Fascinating to watch Lord Goldsmith this morning. A great contrast in demeanour. Wood and Wilmshurst sounded open, painstakingly careful to be accurate, and honest. Goldsmith, by contrast sounds slick and extremely well rehearsed. The stream of verbiage never halts and he hardly seems to draw breath.
Glib.
From the Woods thread:
— I predict Goldsmith will use the “Blackadder” defence tomorrow, “Opinion on Resolution 1441 was divided. Everyone else said war would be illegal, I said it wouldn’t.”
It turned out to be even more risible than that. “Initially everybody, including me, believed that war would be illegal without a second resolution. Then after protestations by Greenstock, Straw & Rice, I had some doubts and gave a non-committal response. Blair assumed this meant that legal opinion had become divided enough for him to conclude that war would be entirely legal, and had the backing of the top legal experts.”
This kind of warped justification puts the ‘pist’ in ‘epistemology’.
Looks to me as if it’s shaping up to be All The Fault Of Those Crude Yanks.
“Government sponsored troll! I hope you meet your maker, a.s.a.p.”
Have you met his parents, are they really that dreadful ?
“This kind of warped justification puts the ‘pist’ in ‘epistemology'” – logos
*big grin* Thanks for that.