I started this particular hare running on the Charon QC blog (link to left) with a quote from Sir Jeremy Greenstock, British ambassador to the United Nations 1998-2003 to the Chilcot inquiry:'I regarded our participation in the military action against Iraq in March 2003 as legal, but of questionable legitimacy'.
Can anyone explain what this means?
9 comments:
If you listen closely, you can hear the sound of tap shoes in the background...
It's what one says when one is trying to cover one's own ass.
Extracts from civil-servantese/English Disctionary:
of questionable = wholly lacking in
economical with = wholly lacking in
inflation-proof pension = reward for lying for one's lying masters
Hey WR, you need to check out my blog and go to the link at the bottom of the post. It's your one rare opportunity to read the court files for our cop killer and 2 of his accomplices. Pierce County has made them available to the public and media w/ a throw away PIN number.
More gobbledygook!
Word verification: gingins. My sentiments exactly.
What is the difference between legitimate and legal?
As far as I am concerned, if something is of questionable legitimacy it lacks being legal. However, I have never been accused of being diplomatic.
(word verification - curable)
He Loves The Sound Of Breaking Glass.......
I have not got a witty or sarcastic explanation.
IMO it is like smoking ciggies
legal but questionable
although in that case i only harm myself not a whole country's population, not even mentioning the British and US soldiers who were killed or maimed.
*goes outside to light up my own weapon of self destruction*
what i really want to know is why when we were marching and shouting against the war as it was beginning, we were alone. now it seems everyone in parliament and elsewhere was on our side all along. shame they were so fucking quiet about it; i mean someone might have noticed, ya know?
Post a Comment