Piers Morgan sacked from Good Morning Britain.

An out of context quote. If you read on you will understand the point. To imply Jeremy has had a typical career and is “just doing his job” is incorrect. His ability and talent has led to many senior command appointments. His career is not typical of every officer and he didn’t just stumble upon these appointments.

He's a late-50s Lt Col - not exactly a stellar career.
 
Many of us have family we want nothing to do with and whilst we choose friends we cannot choose family
1 - Jeremy Morgan appears to be capable, honourable and leading a life like most of us, doing what he can to get by.
2 - Piers Morgan is a hypocritical c^nt of the highest order and not to be trusted to water your plants.

So let us move on from including the siblings and family of Piers Morgan and concentrate on the subject matter.
 

Rooper

War Hero
They were sophisticated fakes and the publication published them in good faith.
Total rubbish; they were not sophisticated fakes at all, they were actually pretty basic and to anyone with a modicum of military knowledge they were clearly a fake.

A blatant clue to them being fake was that they were taken in the back of a type of vehicle which was not in theatre with British forces.

He should have asked his amazingly wonderful sibling to run some verification on them prior to publication obviously!
 

Slime

LE
Let’s all rejoice, we have seen salvation. :)

The Morgan supporting poster has graced us with his wisdom, and pointed out the role of a ‘commissioned’ officer............

How could any of us ever have known without that explanation?

I suspect that the serving or ex serving officers on this ARMY based website can now all breath a sigh of relief.
 
Hi, believe it or not I’ve been really quite busy recently. I will continue the discussion when I can.
Please don't.
The job of an Officer is to take on the responsibility of leading their fellow Soldiers. What you will find is Jeremy has held many senior command positions throughout defence including a secondment with NATO HQ. This is not typical of every officer and he didn’t just stumble upon these appointments. He is known as a proactive commander who isn’t afraid to challenge the status quo. He has over 30 years experience as an Infantry Officer. Believe it or not this is respected in military circles.
Thanks for clarifying that. Is there a journalism forum I can go on and point out what the job of a journo is, because obviously they wouldn't know without a rank Asperger's pointing it out to them.
You keep going round in circles. Allow me to iron out some kinks in your argument. Piers to this day has not accepted the Photographs are fake. He had an honest held belief they were genuine.
Fukc knows how. Wrong uniform as not the one issued to soldiers in theatre, wrong webbing, SA80 in the wrong configuration (iron sights not SUSAT), and taken in the back of a vehicle not in theatre.

Of course he hasn't accepted they are fake, Piers is a gobshit3 and the vociferous bore of a type that believes only in his own self-importance, ocean going sense of entitlement, and that the only opinion society is entitled to is his own. The fact people may occasionally agree with him is only evidence that even a bust clock is right twice in one day.

If Piers was so hated please explain why he has attended RMAS functions, been invited into a number of mess‘ and attended a number of parades since? Any proof he was hounded out the gate. No, he was welcomed.

Probably because he was the guest of his brother and most messes are too polite to call him a cnut to his face, no matter how much they may think it.
 

arfah

LE
A blatant clue to them being fake was that they were taken in the back of a type of vehicle which was not in theatre with British forces.

There were MJ’s in my unit at the time.

The biggest giveaway to the article being fake was the Iraqi football shirt being worn.
Not many locals around Basra would’ve worn it as it was a bit Pro Saddam.
Additionally, the shirt was worth a couple of dollars and more likely to be flogged to any passing squaddie during a time when the new local currency had not been fully distributed.
 
Last edited:
I know it is not the most popular paper to read here on Arrse, but if today's Daily Mail had not printed the proclamations of that Uber C*nt Piers Morgan today they would have nothing to put in between the front page and the back page of the sports section. No fewer than 5 articles by this over-entitled tw@t.
 
Let’s all rejoice, we have seen salvation. :)

The Morgan supporting poster has graced us with his wisdom, and pointed out the role of a ‘commissioned’ officer............

How could any of us ever have known without that explanation?

I suspect that the serving or ex serving officers on this ARMY based website can now all breath a sigh of relief.
To be fair, I always wondered about some officers.
 
The job of an Officer is to take on the responsibility of leading their fellow Soldiers. What you will find is Jeremy has held many senior command positions throughout defence including a secondment with NATO HQ. This is not typical of every officer and he didn’t just stumble upon these appointments. He is known as a proactive commander who isn’t afraid to challenge the status quo. He has over 30 years experience as an Infantry Officer. Believe it or not this is respected in military circles.

Who are you trying to tell fella? Do you have any military experience? It sounds like you’ve quoted from his CV.

All you’ve posted about him is various staff appointments.

Where has he distinguished himself in battle?

Where has he distinguished himself in making major change and be anything but self serving?

I’ve seen plenty of officers like your beloved Jeremy. Grey men who take no risks, question no decisions, if they do nothing they can do nothing wrong. They accept promotion as if it’s any given birthday and treat it likewise.

If Jeremy Morgan was as great as you say then some on this site will have come across him. As it stands he’s anonymous with the sole exception of having an utter prick as a brother.

Validation of his military career from you, a never served, no mark, stinking civvy, doesn’t quite cut it.
 

JWinner

Swinger
Who are you trying to tell fella? Do you have any military experience? It sounds like you’ve quoted from his CV.

All you’ve posted about him is various staff appointments.

Where has he distinguished himself in battle?

Where has he distinguished himself in making major change and be anything but self serving?

I’ve seen plenty of officers like your beloved Jeremy. Grey men who take no risks, question no decisions, if they do nothing they can do nothing wrong. They accept promotion as if it’s any given birthday and treat it likewise.

If Jeremy Morgan was as great as you say then some on this site will have come across him. As it stands he’s anonymous with the sole exception of having an utter prick as a brother.

Validation of his military career from you, a never served, no mark, stinking civvy, doesn’t quite cut it.

The point is, people keep using the newspaper story regarding abuse of Iraqi civilians (even though it is a proven fact that abuse was occurring at the same time) is evidence that Piers is not a supporter of the Armed Forces. This is not true as not only has Piers supported the Armed Forces for decades he also enjoys the support of his brother, a well respected Lt Col.

You seem to side step the fact the photographs were published against the historical context of the time. At that time a number of QLR soldiers where convicted of committing crimes against detained Iraqis. Why do you keep side stepping this? Piers authorised the publication in good faith as it was in the public interest. There wasn’t smoke without fire though as thankfully a number of soldiers were convicted.
 
You seem to side step the fact the made up and doctored photographs were published against the historical context of the time. At that time a number of QLR soldiers where convicted of committing crimes against detained Iraqis. Why do you keep side stepping this? Piers authorised the publication in good faith as it was in the public interest. There wasn’t smoke without fire though as thankfully a number of soldiers were convicted.
Just to clarify. Still, the vitriol being shown here against a serving officer is a bit OTT just because he has a ******** as a brother. You can choose your friends but you can't choose your relatives.
 

rifleair

War Hero
The point is, people keep using the newspaper story regarding abuse of Iraqi civilians (even though it is a proven fact that abuse was occurring at the same time) is evidence that Piers is not a supporter of the Armed Forces. This is not true as not only has Piers supported the Armed Forces for decades he also enjoys the support of his brother, a well respected Lt Col.

You seem to side step the fact the photographs were published against the historical context of the time. At that time a number of QLR soldiers where convicted of committing crimes against detained Iraqis. Why do you keep side stepping this? Piers authorised the publication in good faith as it was in the public interest. There wasn’t smoke without fire though as thankfully a number of soldiers were convicted.
You seem to sidestep the fact that those pictures were fake.
Nobody here is saying that crimes were not committed and the perpetrators were justly sentenced, however if you are a responsible journalist tell the facts.
If you are not able to do so without making crap up then you are no longer a journalist, just a look at me dick, which is the level that Morgan is at.
So, no, I would not accept that he is a supporter of the military, just a hack that jumps on bandwagon if he thinks it will make him look good.
 

Helm

MIA
Moderator
Book Reviewer
Just to clarify. Still, the vitriol being shown here against a serving officer is a bit OTT just because he has a ******** as a brother. You can choose your friends but you can't choose your relatives.
This vitriol, where? All I see is people pointing out that he is not Montgomery reincarnated , which our little Piers cheer leader is claiming
 

Slime

LE
The point is, people keep using the newspaper story regarding abuse of Iraqi civilians (even though it is a proven fact that abuse was occurring at the same time) is evidence that Piers is not a supporter of the Armed Forces. This is not true as not only has Piers supported the Armed Forces for decades he also enjoys the support of his brother, a well respected Lt Col.

You seem to side step the fact the photographs were published against the historical context of the time. At that time a number of QLR soldiers where convicted of committing crimes against detained Iraqis. Why do you keep side stepping this? Piers authorised the publication in good faith as it was in the public interest. There wasn’t smoke without fire though as thankfully a number of soldiers were convicted.

Tell you what, why not post EXACTLY how you KNOW Piers posted the pics in good faith? What has he said directly to YOU about the subject?

You see, here’s the thing. Pics like those he published can lead to things like the murder of someone like Lee Rigby as an act or retribution.

IF Piers had evidence of wrong doing (we know he didnt in this case) and wanted proper justice he would have known what the proper channels to get justice were...........and if not, he could have asked his brother what the channels were.

For clarity, how much did Pier’s brother support the release of the very obviously faked pics?
 
The point is, people keep using the newspaper story regarding abuse of Iraqi civilians (even though it is a proven fact that abuse was occurring at the same time) is evidence that Piers is not a supporter of the Armed Forces.
I think you are missing the point: soldiers being abusive to POWs (and latterly being convicted of it) is not a justification for either publishing knowingly fake pictures, or at the very least not checking their authenticity with the plenty of people who could have easily spotted and pointed out that "they're fake Piers, you'd be a cnut if you knew that and published them mate".

The fact is, the soldiers neither began their abuse, nor ended it, nor were investigated, prosecuted and convicted because of what Morgan published. The two events are entirely without cause or effect and one does not excuse the other. In simple terms, two wrongs don't make a right.

So let's examine the other claim. If publishing the pictures was neither a cause of the abuse, or of stopping the abuse, or of convicting the abusers (because they were faked by a bunch of walts) there was no other agenda than whipping up hysteria on the front page to sell newspapers. Let's even give him the benefit of the doubt, if they were real (or he believed them to be such) he could have handed them over to the Chain of Command, waited a bit an had a front page exclusive of how the Mirror had actually used them to serve a purpose other than flogging papers. So any supposed defence fails on that point.

Further, he could have reasonably anticipated that there would be cause and effect- namely causing the pictures to be published without verification of authenticity would have the effect of putting servicemen's lives in danger either at home at the hands of swivel headed Islamists, or in Iraq by any number of swivel headed loons hell bent on killing the infidel-pig-dog. His measured view was "**** it, publish anyway, flog some papers".

So I put it to the venerable jury of the ARRSE Kangaroo Court that the evidence proves beyond reasonable doubt that Morgan had no motivation beyond flogging papers off the back of dodgy pics which not only makes him a cnut, but no friend of the forces, and arguably a cnut of a brother.

The Prosecution rests M'Lud.

This is not true as not only has Piers supported the Armed Forces for decades he also enjoys the support of his brother, a well respected Lt Col.
Proof? Are you his brother?

You seem to side step the fact the photographs were published against the historical context of the time. At that time a number of QLR soldiers where convicted of committing crimes against detained Iraqis. Why do you keep side stepping this? Piers authorised the publication in good faith as it was in the public interest. There wasn’t smoke without fire though as thankfully a number of soldiers were convicted.
The art of "contextualising" is the same sophistry that most bang-to-rights use when trying to make their guilty acts look decidedly less guilty. Let the facts speak for themselves and ignore the smoke and mirrors argument that people in no way connected with Mogan's decision doing things he had no part in stopping or reporting on at the time once did something indefensible somehow makes what he did "ok".

Or are you going to suggest that the contextualising of the Nazi's doing something wrong a few years ago justifies his actions too?
 

Latest Threads

Top