Daily Telegraph Assistant Editor Andrew Pierce is a waste of time
Assistant Editor Andrew Pierce brings you the latest gossip from the Westminster village.
"And someone has played a prank on former Home Secretary David Davies. What will Davis, a former SAS soldier, do when he finds the culprit?".
Perhaps, someone ought to put a ice pick in Pierce and pop the effing idiot?
Neither David Davis nor David Davies has been Home Secretary. David Davis was a shadow Home Secretary. David Davis is not a former SAS soldier. He is a former Territorial SAS which, like PCSOs, are not real police officers.
If you can't get it right, why bother at all?
A mixture of law, politics, autobiography and humour. Once described as "The Devilish Advocate" (Guardian), I do have the ability to provoke a response. Sometimes it comes from someone who uses a thought process, and sometimes from jerks usually associated with the knee.
5 comments:
"He is a former Territorial SAS which, like PCSOs, are not real police officers."
Oh brother, you think the Territorial SAS aren't REAL SAS.
You poor, poor boy...
You mean like the Birmingham 6, Guildford 4, etc, being "real IRA". As a kid, I used to pretend my toy soldiers were real soldiers. In the same way, PCSOs like to pretend they are real police officers. The Territorial SAS do receive some training, however, part-timers are not full-timers. It is not the same as reservists in Switzerland where they are real soldiers, on stand-by as it were. In my view, the TA is more like Dads Army.
No, I mean the very idea that the commitment and skills of the Terriers' SAS is somehow less - admittedly pro-rata - than their regular comrades.
No doubt their Iraqi enemies don't confuse them with bumbling plastic PCs.
And the LDV/Home Guard did masses amounts of guarding and patrolling - and anti-aircraft work; freeing up many thousands of regular forces to serve overseas and help push back the fascist forces in Africa, Middle and Far East.
I wasn't so much trying to put them down, as point out that the assistant editor of politics should not have made such obvious mistakes.
Indeed he should not: especially being from the Telegraph.
I remember when their factual stuff, especially the overseas coverage was next to being objective and balanced as any reporting in the Free World could be.
Post a Comment