Slow news day? Woman calls a letter from the PM an "insult"

[-:Undertaker:-]

we're not on about whether we should be in afghanistan or not

we're on about the rudeness of this woman

I know what we are on about, and I am saying that the issue over a letter is nothing and that they shouldn't be there anyway, regardless of letters sent by Gordon Brown.

..being lectured by Ardemax on whether my posts are valid, what next.

[GommeInc]

Imagine your son had just died in a war that we shouldn't even be fighting, and then the PM of the country sends you a letter looking like that? terrible handwriting, pathetic spelling, 5cm spaces between words and saying that you're son is 'ONLY ONE OF 220'? how would that make YOU feel? I mean come on, my 5 year old brother could write better than that - and to a women who has just lost her son to a NON-WORTHY cause, it is DISGUSTING.

To all you people saying 'this woman is pathetic, she should be grateful' just shut up, just shut up, just do it now. That's a pathetic excuse of a comment, she has just lost her son, how do you think she'd feel reading that pile of crap?

She has EVERYTHING to complain about, if he has bad eye site and whatnot then he should have got someone else to write it. Bad eye sight or not - I'm sure he has glasses? then is no excuse for such a pathetic insult.

Some of you people commenting in here saying 'whats she complaining about!!!' should be disgusted with yourselves. It's people like you who are driving this country down even deeper into darkness.

Way to make up the article :rolleyes: He never said anything about "1 of 220", so why don't you shut up, just shut up, shut up now :rolleyes:

It's a hand-written letter with heart-felt condolences and emotion. What does she want? A golden coffin with Elton John mounted on top of it? Don't be silly, he fought in a war which is expected of being a soldier, working in the army. You're missing the point, HE wrote the letter. Not someone else, why should "someone else" write the letter, a letter that Gordon Brown should do himself? Again, you miss the point and immediately bum-huff The Sun and take the side of a clearly clueless woman. If it was word-processed, should would of complained that the letter was impersonal, if Gordon Brown had someone else write it, it would be impersonal. Again, you miss the point that Gordon Brown wrote this letter, and not someone else. Sod his hand-writing, it would appear it's how he always writes anyway. I have a Princess Diana Award certificate with his signature on it, and it is the spitting image of his natural hand-writing in this article, and funnily enough it is written in felt-tip (though the signature is a photocopy put onto the paper, which is expected).

So yeah, re-read what you have written, and laugh at this lady. No-one is taking her seriously - she's disgusting, she's recently lost her son but cares more about a letter that was sincere and honourable, but she thinks it a better idea to piss on her sons honour and rant about how terrible of a person she is to the government (that's the impression). It's people like her who have no right to walk in the air of this country, because she's too inconsiderate and rude. She's pissed on the hand of the Prime Minister, who had offered a personal invitation of help and a letter of sincere condolences. It's not us who are the problem, it's people like you who do not recognise kindness in the community, people like you who will grow up to be old people who won't thank a youngster for giving way to you or letting you sit on a seat on the bus.

I know what we are on about, and I am saying that the issue over a letter is nothing and that they shouldn't be there anyway, regardless of letters sent by Gordon Brown.

..being lectured by Ardemax on whether my posts are valid, what next.

You are totally missing the point dear. This argument is about how a vile woman has rejected the thanks of someone, because of a few words that she could not read, yet the majority of the country can read what that person said anyway. The war is completely unrelated, as this argument is simply about common decency and kindness, which this lady lacks. Turn off the government rador for this thread m'love

[Jordy]

What use it it someone else writing it? I'll tell you - a well stuctured and well worded letter, the poor women is not going to know the difference between Brown writing it or someone else sitting next to him handwriting what he is saying? it's just common sense - if he isn't up to writing it, then get someone else to write what you are saying, it really isn't rocket science.

That's not the point at all - yes he had good intentions, but his execution was lazy. Of course he didn't write the letter to take the piss, now you are just getting the wrong end of the stick. Go on, add me to it, I really couldn't care, Just put yourself in her situation, I'm sure you'd feel very disrespected.

I understand where people are coming from, but come on. Put yourself in that ladies position, you'd be absolutely mortified and disrespected if someone spelled your sons name wrong, and wrote a letter that looks more like he tried to write it with his toes.

It isn't like this is a 'special case', he writes to all the families who have lost soldiers. I'm sure all the others have been fine, but on this one it just looks like he hasn't been bothered at all, and looks like he wrote it within two minutes to just get it out the way. I know I certainly wouldn't like it if MY SON DIED, would you?

Jordy, I'm sorry if you don't like me giving my opinion, I'm sure I'll feel very comfy in your ignore list.

You've changed your tone from all this "just shut up, just shut up, just do it now. That's a pathetic excuse of a comment, she has just lost her son, how do you think she'd feel reading that pile of crap?" and "it is DISGUSTING." to now understanding where people are coming from, strange isn't it?

He has dyslexia, and has one eye remaining with very poor eye sight, I would certainly take that into account if I was the mother, he is also a very busy man and I'm afraid we lose soldiers in Afghanistan almost every day, yet he still sends out personal and hand-written letters, having it written by his secretary is completely meaningless, it's like me sending her a letter about the loss of a son. I have nothing to do with her, nor does the secretary. The prime minister is obviously the most important man in the country and is at the forefront of things to do with Afghanistan, therefore a letter from him means something.

She's cashed in on his mistake also which is probably the most ludicrous part of it all.

[-:Undertaker:-]

You are totally missing the point dear. This argument is about how a vile woman has rejected the thanks of someone, because of a few words that she could not read, yet the majority of the country can read what that person said anyway. The war is completely unrelated, as this argument is simply about common decency and kindness, which this lady lacks. Turn off the government rador for this thread m'love

The woman just lost her son because her son and others men and women was/are out there fighting for a corrupt government in Kabul/unjust war in Iraq. I think calling the woman vile especially when she has just lost her son is out of order, because it was not her who sent thousands of our men and women out there to be killed for no reason what so ever.

[StefanWolves]

The woman just lost her son because her son and others men and women was/are out there fighting for a corrupt government in Kabul/unjust war in Iraq. I think calling the woman vile especially when she has just lost her son is out of order, because it was not her who sent thousands of our men and women out there to be killed for no reason what so ever.

This.

Jordy, just looking up the full letter and I'll prove my point hopefully in a minute, I'm sure I read somewhere about 1 of 220 or something along those lines.

[Inseriousity.]

At least he sent a letter. He could have just made excuses that he's busy with some 'important government business.' He's just in a lose-lose situation where he can't win. He sends a letter, he gets abuse. He doesn't send a letter, he gets abuse.

I'm sure she's upset over the loss of her son but there isn't any need for her to use someone's disability against them.

[GommeInc]

The woman just lost her son because her son and others men and women was/are out there fighting for a corrupt government in Kabul/unjust war in Iraq. I think calling the woman vile especially when she has just lost her son is out of order, because it was not her who sent thousands of our men and women out there to be killed for no reason what so ever.

Her son has free will, if he wanted a job in the army, then war is expected to be on the agenda And it's not disgusting, it's honest. She is not arguing about her son going to war, or the war in general, she's moaning about a letter which she cannot read and a mis-spelt name, hardly the end of the world and hardly worth the paper it was printed on. The silly woman should of done this quietly, by asking the Prime Minister to possibly re-write this on a word processor, or just simply fix the name. She's disgusting because she takes the kind words he wrote in this letter, urinated on them (so basically urinated on her son's honour) and disregards it, all because she's a petty little woman :/

This.

Jordy, just looking up the full letter and I'll prove my point hopefully in a minute, I'm sure I read somewhere about 1 of 220 or something along those lines.

Way to go, you've just admitted your original post was aload of rubbish.

For anyone interested in his signature:



Since when was his name "Gorda Bum"? See, I can play the hand-writing critic

[StefanWolves]

And how did I do that?

@The person up their also criticising me; what? can't I say that I don't agree with the way the mother went about? yes she may have gone about it the wrong way, but I have a lot of support for her, the letter is disgusting.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Her son has free will, if he wanted a job in the army, then war is expected to be on the agenda And it's not disgusting, it's honest. She is not arguing about her son going to war, or the war in general, she's moaning about a letter which she cannot read and a mis-spelt name, hardly the end of the world and hardly worth the paper it was printed on. The silly woman should of done this quietly, by asking the Prime Minister to possibly re-write this on a word processor, or just simply fix the name. She's disgusting because she takes the kind words he wrote in this letter, urinated on them (so basically urinated on her son's honour) and disregards it, all because she's a petty little woman :/

...war has to be expected on the agenda yes, but theres a very big gap between fighting a just war and a war that was wrong in the first place and only exists to prop up some backward government in Kabul who rigged the elections.

I certainly wouldn't say her sons honour is in any letter belonging to Tony Blair/Gordon Brown, especially when they are one of the principle reasons why her son is dead.

[GommeInc]

And how did I do that?

Because nothing in your original post, other than "her son went to war and died" was in Undertaker's post, the rest of your post was pure dribble which you seem to just want to ignore now (he shouldn't of written it, he should lie etc etc).

...war has to be expected on the agenda yes, but theres a very big gap between fighting a just war and a war that was wrong in the first place and only exists to prop up some backward government in Kabul who rigged the elections.

I certainly wouldn't say her sons honour is in any letter belonging to Tony Blair/Gordon Brown, especially when they are one of the principle reasons why her son is dead.

Again, this has nothing to do with war... This whole discussion is revolving around common courtesy and basic human kindness, qualities Mrs. Janes lacks. Also, honour is in the eye of the beholder, much like beauty, heroics and so forth. Gordon Brown says he is an honourable and "great" man, these are qualities which can only label a man if they come from someone else (Mr. Janes could not call himself honourable, there needs to be reasons both in action and what is perceived, his friends called him honourable, as with family and someone with a high-status). She literally just urinated on someone calling him honourable and great, not something you should do to your son :rolleyes: Basically like saying "Cheryl Cole is a very beautiful woman" and then someone else saying "this is an insult!" which in turn looks like the person who is "insulted" disagrees with the fact, as Mrs. Janes has done with her son, she took no acknowledgement in the letter other than his arguably "poor" writing. She's a vile woman.

So yeah, get off the war and government argument, it's totally irrelevant, this is about a woman who is too up her own bottom to take the kind words of an individual, simply because of a few minor issues. It's pathetic.