A Chinese translation (together with critique) is here.
Seems cnn has some blood sucking over-priced lawyer to write this. It basically dodged its previous defense and dropped the "car on fire" excuse. Now it simply said "The one image in question was used wholly appropriately in the specific editorial context and there could be no confusion regarding what it was showing"
To defend the fact that it chose some particuler side of opinions and points of views it concluded its statement with "CNN's reputation is based on reporting global news accurately and impartially, while our coverage through the use of words, images or video always reflects a wide range of opinions and points of view on every story."
:) :) :)
Here I would quote a few comments on that Chinese translated page (this site, despite its name which suggests 'patriotism and military related theme' has mainly rational and educated members)