A Question of Duty, A Question Of Truth

Some while back I took a swipe at the decision made by the top brass of the army to keep Prince Harry in the safety of barracks (or wherever they keep young cannon fodder these days). I got a fair bit of flack in return; fair enough.

We now learn that the young redhead has finally seen active service in Afghanistan. I'm pleased he has been able to try and actually do the job he is paid for and has been trained for, despite the fact that the conflict in Afghanistan is a pointless and unwinnable affair started for no better reason than that the USA with British support wanted to bomb somewhere (anywhere?) in retaliation for the world trade centre attacks.

No soldier gets to choose where or who he fights: that's the job of the politicians. But we shouldn't forget that one of our senior royals has said how happy he is to have taken part in an illegal and barbarous conflict.I believe his brother is also shortly to go and help to kill a few people whose country we have invaded. Please note, this does not make me a Taliban supporter: all religious nutters and murderous bastards ought to be challenged. We really should be invading Saudi, you know.Worryingly the BBC and other UK media organisations have jeopardised their worldwide reputation for impartiality by entering into an agreement with the government for a news blackout. I'm not saying that telling the world Harry was available to be shot would have been a good idea (although, come to think of it...); I am saying that one deliberate collusion with a government can and probably will lead to another. Can we any longer believe what the Beeb is telling us as news? Might we not be listening to a government approved, edited version? Might we be listening to simple lies?