DaGaffer
Down With That Sorta Thing
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2003
- Messages
- 18,530
They reckon they've identified the actual truck in the pictures and it has never left Britain...http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3702139.stm
If the Army can actually prove the pictures are fake, and prove that the Mirror knew it (much harder I know), what would be the penalty for Piers Morgan? Is it treason?
Its interesting the language the Mirror use in their rebuttal of the Army's statement: The Mirror said it remained "absolutely confident that those pictures accurately illustrate a serious abuse of a detainee by members of the Queen's Lancashire Regiment". (my italics). Very careful choice of words there; not, you'll note, "...are pictures of a serious abuse of a detainee by members of the Queen's Lancashire Regiment".
I'm sure abuse has gone on, its sadly inevitable, every army attracts a meathead element, and the British Army is certainly no exception, but does that condone fakery to get the message across?
If the Army can actually prove the pictures are fake, and prove that the Mirror knew it (much harder I know), what would be the penalty for Piers Morgan? Is it treason?
Its interesting the language the Mirror use in their rebuttal of the Army's statement: The Mirror said it remained "absolutely confident that those pictures accurately illustrate a serious abuse of a detainee by members of the Queen's Lancashire Regiment". (my italics). Very careful choice of words there; not, you'll note, "...are pictures of a serious abuse of a detainee by members of the Queen's Lancashire Regiment".
I'm sure abuse has gone on, its sadly inevitable, every army attracts a meathead element, and the British Army is certainly no exception, but does that condone fakery to get the message across?