< link rel="DCTERMS.isreplacedby" href="http://sirhumphreys.com" > Sir Humphrey's: Russell Brown


SITE MOVED:Sir Humphrey's has moved

Please join us at our new site: www.sirhumphreys.com.

The RSS feed for sirhumphreys.com is now here.

Monday, January 10, 2005

Russell Brown

If you're talking newspaper credibility, the Daily Mirror's reputation can best be described as "not fit to wipe your arse with". If you're talking factual accuracy, you probably won't find a lot if you ask a terrorist how the United States treated him. If you're talking exaggeration, giving somebody 65000 pounds for their story is probably a good way to get it.

So if the Daily Mirror gives a terrorist 65000 pounds for his story about how America treated him, how likely is it that what follows will be an accurate and truthful recounting of what actually took place? About as likely as spotting Elvis riding the Loch Ness Monster.

And given all this, you'd think that a self-proclaimed media critic and watchdog might express a fair amount of scepticism at the terrorist's version of events, and the same for the stories of his mates, extracted in similar circumstances. Right? Wrong. Apart from one passing reference suggesting they might have doubled the numbers in one detail of their story, Russell Brown takes their story as gospel.

Remember, we are talking about people who went to Pakistan in September 2001, and crossed the border into Afghanistan just as the war started. Sound a tad iffy? They gave hogwash excuses, saying they went into Afghanistan to give humanitarian aid, for instance. Of course, they didn't actually join any aid organisation, take any aid supplies, or even tell anyone what they were getting up to. On the off chance these little choirboys were innocent, they must have been monumentally stupid.

Innocent or guilty, Russell doesn't know, and cares less. But Rumsfeld didn't like them much, so they must be pretty good blokes, right?
ยท Linked Article

Posted by RightWingDeathBeast | 1/10/2005 01:00:00 PM