Chris Bryant is not letting up on his crusade against Rupert Murdoch, but perhaps the real reason why he is so angry is beginning to come to light.

A few years ago the Sun put this picture and headline on its front page:


Apparently they were expected to put this picture on the front page under the headline, "BRYANT'S IN HIS PANTS."


Chris was appalled that they not only managed to spell his name incorrectly, but that they allegedly spent a large amount of money on an unflattering photograph rather than use the one he had put on the web.

I'm not sure I share his judgement about it being unflattering, though. It looks unposed and natural, whereas the one he sent out looks flashy and exhibitionist.

Bookmark and Share


Jac o' the North, said...

Exactly, "flashy and exhibitionist" about sums up Bryant. Some might add, egotistical, insincere, self-promoting, hypocritical, carpet-bagging . . .

Whereas there's something almost natural and unaffected about a middle-aged man struggling with his trousers. You almost feel like offering your shoulder while he puts them on.

Remind me, now; which one's the mass-murderer?

MH said...

Interesting question. There's no doubt that Saddam Hussein was a mass murderer, of course. But many civilians were also killed as a result of the UK and USA invading and occupying Iraq. There are various estimates of how many here, ranging from 66,000 to more than a million.

Chris Bryant voted for that invasion and must bear his share of responsibility for those deaths; but he isn't alone in having to do so.

Anonymous said...

There's many things i'd criticise Bryant for. Many. But not posing in his underpants. It's stupid and unprofessional but the guy had a right to do that.

His support for the Iraq war however is fair game. It's simply illegal to attack other countries without UN mandate, when they have not attacked you. It is in fact classed as the greatest war crime of all by the Geneva Convention.

Let's also not forget the war was nothing to do with Saddam being a mass murderer, it was aimed at preventing a chemical weapons threat that had been invented.

Quite a few Labour MPs voted against it and Bryant, Alun Michael, Hain etc could easily have chosen to join those ranks. They didn't.

Anonymous said...

For goodness' sake, take that camera from that Saddam chap and give him a dressing gown. He's putting me off my tea.

Unknown said...

The reason Bryant's picture looks flashy and exhibitionist - not to mention posed - is that he took it with the purpose of posting on a gay sex-site.

Anonymous said...

Which is fine though! There's nothing wrong with someone doing that. But voting for the Iraq war, privatisation etc is the crime.

Post a Comment