Habeas Corpus: Where is the body?


The embarrassingly obsequious manner our Prime Minister displayed in her response to the recent air strikes in Syria is perhaps a reflection of her complete ignorance when it comes to matters of foreign affairs.

It seems however that she is not alone with the leader of the opposition also chiming in with his own tacit approval of unilateral action in the Middle East.

I?m beginning to wonder whether there are any current politicians who are brave enough to speak out against the idea of continuous warfare which the world is slowly sleepwalking into.

I?m a bit old fashioned but I?m of the mind that it is best to follow basic principles of jurisprudence before deciding on who is to blame and dishing out punitive measures.

Obviously, the use of chemical weapons is guaranteed to strike a chord with anyone but we need to be very careful when it comes to countermeasures in the absence of evidence to support such actions. One could be forgiven for believing this monstrous act was perpetrated against innocent civilians in order to justify ongoing military action.

The disastrous and irresponsible foreign policy of the Obama administration has led the world closer to the brink of total war and I?m amazed that war mongering idiots such as Hillary Clinton have not been taken to task for their actions in creating such an unstable political environment in the Middle East.

At least during the invasion of Iraq, there was some attempt to use international arbitration measures to justify armed intervention and also implement standards of common law proceedings in the final outcome.

Fast forward to 2011 and what was Secretary of State Clinton?s response to the legitimate leader of another sovereign nation being hauled through the streets and then sodomised to death with a bayonet? Quote:

We came,?we saw, he died. End of quote.

This was?followed by?the customary?hideous bout of cackling laughter.

In my opinion, this woman belongs in either a mental hospital or a prison but I wouldn?t want to see that happen without a fair trial. After all, how are we supposed to know whether she is criminally insane or just another crooked politician without it being decided on?by a jury of twelve of her peers?

So back to the point at hand. The timing of this recent chemical attack is very interesting indeed. Just as the two major powers, United States and Russia, had agreed to a plan for pulling out their troops from the region and deescalating the conflict, we see a situation arise making this no longer politically possible.

Assad, who had finally managed to reach a point of strategic dominance in this long and bloody struggle, suddenly decided to do the very thing which would strip away his advantage and?reinstitute a reengagement of military force from the United States. There is absolutely no proof of this whatsoever.

And do we wait for an investigation to find out exactly what occurred? Of course not. This would be far too sane and civilised.

So while the rulebook is being done away with entirely I may as well chime in with my belief as to who was responsible for this latest barbaric murder of innocent civilians.

Who do we know that uses unarmed non-combatants as shields and cannon fodder for their own nefarious ends? Who do we know that would do anything under the sun to further their own ends even if that means sacrificing their own people? Who do we know that places absolutely no value on western standards of jurisprudence and secularism? And finally, who do we know that would have the most to gain by the re-engagement of US and NATO forces against the Assad regime? I?m guessing a bunch of fanatical religious zealots who are hell bent on pushing the entire planet into World War three.