Flashback: When Piers Morgan was Fired from the Daily Mirror
December 19, 2012 - 3:37 pm
CNN’s main man in prime time, Piers Morgan, has responded to the massacre in Newtown, CT with his usual restraint: He called a guest “dangerous” and “incredibly stupid” during Tuesday’s night’s show, because the man defended the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding Americans.
The term “incredibly stupid” might be an appropriate label for Mr. Morgan to wear around his neck. As editor if the Daily Mirror in 2004, he was fired when his newspaper published photos that purported to show British troops abusing al Qaeda terrorists.
The photos turned out to be obvious fakes. Once published, those faked photos put the lives of British troops in real danger as they became a recruiting tool for al Qaeda. Obviously, that’s dangerous.
At a news conference in Preston on Friday afternoon, the regiment demonstrated to reporters aspects of uniform and equipment which it said proved the photographs were fake.
The regiment’s Brigadier Geoff Sheldon said the vehicle featured in the photographs had been located in a Territorial Army base in Lancashire and had never been in Iraq.
He said the QLR’s reputation had been damaged by the Mirror and asked the newspaper to apologise because the evidence they were staged was “overwhelming”.
What does this say about Mr. Morgan’s skill in discerning the validity of information presented to him? What does it say about his adherence to truth? Whatever it says in answer to those questions, what happened after the photos were revealed to be fakes says quite a bit about Morgan’s ego and character.
The BBC’s Nicholas Witchell said it appeared Piers Morgan remained unrepentant right to the end
“According to one report Mr Morgan refused the demand to apologise, was sacked and immediately escorted from the building,” he said.
After that, eventually, Morgan failed up to land a position on struggling CNN where he replaced Larry King. Somewhere in there he also became a sanctimonious judge on a variety show.
This qualifies the man to assail our Second Amendment, which is part of a document he probably barely comprehends?
I wonder, how did he explain this episode during his job interviews at CNN? Did they even bother to ask him about all this?