The people in the sand-coloured berets have an almost opposite culture to the mob who wear maroon. There's a certain truth to "How do you know you're in a room with a Para? He tells you."...
...a friend of mine went from our infantry unit to 23 SAS, then to the Metropolitan Police; a couple of his mates ended up on our table at his wedding. Listening to them, as they studiously avoided the whole subject of "how they knew the groom", was quite fun.
All are fit, and supremely determined individuals (oversimplified TL;DR - Hereford uses fitness to select for determination, while the Paras use fitness to select for aggression).
]]>How many times do you do that before the two collide? Even the first time you're telling him that his shouldn't let his house be on fire. But after the tenth time you really are nagging him to change the way he runs his house.
]]>Oh, yes; his fellow New Yorkers know him very well and would be particularly satisfied to nail him to a wall and throw tomatoes.
And as of this week that's one of his better options; British media may not have covered it but Iran has issued an arrest warrant for his involvement in the killing of General Qassem Soleimani. (Interpol has politely and wisely declined to get involved.) He has effectively no chance of ever facing murder and terrorism charges but he will have to choose the nations he visits very carefully. Coverage by Time magazine, Al Jazeera (in English), or NPR, or The Guardian as you prefer.
]]>It's not my place to tell Charlie how to run his blog and I won't do it. But if I saw that his house was on fire
How many times do you do that before the two collide? Even the first time you're telling him that his shouldn't let his house be on fire. But after the tenth time you really are nagging him to change the way he runs his house.
I'll have to get back to you on that after the tenth time I see his house on fire ... 8^)
]]>Just a SWAG, but I think the U.S. recognizes "Interpol", but not the "ICJ". If Interpol presents the warrant to the FBI, the U.S. government has to respond, even if that response is only a diplomatically worded "Tell them to go fuck themselves."
The U.S. would just ignore the "ICJ" like it wasn't even there, so they went with the organization the U.S. would have to respond to.
]]>If there exists a witty aphorism equating to no-commenting/pleading-the-Fifth being equivalent to an affirmative answer then I would have commented with that instead of rambling.
]]>JBS has a good point; the ICJ is a part of the UN and the United Nations is not trusted by the Reich wing of American politics.
On the nitpicking hand, the ICJ addresses disputes between nations [wiki]. Murder is a criminal charge so Iran is reporting it to the International Police organization.
Given that the accused is currently holding political office, Interpol has declined to take any actions. Article 3 of their charter says "It is strictly forbidden for the Organization to undertake any intervention or activities of a political, military, religious or racial character."
I think both Iran and Interpol have acted correctly. Iran is carrying through the proper formalities of a murder investigation; Interpol has recognized that this is not their problem.
]]>That's disturbingly plausible!
]]>