i do like the idea of these intelligence agencies trying to undermine the reputation of one oomph cavilrest, mostly unread antisocial quietly grumbling dissident poet ranter gadfly and wordplayer, by making subtle alterations to some of his destructive writing exercises; i suspect that sort of involvement might be exactly in accord with the ethos of (some) destructive writing.
anyway, i'm still reading everything and trying to be sure it's what i wrote. talk about rectal introspection.
but i did catch this chilling item:
the claim of Mr. Khan that united kingdom participation in drone strike programs in waziristan was unlawful for likely encouraging or assisting murder was declared not justiciable: despite persuasive assertions concerning the relevant law
"a finding by our court that the notional UK operator of a drone bomb which caused a death was guilty of murder would inevitably be understood (and rightly understood) by the US as a condemnation of the US."
"What matters," Lord Dyson concluded, "is that the findings would be understood by the US authorities as critical of them."[redirected "Mr. Khan" link to profile of claimant Noor Khan on Reprieve's website, from link to passing reference to that case in Intercept story on the abduction of Kareem Khan. - ed.]