Do you agree?

[anotheoldgit]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1158 042/Just-loved-Ivan---Commons-didnt-stop-them. html

I tried in a previous post to explain my feelings towards our politicians attitude upon the sad death of little Ivan Cameron.

But reading Peter Hitichens column, I think he perhaps will be more successful in getting over what I was trying to convey.

Please do not try and turn the debate over to the difference between losing a small child to the death of a volunteer soldier, because we have been down this track many times.

I do not wish to try and score political points over this, let's just have a debate on the hypocritical attitude of all those who have the power to force some changes.

[rov1200]

If someone was being cynical it was certainly a day to diminish bad news. It must also have helped Cameron's proported aims to be compassionate conservatives.

I know what these children go through as I had a brother who suffered from daily fits and was paralysed down one side of his body. He went through agony as a child not only physical but mental scars where he was taunted by other yobs unable to understand. He died not being able to overcome this.

[Totterdown]

There was another post about this, started by youngmafbog on 25/2/09 at 14.48 headed Will Noo Labour..................................................

One of the replies was by rov1200 on 26/10/09 at 14.48 which was pretty disgraceful. Has he/she forgotten this? And how does he defend his remarks when talking about his own brother?

[Totterdown]

I meant to say rov1200's reply was at 9.40 on 26/2/09

[rov1200]

Even if your timing is out Totterdown I don't need to defend my remarks. Having an experience of a close relative with this handicap gives me greater insight than most. Most casual observors seeing the posed pictures are unaware of the trauma most parents go through. As they brought the child into the world they feel the guilt. To use it for political capital, for it is the parents to issue these pictures is disgusting.
Remember Cameron on his sleigh in the frozen artic? Maybe you don't!!

[rov1200]

Totterdown
Sun 22/02/09
18:59 I have every sympathy for her and would not wish her plight on anyone. Her wedding must have cost an absolute fortune. Why could not all of that money gone into her children's trust fund. Why does she continue to court publicity?

Answer:So she can put more money into her childrens trust fund! The wedding is being paid for by magazines.

[Drisgirl]

Sorry -I am being apolitical here -I dont see where the death of their son equates with what he does for a living nor anyone who doesnt as it happens have any power over any major changes in Government .He is a nobody/spre part in effect as far as the Government of this country is concerned -he is only there to bait Gordon Brown.

My heart goes out to all the family.Bless them all.

[Totterdown]

rov1200 - my remarks were to remind you and to refer anyone else to your remarks that these children should be "put down soon after birth". Are you saying your own brother should have been put down at birth. I cannot see how your subsequent post about "posing for pictures" or "Cameron on his sleigh" should excuse you from your distasteful comments. I am not a Conservative voter but this is someone who has lost a child and I have every sympathy for David Cameron, although I do not like him. Also what on earthy has Jade Goody got to do with this particular thread? Now have another go at me.

[Gromit]

For a newspaper man, Hitchens seems to have forgotten what makes a story newsworthy. The first soldier deaths in Afghanistan were extensively reported. Many news pages were devoted to their plight, there was national grief. But 8 years and 150 deaths later, deaths in Afghanistan are less newsworthy because of there unfortunate regularity. Maybe when the leader of the opposition loses his 150th child, not as much fuss will be made.

Hitchens also moans about PMQs being suspended. As this is essentially a cameron/Brown duel, it is pointless to continue without Cameron. I suspect if PMQs had gone ahead, and Brown wiped the floor with an under prepared and grieving oppostion, then he would have been accused of taking politic advantage from Cameron's personal tragedy.

I am not a Cameron fan, but I believe he has been brilliant over his son's disability. It is true he has used his family in his publicity, but rather than hide Ivan, he was always in the pictures. This was not to exploit his diability, more an attempt to show how normal it is, how anyone can be struck by it. For me, Cameron gained some respect for this stance.

As for Hitchens, he specialises in taking a different view from the rest of us, whether he is deliberately trying to be controversial, or just likes the attention his alternative view gets him, I'll let you decide.

[andy-hughes]

Speaking as one who has joined in this debate on a number of occasions -

I have to agree that Peter Hitchens presents a very powerful and reasoned argument in his column.

I do feel - as I said previously - that MP's will feel a keen sense of loss for the Cameron family for two reasons - their daily contact with Mr Cameron in the House, and the loss of his child in infancy.

That said, it should in no way detract from the loss of soliders in war zones which, with the passing of time, apear an ever more fruitless and expsneive exercise, especially when that cost is calculated in livves on both sides.

I would stop short of saying that the attitudes of MP's over Mr Cameron's child's death amount to hypocracy - however it does add to the debate that they appear able to sanction the deaths of strangers, while mourning the loss for someone with whom they interact.

We need only look at Russia's attempt to overrun the Afghans - and their failure and withdrawal.

If we are indeed condemned to repeat our mistakes, then here we are - history repeating itself.