After publishing fake photographs of tortured and sexually-abused Iraqi prisoners the editor of Britain's The Daily Mirror got the sack, reports Alistair Alexander from London It looked like the British newspaper scoop of the year. The Daily Mirror 's exclusive photographs of British soldiers abusing Iraqi prisoners had much the same effect in Britain as the Abu Ghraib photos -- published only the day before -- had in the United States. One picture showed a British soldier urinating on an Iraqi prisoner while another showed a soldier ramming a rifle butt between a prisoner's legs. But the shock the pictures caused was quickly replaced by scepticism as doubts about the pictures' authenticity gained ground, despite horrific -- and far better founded -- allegations emerging of prisoner abuse by British soldiers. The British army's Queen's Lancashire Regiment at the centre of the allegations was quick to pour scorn on the Daily Mirror 's story. They claimed the military truck in the photos was a type that was apparently never taken to Iraq, while the rifle was also an earlier model to the one they used. Also, the soldiers' uniforms were incorrect. And, unlike the US pictures, these ones were in newspaper-friendly black and white -- hardly the format of choice for ordinary squaddies taking so-called "trophy photos". Piers Morgan, editor of the Mirror, was insistent the photos were genuine, printing more allegations on a daily basis from soldiers in the regiment. But as the controversy continued, further evidence that the pictures were genuine was not forthcoming. Finally the Queen's Lancashire Regiment -- with conspicuous assistance from the government's press machine -- proudly announced that they had found the exact truck in the photographs, which had never left its barracks in England. When Morgan responded that, regardless of their authenticity, the photos still illustrated events that took place, it was clear that he had to go. Within hours he was escorted from his office by security guards and his paper printed a fulsome apology the following day. Comparisons have been drawn between Piers Morgan's abrupt departure and that of the BBC's chairman and director-general following the publication of the Hutton report. Here, after all, was another senior journalist making serious allegations about the war in Iraq being sacked after pressure from the government. But there really is no comparison. Tabloid editors lead a perilous existence and are keenly aware that they are only one bad story away from the sack. In fact publishing the pictures probably wasn't in itself a hanging offence. If Morgan had let the story die down and wait for more evidence to emerge, he would have probably hung on to his job, albeit with his reputation in tatters. But instead, he became increasingly defiant as the doubts mounted, making a retraction all but impossible. Since 11 September, Morgan has broken away from his paper's traditional support for the Labour Party to pursue the most overtly anti-war agenda of any national British newspaper. But the unfortunate irony for Morgan is that, far from damaging the government, his pictures became the focus of attention instead of the genuine evidence of prisoner abuse that is emerging from British-controlled Iraq. The Red Cross has reported on a number of incidents where Iraqi prisoners have been abused, seemingly in similar circumstances to the photos. In addition at least 10 deaths of Iraqi prisoners in British custody are being investigated. A further 20 families of Iraqi civilians killed by British soldiers are pursuing their cases in the British courts. Needless to say, the devastating effect in Britain of the abuse allegations cannot be overstated. Most Britons are aghast to find that they can barely distinguish between coalition rule in Iraq and the brutality of the regime that it replaced. However unpopular the war might have been, the British public have at least consoled themselves that the British army was doing a far better job of winning Iraqi hearts and minds than their American partners. But with even that scant consolation now gone -- not to mention any pretence of liberation -- all but the most hard-line hawks now acknowledge that Iraq is an unmitigated political disaster that can only get worse. So while government ministers tried to make the most of the Mirror 's fake photos, few were listening. Just as in the scandal engulfing America, British ministers fell over each others' stories as they scrambled to deny any knowledge of the Red Cross report. Astonishingly, ministers claimed they hadn't seen the report because it was classified. The outrage over the pictures has unleashed yet more fevered speculation over Tony Blair's future -- or lack of it. Labour MPs have long pleaded with the prime minister to distance himself from the US. Only now they are beginning to realise he is surgically attached; Blair knows that any attempt to realign himself would be a tacit admission of his colossal failure and make his exit all the more swift. So instead of planning an exit strategy, ministers are instead bracing themselves for announcing plans to send more troops to Iraq to bolster the beleaguered coalition forces. The timing could hardly be worse. Even more seriously for Blair, the doubts over his leadership appear to be reaching his cabinet. Rumours are rife that Blair's long-standing rival Chancellor Gordon Brown has been naming his cabinet in anticipation of Tony Blair's departure. Even the fiercely loyal Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott revealed that the "tectonic plates" in the government could be shifting. It will certainly take a lot more than rumours to persuade Blair to leave office before winning a historic third election, which he apparently still believes is his destiny. But with morale in the Labour Party at rock bottom over Iraq, many are looking to the local and European election held in mid-June rather than the national election pencilled in for 2005. If the results are anything like as bad as most predict, Blair might find his destiny being re-evaluated by the ministers around him.
