Thats a very good question. The Establishment is I think unlikely to reverse its position which is similar to the question on Brexit, broadly, not in favour of the death penalty. Offering a referenda to the British People one suspects is not a mistake the Establishment will repeat on this question. The abolition for murder predates EU membership by some time for the Martial offenses of espionageand treason, I had not been aware that the Human Rights act also abolished those in 1998, courtesy of Wikipedia Murder (Abolition of Death Penalty) Act 1965 . The intention of the present Government to abolish the Human Rights Act or its tenets is not somethingwhich would be popular with the UK public who´s conditioning against the EU as with other EU Skeptic member states is really against Curvature of Bananas, standardised weights and measures, for some decimilisation and clearly open border immigration policies within the union for many (52%).
With the Establishments apparent taste for Islamaphobia it is not impossible that calls for the Death Penalty for Terrorist offenseswill be floated, rather than for commonalgarden Murder. Treason and Espionage could be slipped back in on this ticket too. If in fact, a referendum promise for that was made It could prove a populist vote winning strategy. The thought is gut wrenchingly appalling but seeing Boris Johnson at the UN security council yesterday it is probably a referendum he might quite relish. It was joked at the time of his appointment that it was as bizarre an appointment as we have seen since Caligula appointed his horse consul ( he actually appointed it as a Priest). We should all know of Caligula’s greek love of his Consul(Priestly horse) and similarly Secretary Kerry had clearly groomed the new Caligulan Equus ferus caballus to compliantly entertain the emperors will. Boris was clearly bent over and exposing his thinking parts.
Boris was not specific as to the outrages he was referring to in the general rhetorical flourishes of his introductory scene setting. White phosphorous lots of Slaughter , lots of ‘Únger’ , had to look that one up for those who didn’t already know UNGA , ah the United Nations General Assembly. This UNGA this , this UNGA that, and there was me thinking the great Bullingdon Club classicist was earnestly entreating with polished Latin or greek for the Present dignitaries, some we were told even with ‘University degrees’, to seize the day, Carpe Diem with unga in our souls. But no it’s a bloody acronym. Boris come on, bloody UNGA .
He was though, not out doing his Caligula, his emperor, his very stern and poetic Rider. No our Incitatus was outshone on the flowery rhetorical sophistry by Kerry and his introductory remarks.
We were told how moved he had been looking up at the screen at that young olympian (with the no doubt elysian scene captured so perfectly) ´´in a beautifully.. Bono, narrated video that er really made us think…?” yes you heard that right, verbatim ‘err’ and dramatic… pauses all. Bono, Bloody Bono! Yes that Bono, U2 Bono , Sunday bloody Sunday , Bono. Who we now Know narrated a video of the Syrian(refugee) olympic team who with the aid of a Charity, for whom Bono no doubt donated his narration fee, Were able to join the rest of the free world in RIO, newly fumigated by Regime Changes R Us, with another CIA coup de tat.
The introductory remarks of each were so appalling they were clearly designed to elevate the ‘Evidence’ to come , for which no one would be entitled to have their own facts, those stubborn things. Facts! Like all the evidence that we had supposed to swallow before as readily as Dr David Kelly swallowed the Blood from a Throat slit by his own hand under a tree somewhere on a hill in rural Oxfordshire, all those years ago. The facts which some how were in the possesion of Kerry even before the dust had settled or the bodies were cold. Known to Caligula, possesed of divine right and shared with his consul, his Horse, Incitatus.
Epictetus might shriek from his enchiridion ´´42. When any person harms you, or speaks badly of you, remember that he acts or speaks from a supposition of its being his duty. Now, it is not possible that he should follow what appears right to you, but what appears so to himself. Therefore, if he judges from a wrong appearance, he is the person hurt, since he too is the person deceived. For if anyone should suppose a true proposition to be false, the proposition is not hurt, but he who is deceived about it. Setting out, then, from these principles, you will meekly bear a person who reviles you, for you will say upon every occasion, “It seemed so to him.”
As already THE RHETORICIAN’S VADE MECUM, where are the Lucians in the fourth estate and their dead tree rags of apology, privelidge and patronage?
”if you start with the Trojan War–you may if you like go right hack to the nuptials of Deucalion and Pyrrha–and thence trace your subject down to to-day. People of sense, remember, are rare, and they will probably hold their tongues out of charity; or if they do comment, it will be put down to jealousy. The rest are awed by your costume, your voice, gait, motions, falsetto, shoes, and sundry; when they see how you perspire and pant, they cannot admit a moment’s doubt of your being a very fine rhetorical performer. With them, your mere rapidity is a miracle quite sufficient to establish your character. Never prepare notes, then, nor think out a subject beforehand; that shows one up at once.
Your friends’ feet will be loud on the floor, in payment for the dinners you give them; if they observe you in difficulties, they will come to the rescue, and give you a chance, in the relief afforded by rounds of applause, of thinking how to go on. A devoted claque of your own, by the way, is among your requirements. Its use while you are performing I have given; and as you walk home afterwards, discussing the points you made, you should be absolutely surrounded by them as a bodyguard. If you meet acquaintances on the way, talk very big about yourself, put a good value on your merits, and never mind about their feelings. Ask them, Where is Demosthenes now? Or wonder which of the ancients comes nearest you.”
Facts are the components of truth and they are evinced from evidence , I was once asked to entertian the notion of political Facts. and had this to say.
”I could follow your argument more readily were you to define such items as Political Truths. Facts are not dependent upon belief or interpretation once they have come to pass, the Truth however of an interpretation of events that results in the fact is rather different especially if you wish to argue that if action a, had been taken instead of action b, then the result, fact c, would have been less. The Isis example I can see how the motivation is political or by some other argument Religious or financial once done the killing is a fact. The motivation could be many things or a combination of many things. Its an interesting choice of words. I like my Facts to be empirical stand alone no nonsense measured certainties. If you are using the term Political Fact as a state of art or convention from some discipline or other I would very much like to study the accepted formal usage set out in its agreed form, do you have that?”
Oh, the evidence?
The Aleppo Convoy.
Its far to early to say what happened to the Aid Convoy just out side Aleppo at the centre of the current row. If it were a genuine terrible mistake a preliminary acknowledgment of mea culpa might reasonably have been expected already the present hiatus and intrigue, claim and counter claim can not rule out and indeed suggests intrigue and skullduggery quite apart from the appalling murder of innocents. We can though justify a high degree of Skepticism regarding the holier than though affirmations of the Arch imperialists rich in Rhetoric and Sophistry , Kerry and Johnson, those stubborn things facts, tend only to emerge after thorough investigation, rigorous checking and this requires a passage of time its a Stubborn and strict task master scientific rigor. So facts stubborn or not, are by definition in short supply early on, however stubborn they may or may not be and how universally owned they may be is not a question until said facts can be sensibly assembled.
Boris almost had me at the start I thought he was being sincere but fresh off the 350 million quid a week for the NHS wheeze, post Brexit &; plastered all over the side of a Bus. And given the scant acquaintance old Bozzer seems to have with telling the truth, I remained unhooked but admit almost lured. But then the tell, the give away, everything was ´´especially the blame of the Assad regime, who could possibly see them as the part of any solution? They alone responsible for the greater part of the 400,000 deaths in Syria” and on and on he went with his own curious set of facts, and awed equine mastication of the acronym UNGAR, after all Caligula had done much the same and a borrowed fact here and there who could possibly notice. So there dear reader we must depart the scene in the marbled atria of the Colonnades of the United nations and its most lauded Security Council with UNGAR foremost in our hearts and minds let us envision bent over braced and head firmly in the sand Boris again in position to Expose his thinking parts again, as Caligula Whips his Incitatus onwards. Gimp masks instead of Blinkers and much feasting on porcine fare in best Bullingdon and Skull and Bones style, perhaps they had both had a late night down the temple playing the biscuit game, beloved of posh Lads in posh schools and posher clubs they had taken the seasons biscuit for scraping the bottom of the barrel after all.
Wikipedia does facts its an encyclopedia. So far this.
Heres the Full UN securtiy Council Hearing, the Channel Four report above is seen for the biased mash up it really is if you watch the whole thing.
The great investigative journalist Seymour Hersh, in two previous articles in the London Review of Books («Whose Sarin?» and «The Red Line and the Rat Line») has reported that the Obama Administration falsely blamed the government of Syria’s Bashar al-Assad for the sarin gas attack that Obama was trying to use as an excuse to invade Syria; and Hersh pointed to a report from British intelligence saying that the sarin that was used didn’t come from Assad’s stockpiles.
Hersh was asked about the then-US-Secretary-of-State’s role in the Benghazi Libya US consulate’s operation to collect weapons from Libyan stockpiles and send them through Turkey into Syria for a set-up sarin-gas attack, to be blamed on Assad in order to ‘justify’ the US invading Syria
During the Syrian Civil War
US President Obama argued in a 2012 speech that a chemical attack in Syria would constitute crossing a “red line
” and that this would trigger a US military intervention
against the government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad
After this speech, and prior to the chemical attacks in Ghouta, chemical weapons were suspected to have been used in at least four attacks in the country.
On 23 March 2013, the Syrian government requested the UN to send inspectors in order to investigate an incident in the town of Khan al-Assal, where it said opposition forces had used chlorine-filled rockets.
However, on 25 April US Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel stated that US intelligence showed the Assad government was likely to have used chemical weapons – specifically sarin gas
On 8 December 2013, the London Review of Books
published an online article by Hersh alleging that President Obama had “omitted important intelligence, and in others he presented assumptions as facts” in his assertion during his televised speech of 10 September that Bashar Al-Assad’s regime had been responsible for the use of sarin in the Ghouta chemical attack
of 21 August 2013 against a rebel-held district of Damascus.
In particular, Hersh wrote of anonymous intelligence sources telling him that the Syrian army was not the only agency with access to sarin, referring to the Al-Nusra Front Jihadist
group, and that, during the period before the Ghouta attack, secretly implanted sensors at the country’s known bases had not detected suspicious movements suggesting a forthcoming chemical attack in the period. The New Yorker
and The Washington Post
had both decided against publishing this account.
On 22 December 2015, the London Review of Books
published Hersh’s article ″Military to Military
in which he exposed the divide between the US top brass and the politicians in the White House when it came to dealing with Islamic extremists in Syria and Iraq. Hersh reports the Joint Chiefs of Staff
(JCS) of the United States Department of Defense
has indirectly supported Syria’s PresidentBashar al-Assad
with quality intelligence in an effort to help him defeat jihadist groups and provided – via Germany
– to help Assad push back Jabhat al-Nusra
and the Islamic State
. Hersh also writes the military even undermined a US effort to arm Syrian rebels in a bid to prove it was serious about helping Assad fight their common enemies. Hersh says the Joint Chiefs’ maneuvering was rooted in several concerns, including the US arming of unvetted Syrian rebels with jihadist ties, a belief the administration was overly focused on confronting Assad’s ally Russia
, and anger the White House was unwilling to challenge Saudi Arabia
over their support of extremist groups in Syria. These countries had armed extremists with modern weapons – which gave them the upper hand in subduing the Syrian Army
– and resulted in huge territorial losses by 2013. Recep Tayyip Erdogan
and the Turkish government supported Jabhat al-Nusra. The US JCS reported the Erdogan government were “doing the same for Islamic State
” in order to disrupt the balance in the Middle East. The Turkish government refused to halt the flow of foreign militants going through Turkey.
From the Movie 1984, Eurythmics Sex Crime.
Substitute War Crime and how silent the fourth Estate has fallen on Chilcott and adventures back in yesteryear in Babylonian Lands, Iraq. On Facts on wisdom
and on knowledge Kerrys Aphorism borrowed from John Adams and Senetor Patrick Moynihan,was stated thus
Indeed stubborn things, as mule like as compliant consuls are Horse like. And as
the little boy declared in the old fairy tale, where are the emperors clothes?
He is surely not clothed in truth, woven from threads of facts and tended with
wisdom and care.
The Mad Philosopher
The flabby wine-skin of his brain
Yields to some pathologic strain,
And voids from its unstored abysm
The driblet of an aphorism.
Ambrose Bierce :
In Closing Philosophy is a love of truth, Literally! So I give you two quotes to contrast with Caligulas Aphorism.
“I constantly sought knowledge and truth, and it became my belief that for gaining access to the effulgence and closeness to God, there is no better way than that of searching for truth and knowledge.” Ibn al-Haytham
CHARLES SANDERS PEIRCE: ”In order to reason well …. it is absolutely necessary to possess … such virtues as intellectual honesty and sincerity and a real love of truth (2.82). The cause [of the success of scientific inquirers] has been that the motive which has carried them to the laboratory and the field has been a craving to know how things really were … (1-34). [Genuine inquiry consists I in diligent inquiry into truth for truth’s sake (1.44), … in actually drawing the bow upon truth with intentness in the eye, with energy in the arm (1.235). [When] it is no longer the reasoning which determines what the conclusion shall be, but … the conclusion which determines what the reasoning shall be … this is sham reasoning…. The effect of this shamming is that men come to look upon reasoning as mainly decorative…”.