SORRY.. WE WERE HOAXED

[dArKeR]

VOICE OF THE MIRROR: Iraqi PoW abuse pictures handed to us WERE fake

Hoaxes: Minister Adam Ingram

IT is now clear that the photographs the Mirror published of British soldiers abusing an Iraqi prisoner were fakes.

The evidence against them is not strong enough to convict in a court but that is not the burden of proof the Daily Mirror demands of itself.

Our mission is to tell the truth.

That is something this newspaper has been doing for more than 100 years and will always strive to do. If ever we fail, we are letting down the people who mean most to us. Our readers.

So to you today we apologise for publishing pictures which we now believe were not genuine.

We also say sorry to the Queen's Lancashire Regiment and our Army in Iraq for publishing those pictures.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnews/tm_objectid=14242612%26method=full%26siteid=50143%26headline=sorry%2d%2d%2dwe%2dwere%2dhoaxed-name_page.html


----------------

OTHERS MUST ADMIT TO MISTAKES TOO

THE DAILY Mirror did what it felt was right yesterday - and admitted it was hoaxed over the Iraqi abuse pictures.

That was in stark contrast to those who brought about the invasion of Iraq and deaths of thousands of innocent civilians.

On the false premise that weapons of mass destruction would be found in Iraq, the UK and the United States went to war.

Bogus dossiers were produced and lies told to the UN to convince the world it was legally right to invade a sovereign country.

Today, the Mirror's WMD-ometer still shows that after 381 days nothing has been found to have justified the war.

President Bush and Tony Blair still have their jobs. Defence Secretary Geoff Hoon clings by his fingernails to his job as does his sidekick Adam Ingram.

US Secretary of State Colin Powell, who testified before the UN to the existence of WMD, is still in power.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnews/tm_objectid=14242616%26method=full%26siteid=50143%26headline=others%2dmust%2dadmit%2dto%2dmistakes%2dtoo-name_page.html

[aquart]

1. Now THIS is making lemonade.

I applaud the Mirror.

[Devils Advocate NZ]

2. It's bollocks

The ONLY evidence against the pictures is the Army's "word" that no L85A1 rifles (assuming the rifle is indeed an L85A1 and not an L85A2) and that the type of truck is a type not used in Iraq.

If THAT is the "evidence" against these photos, then as far as I am concerned there is NO evidence against them. Remember, the UK signed the ICC treaty, and thus everyone from Blair on down to the squaddies involved are liable to war crimes charges.

OF COURSE, they would want ot cover up any torturing going on in Iraq, and they may just have made it worth the Mirror's while to go along with it.

By the way, if the Mirror was hoaxed, why did the editor need to be fired? Surely it wasn't his fault? Unless he refused to accept the new "editorial position" the Mirror is taking...

[DarkPhenyx]

3. Or the pictures could indeed be a hoax.

Unless someone comes up with better proof that they are real then I think we are going to have to live with this decision.

I too applaud the Mirror. Far too many people are not willing to publicly admit they were wrong. A certain President leaps to mind almost immediately.

[mobuto]

8. The quality of the photos

was far too good. They look staged, and were clearly taken by an experienced, if not professional, photographer. Is that alone proof that they're not real? No. But compare them to what real snapshots look like - the ones from Abu Ghraib for instance - and you'll see a world of a difference.

[DarkPhenyx]

11. I am a soldier, and also a photographer.

If I had taken the pics at AG they would have been pretty good quality as well. Particularly if I had the opportunity to stage my subject. :shrug: Taking good pics isn't hard. Most people just don't know how to is all.

[mobuto]

12. Exactly - most people don't know how

I'm a pretty serious amateur photographer myself - but most people aren't, and it was the quality of the photos that attracted my attention when I first saw the British photos. That's unusual.

There are a number of other oddities as well that point to the photos being staged in some place other than Iraq.

[DarkPhenyx]

16. Agreed.

I wouldn't say it is definitive proof though. I simply wished to raise that issue, not attack you for your position on it.

[Devils Advocate NZ]

20. Do you know that the UK DOESN'T have a free press?

Do you know that if the government declares a story to be a "national security" item, that they can FORCE the media to not report on stories, or to report FALSE stories?

The Berg video is awfully well timed isn't it?

[MGKrebs]

4. That's the only evidence I have ever heard also.

And that is pretty lame "evidence".

Is the military in control of every one of those trucks ever made? Are they all accounted for?

[tuckessee]

5. The editor was asked to apologize

to the board first thing after being called before them.

He refused and was immediately fired.

That's what I heard on BBC radio last night.

The inference from the story was that if he apologized he could've kept his job.

Makes me think the editor is still standing by the contention that the images are legit.

[librechik]

6. I sense you are right. Plus Human Right Watch (as I recall) says

the photos are real. Ingram is just exercizing his martial power on the Mirror.

[Stella_Artois]

21. Its right about the rifles

It was an extremely well publicised scandal about the original rifles not being fit to use in action. Hundreds of thousands of them were upgraded. All front line units have the new ones, only TA units have the old ones and even they are being issued with the new ones before going to Iraq AFAIK.

Anyway, even Piers Morgan days ago was not saying that the pictures were real, merely that they "illustrated" what is going on, or words to that effect. A form of words that allowed for the pictures to be faked.

[Spentastic]

22. A first time for everything

I'm going to disagree with you here (first time ever),

The photos were obviously bollocks. The rifle and truck problems are only the tip of the iceberg. The posing looked suspect and it appears the even Piers knew last week that he'd been done. The squaddies involved will be named and how much would you bet on a retraction? I'd bet they'll even wheel out the lad in the sack.

I have another theory for you. The Mirror has been stridently anti war. Anyone fancy that this kind of shenanigan isn't below MI6? Feed the mirror shite intelligence and let Piers hang himself. All they would have had to rely on is Piers' own ego and love of self publicity. Like shooting fish in a barrell.

Remember too that on the back of these photos a third squaddie has come forward and made unrefuted claims of abuse. Far from exonerated the Queen Lancs regiment have just dipped their toes in murky water.

I have no sympathy for Piers Morgan. If his editorial control is so lacking that obviously suspect photos get printed then he had to go.

[Robbien]

7. Is there any word on who hoaxed them? eom

[dArKeR]

10. MoD: Four arrested over hoax photos

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=556980

[Devils Advocate NZ]

19. Arrested, quized and released...

Just the way to ensure that the story that these photos was hoaxed sticks - after all the Army surely wouldn't arrest someone unless they had done it right?

If so, why did they let them go?

[Demonaut]

9. I'm in London now, the news was this morning the editor refused

to entertain the notion that the pictures were fake and was immediatly escorted off premisis's. Most of the news outlets support his removal.

[struggle4progress]

13. I bet the "hoax" story is keeping some others off the front page

These, for example:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=557254

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=553624

[Lori Price CLG]

14. Ok, now the CIA can admit the Berg video was a hoax

...as the execution/videotape production was a botched PSY-OPS job by al CIAduh.
-Lori Price

[DarkPhenyx]

17. Unless it isn't.

That's the trick here. It has become nigh unto impossible to tell waht is real and what isn't anymore. even when you have pistures and video as proof.

[0007]

15. Thank you for the first class ARTICLE - This is a must read

"President Bush and Tony Blair still have their jobs. Defense Secretary Geoff Hoon clings by his fingernails to his job as does his sidekick Adam Ingram.

US Secretary of State Colin Powell, who testified before the UN to the existence of WMD, is still in power.

And who can forget this ass wipe???....... And Wolfowitz asking for 50B yesterday to keep this fucking war going!!

"And arch warmonger US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, who despite shocking images of torture and atrocities committed in his name by his troops, refuses to stand down."

....and yet Tony Blair want to crucify this News outlet. Well fuck you Tony, and fuck you junior and fuck the whole fucking lot of you dirty bastards that lead the good folks to your death house for your fucking gain.

[dArKeR]

18. What do you expect from Bush who used his baby daughters

as a political shield for his DUIs and alcoholic behavior. What kind of Christian man would use his own children to hide behind?

[daleo]

23. This has a bit of bearing on the Berg video

It seems to me that the main difference between the U.S. prisoner torture photos and the British ones, was that the U.S. photos showed the faces of the guards, while the British ones did not show faces of soldiers (at least as far as I can recall). The Berg video also had all of the faces of the perpetrators covered. This doesn't mean it was a fake or a black op, of course, but it is consistent with those theories.

Of course, even if it was Al-Queda, they might have wanted to cover up their identities, too. The odd thing, as many have pointed out, was that the translators have said that one of the perpetrators gave his name, yet covered his face.

Far from conclusive either way, but worth a mention.