by John Bean
Baby Charlie Gard and parents
Few cannot feel extremely sorry for the anguish of parents who know that their young child is faced with an early death. The socio-political beliefs of such people have no bearing on such feelings – or certainly should not. As I write this another month has gone by where obsessive emotion is now the main factor in deciding what the fate shall be for the 11-month life of Charlie Gard.
At this point I can imagine that there will be some who object to what I have written and no doubt think it typical of an elderly male who has not quite yet got one foot in the grave. I have two one-year old great-granddaughters and three great-grandsons. The youngest of these, also called Charlie, was born with a cancer in one eye. As it was not noticed until he was nearly two, doctors thought it possible that he would not live for much longer. With support from the family, plus the NHS at Newcastle and Birmingham, he did and now five he looks forward to wrecking great-granddad’s garden on future occasions.
Whatever the opinion of the media, Donald Trump, the Pope, and thousands of people weighing in with their emotive views may be, the opinion of the doctors at Great Ormond Street, London, is the one that should be listened to. The life support should be turned off so that he can die with dignity.
As Zoe Strimpel says, writing in the Sunday Telegraph, it has become “a troubling example of the sentimental extremity that beams down on an ever-rotating cast of individuals taken up and trended by global social media.”
Sir Martin Moore-Bick is in charge of the investigation, but has been challenged by some Grenfell residents
Leaving aside poor young Charlie Grade (who almost became the hub of an experiment by an American specialist) this is now the world where experts in many fields are shouted down and knee – jerk opinions offered by many who are without knowledge of the issue “under discussion”. We can see this in action in attitudes to Brexit or (and particularly so) in what must follow the Grenfell Tower disaster. Backed by the far-left Corbett and his multiracial followers, many of whom live illegally in the remaining Towers of Kensington, are trying to cash in with a subtle anti-white campaign.
This has led to a bizarre campaign to oust the well-respected judge in the public inquiry because, they say, he could not understand their ways of life and had a typical ‘white’ double-barrelled surname – Sir Martin Moor-Bick.
3
In the case of Grenfell tower, in order to placate people upset by the coverage of the recent Islamic extremist attacks and the way it has reflected negatively on multiculturalism, we have seen a collective media effort to equate the horrendous fire with the recent terrorist attacks in the UK. One example of this is the ES magazine which is free with the Evening Standard. The editor Laura Weir referred to the terrorist attacks as tragedies and the Grenfell tower fire as an atrocity. This was mentioned in a particular issue celebrating Londons ”unity” with various magazine covers, two of which struck me as ”Far Left” in style and imagery. Now correct me if I am wrong, but while any loss of life under these circumstances should rightly be described as a tragedy, to label something which occured because of a faulty refrigerator catching fire as an atrocity and another where there was planned and murderous intent as a tragedy, clearly shows how the media is presenting the facts with their own usual agenda.
Spot on analysis, on both issues.