Thread: Nob Brown-mis-spelled dead Soldiers name in letter to family

Brown spent many years as chancellor in a loving embrace with Murdoch - which served politicians and the media, but undermined democracy for a decade. This disgusting pair (and Blair) deserved each other then and now.

This episode marks the first real fallout from the break up of that love affair. I feel so sorry for the vulnerable mother being got at and closely manipulated in order to take pot-shots, build a head of steam and shift this tawdry rag. Cameron won't condemn it because he's over a barrel in the service of the rag in the build up to the next election, and beyond. And democracy (i.e. the electorate's interests will continue to suffer for the next god knows how many years)

We'll never know for sure what's in the mind of the Prime Minister when he writes these letters. We can only assume if he's making glaring errors and these errors are not picked up by his staff, then 'sympathy for the families of the fallen' is not uppermost, but something else - possibly good old 'spin' or repairing his battered image. It would be folly to assume that he's in any way capable of showing humanity, honesty or integrity - that's clearly an impossible position to adopt with these vermin. He also made so-called 'mistakes' with his expenses, along with several hundred of his politician colleagues.

I hope Armando Ianucci is following this closely and devotes an episode to it. We'll probably get a bit closer to the truth then.

Originally Posted by maxi_77

The point about such letters is that if they are to be seen as a genuine expression of the writers feelings they need to be accurate, legible, and preferably reasonably well spelt. This letter did not meet any of those criteria.

Well put!


THis letter was clearly written in haste and the Dear Leader couldn't even be arsed to start again when he made a mistake. The Dear Leader is trying to spin himself as a 'caring' PM, when it would seem by the letter, they are nothing more than a chore he feels compelled to do .

Back in the old days

Originally Posted by BarkingSpider

Is it just me that finds the worst thing is that the Sun will get away with illegally publishing a recorded private conversation because they know that Brown can't take action against them because of the subject matter?

The devious barstards. They've sunk as low as they can with this one, and that's saying something.

I was going to agree with you. Then I read the comments at the bottom of The Times article on this-

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...-have-your-say

And I changed my mind. The Sun are lower than a snakes belly and I have no time for it in any way shape or form but Mrs Janes has the right to express her opinion.
Mr Brown put his letters to the bereaved into the public domain to make himself look better.
I am astonished at the number of people out there in the world who believe Mrs Janes should be told to be quiet.
I cannot imagine what it is like to lose a son, even worse than that to believe that he could have lived had a helicopter been available quick enough.
Jamie Janes died in service of this country, that entitles his mother to give Brown her opinion in any way she chooses.
I may not think much of The Sun but the issue is bigger than my dislike for a newspaper.

Originally Posted by jagman

I am astonished at the number of people out there in the world who believe Mrs Janes should be told to be quiet..

12 years of Neues Arbites indoctrination has conditioned them to provide the 'correct' response.

Originally Posted by Roger_The_Cat

Originally Posted by chimera

Originally Posted by pombsen-armchair-warrior

Christina Schmidt set the benchmark - this woman falls short by a considerable margin.

Well said.

Christina Schmid did too

Oh the ironey.



WWWWWWWAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHH

Originally Posted by Bazzinho1977

Originally Posted by Roger_The_Cat

Originally Posted by chimera

Originally Posted by pombsen-armchair-warrior

Christina Schmidt set the benchmark - this woman falls short by a considerable margin.

Well said.

Christina Schmid did too

Oh the ironey.



WWWWWWWAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHH

Indeed.

Originally Posted by "jagman

I am astonished at the number of people out there in the world who believe Mrs Janes should be told to be quiet.

I don't think anyone believes she should be told to be quiet. She should however, be voicing her own opinion on her own terms, and not manipulated by the journo scum that have done this.

One thing that really psses me off is that once you die in action, people feel they have the right to use your life for whatever cause they're pursuing, assuming you'd have agreed 100% with them.

The Sun are a bunch of wnkers for this. Deeply disrespectful to the dead soldier.

GB - at least he made the effort. He's got half an eyeball by all accounts so much as I think he's a tsser, I don't really blame him for this one.

Overall, I think this secret recording etc undermines the armed forces as a whole more than it does GB. A real shame.

Originally Posted by Booty

Originally Posted by dante242

Originally Posted by Dunservin

Originally Posted by FiveAlpha

Originally Posted by Bazzinho1977

Originally Posted by Sangreal

What a load of tosh. The only people who will get irritated about this story are of the sort that routinely use one of the following bone phrases (not exhaustive!) that seem to litter ARRSE's threads these days:

Zanu Labour
Liarbour (and all other conceivable iterations)
Tony Bliar
Neu Arbeit
Simples
'Them'
'I've met good TA and bad TA, and I've met good Regs and bad Regs.'
'Let's start up the outrage bus.'

Fuckin' get a life!

May I commend this post to the house.

I'll second that.

Thirded.

Forthed :D

And fithed

They're still among us, it seems:

Originally Posted by Oil_Slick

Originally Posted by jagman

I am astonished at the number of people out there in the world who believe Mrs Janes should be told to be quiet..

12 years of Neues Arbites indoctrination has conditioned them to provide the 'correct' response.

Originally Posted by Fugly

Originally Posted by "jagman

I am astonished at the number of people out there in the world who believe Mrs Janes should be told to be quiet.

I don't think anyone believes she should be told to be quiet. She should however, be voicing her own opinion on her own terms, and not manipulated by the journo scum that have done this.

I agree with you but everyone seems to be losing sight of the issue. Excet for some of the commenters on The Times article who clearly beleive she should be quiet.
Who published what she had to say is irrelevant (if distateful exploitation by the Sun), what she has to say is very relevant and she has every right to say it.
I couldn't give a monkey's if some Scum journalist has been a bit sly, what irks me is that some people seem to feel that in some way vindicates Brown and absolves him of his responsiblities.

Are we really going to allow this to turn into an oppurtunity for Brown to look like the victim?
Brown got stitched up for a day or two on the front page of The Sun. Mrs Janes lost her son. Why the fook should Brown be allowed to claim the victim status in this?
He's embarrrased. Its not as if he is the one paid with is life is it?

Originally Posted by Fugly

Originally Posted by "jagman

I am astonished at the number of people out there in the world who believe Mrs Janes should be told to be quiet.

I don't think anyone believes she should be told to be quiet. She should however, be voicing her own opinion on her own terms, and not manipulated by the journo scum that have done this.

Correct and as I said before, this should be continued between Mrs Janes and Mr Brown in person at No. 10 without the chance of any press to manipulate the situation. Having a voice is every persons right.

Allowing your voice to be controlled by a media organisation causes people to detract from what you are saying in defiance of the media.
Mrs Janes has valid points, she has cause to be angry and upset of course.
Sadly due to how the situation has been handled so far everything that is and has been said is now in the public eye, open to close scrutiny by all.

Originally Posted by jagman

Originally Posted by BarkingSpider

Is it just me that finds the worst thing is that the Sun will get away with illegally publishing a recorded private conversation because they know that Brown can't take action against them because of the subject matter?

The devious barstards. They've sunk as low as they can with this one, and that's saying something.

I was going to agree with you. Then I read the comments at the bottom of The Times article on this-

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...-have-your-say

And I changed my mind. The Sun are lower than a snakes belly and I have no time for it in any way shape or form but Mrs Janes has the right to express her opinion.
Mr Brown put his letters to the bereaved into the public domain to make himself look better.
I am astonished at the number of people out there in the world who believe Mrs Janes should be told to be quiet.
I cannot imagine what it is like to lose a son, even worse than that to believe that he could have lived had a helicopter been available quick enough.
Jamie Janes died in service of this country, that entitles his mother to give Brown her opinion in any way she chooses.
I may not think much of The Sun but the issue is bigger than my dislike for a newspaper.

I see your agreement and I raise you with my agreement. My point was solely about the Sun's manipulation. The lady has every right to complain. I just don't like the Sun's agenda in all this. They are quite capable (did I just say that?) of raising all the other salient points about equipment without using this grieving lady as a pawn.
Let's not forget their only real interest in all this. Selling newspapers.

Originally Posted by BarkingSpider

Originally Posted by jagman

Originally Posted by BarkingSpider

Is it just me that finds the worst thing is that the Sun will get away with illegally publishing a recorded private conversation because they know that Brown can't take action against them because of the subject matter?

The devious barstards. They've sunk as low as they can with this one, and that's saying something.

I was going to agree with you. Then I read the comments at the bottom of The Times article on this-

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...-have-your-say

And I changed my mind. The Sun are lower than a snakes belly and I have no time for it in any way shape or form but Mrs Janes has the right to express her opinion.
Mr Brown put his letters to the bereaved into the public domain to make himself look better.
I am astonished at the number of people out there in the world who believe Mrs Janes should be told to be quiet.
I cannot imagine what it is like to lose a son, even worse than that to believe that he could have lived had a helicopter been available quick enough.
Jamie Janes died in service of this country, that entitles his mother to give Brown her opinion in any way she chooses.
I may not think much of The Sun but the issue is bigger than my dislike for a newspaper.

I see your agreement and I raise you with my agreement. My point was solely about the Sun's manipulation. The lady has every right to complain. I just don't like the Sun's agenda in all this. they are quite capable (did I just say that?) of raising all the other salient points about equipment without using this grieving lady as a pawn.

Despite having to agree again....
I am most concerned that Brown is going to come out of this looking like the victim. He isn't, the Janes family is.
It is amazing how many peole have simply gone off on one about The Sun's integrity (like anyone believed they had any in the first lace) instead of focusing on what really matters.

Originally Posted by Oil_Slick

THis letter was clearly written in haste and the Dear Leader couldn't even be arsed to start again when he made a mistake. The Dear Leader is trying to spin himself as a 'caring' PM, when it would seem by the letter, they are nothing more than a chore he feels compelled to do .

Who published the letter?