling mistakes has caused the whole situation to get all out of hand.



As for the Mother. She's obviously very distressed about losing her son and wants to get back at somebody.



I feel sorry for both of them.

sienna


Joined: 09/01/2009
Posts: 1627

Message Posted:
12/11/2009 17:49

oh My goodness Sienna is agreeing with No 1



I am not particularly a lover of GB but I do not think any upset was intended just a man with bad hand writing - shame it casued so much distress, but was well intened - I believe he wrote it by hand to be more personal