Whatever you may think about Inayat Bunglawala, the Express have lumbered themselves with another costly fuckup in the wake of the Kate & Gerry McCann and Robert Murat apologies:
On March 1, 2008 we published a front-page article under the headline “TARGET HARRY – British fanatics threaten him” concerning Prince Harry’s active service in Afghanistan.
The article made reference to Inayat Bunglawala, who is a spokesperson at the Muslim Council of Britain. He has also advised the British government on ways of combating extremism among young Muslims.
We now accept our article may have been understood to allege that Mr Bunglawala was a fanatical extremist who was inciting or would condone a terrorist attack on Prince Harry.
There was absolutely no truth in these allegations. Mr Bunglawala did not, and would not, condone any attack on Prince Harry; on the contrary, he consistently made clear to the media that he wanted to see the Prince and his colleagues brought home, out of harm’s way.
We apologise unreservedly to Mr Bunglawala for the distress and embarrassment we have caused him.
The bit I like best is the innocence with which the Express pretends that they ever-so-accidentally might have, oops, how on earth did that happen, suggest something which may have been misinterpreted to say something else. I'd have more respect for them if they simply said they thought he was a nutter, and yes that's exactly what they wanted to imply through the article, but they couldn't prove it. But never mind. You can't have honesty as well.
And oh, how writing that apology against Bunglawala must have hurt the Express.