Wednesday, April 27, 2005
Somebody described Goldsmith on C4 tonight as "pliable" for later changing his advice - I would not be so euphamistic - what is the law worth when the country's chief law officer is so corrupt that he will reverse himself at a word from his master.
If you don't want to go through the full thing here, from clause 29, is the essence of his original legal opinion:
the argument that resolution 1441 alone has revived the authorisation to use force in resolution 678 will only be sustainable if there are strong factual grounds for concluding that Iraq has failed to take the final opportunity. In other words, we would need to be able to demonstrate hard evidence of non-compliance and non-cooperationTHESE PEOPLE ARE SCUM
PS From Section here is a titbit which is rather relevant to the AG's opinion on the illegality of the previous War To Commit Genocide With the KLA:
However, it must be recognised that on previous occasions when military action was taken on the basis of a reasonably arguable case, the degree of public and Parliamentary scrutiny of the legal issue was nothing as great as it is today.