Tuesday, 26 January 2010

The wisdom of "experts"

The consistently infuriating Eventard has a good one here:

It is not a court of law, none of the committee members are lawyers (two are out of their depth) and so the question that needs asking is:

Why are they considering the legal basis of going to war?

The Iraq Inquiry is no better qualified to do so than George Monbiot, a zoologist, or the many others that would like to believe they are legal experts but aren't.



Why indeed? How come the Chilcot enquiry is asking questions that it wouldn't if know the answers were true or even feasible? Is this a meta-whitewash?

10 comments:

John R said...

Because Chilcott and his buddies are all "the right sort of chaps" and know what's expected of them. The final report's probably already written. So unless some fluffs their lines this will takes its predictable path to a conclusion that harms no-one.

You must be slipping if you thought this pantomime was ever going to produce anything meaningful!!

Oldrightie said...

Though fully supportive of these arguments it is still possible some truths might surface. Not least the very nature of Blair's flawed character. Heard the one about his daughter?

Uncle Marvo said...

You could use this conundrum ( http://www.cut-the-knot.org/impossible/brothers.shtml ) to find out whether truth or lies were being told.

Only problem is, you have to find someone who always tells the truth. Perhaps George Washington?

Finding some being questioned at Chilcot who wouldn't know the truth if it came dressed in a truth suit, waving a truth flag and having a degree in Truth from the University of Truth, Truthsville, wouldn't be a problem.

Anonymous said...

There can be only one saviour: http://en.tackfilm.se/?id=1264510730083RA60

He's Spartacus said...

As I said in the comments below Monbiot's screed....

Bloody French. A day late and a dollar short, as usual.

One more aristocrat to the guillotine. Was that really too much to ask?

bayard said...

It's just another show at the circus (panem et circenses (Juvenal)).

Anonymous said...

like george davis and liddl towers done and dusted

Mitch said...

I wonder how many possible law suits this inquiry might prejudice ??.
Might this be the reason??

powerman said...

I'm not a lawyer either, but by asking these questions out of court and saturating media coverage of it aren't they effectively making it impossible to conduct a real trial at a later date ?

bayard said...

Ah, so that's what it's all about!