It can be implied from this that Wolsey had the ability to obtain Henry’s annulment, but failed due to his lack of effort and his half-hearted approach. Furthermore, source 1 supports this view, first implying once again that Wolsey had good contacts and that he had the ability to influence them, “Stafileo has changed his opinion”. However, a lack of effort can still be seen here as he only instructed Stafileo of the facts. It is likely that source 2 is more reliable than source 1 as it was a letter written by the Duke of Suffolk who was not directly involved in the ‘Great Matter’. As the source is also from a letter, it is unlikely the Duke of Suffolk would not have feared angering Wolsey as otherwise the letter would have been private.
Curtiz, director of Casablanca, suggests that it is alright to do bad things for the right reason through reaction shots and high angle shots. He uses high angle shots, sound effects and reaction shots when Major Strasser is shot. When Major Strasser is shot Curtiz uses high angle shots to show that Major Strasser is not in a position of power. The fact that Captain Louis doesn’t arrest Rick shows that he believes that what Rick did was the right thing and it is all right to do bad things for the right reason. Caption Louis actions are also patriotic because helping Rick and allowing Victor and Ilsa is helping the war effort.
Once he had an idea, to him that was final and the only “right” idea. Charles as a military leader also added to the defeat. He made himself commander in chief and while this may have strengthened his position if he could provide strong leadership and bring his generals and politicians together, it also meant that he became responsible for his defeat. Good advice was never acted upon. Military failure also played a role in the defeat of the Royalist cause.
Source H supports the arguments of G because it argues the monasteries are sinful and vicious. Source I however argues that the monasteries are not corrupt and that their dissolution is a result of the financial benefits they gave to the King. The sources
In the movie it was obvious that COL Jessup truly believed that he was doing right by his people. The ethical dilemma was the manner in which he did it. It was obvious that he was disobeying orders from his superiors and placing his subordinates in Ethical situations. Lt Kendrick is Private Santiago commander, he denies his transfer and agrees with the code red. The defense discovers that the death was the result of a ‘Code Red’ illegal corporal punishment meted out to a soldier in need of discipline administered upon the order of a Colonel Nathan Jessup.
This shows that Seacole in the Crimea may have been unnecessary. Even Source 1 says the cured only “some” patients, suggesting not all benefitted from her care. Source 2’s claims are questionable though, because it’s from an unnamed source meaning we don’t know if there is a motive as we can’t research the writer to see if they were a first hand witness or if he only heard about Seacole because he only gives a general impression. Unlike source 2, source 3 had such a strong motive
AJP also uses emotive words such as “slaughter” and “blind”. These words show that the purpose of the source is to persuade the reader to agree with the statement and it shows that he supported the statement himself, and was against the war. Also the fact that there were over 250,000 British casualties at Passchendaele also supports AJP Taylor’s view. Moreover, source 4 also agrees with the statement “Lions Led by Donkeys”. I think the purpose of this source is to persuade.
How Far do sources B and E challenge what Lord Raglan says in source G in reply to Queen Victoria’s letter? On the whole sources B and E are predominantly in disagreement with Lord Raglan’s letter addressing Queen Victoria. Lord Raglan accepts in his letter that despite being ‘occupied’ in his endeavour to ‘provide for the various wants of your majesty’s troops’ there is a level of ‘inefficiency’ amongst his staff, which he attributes to the suffering of the soldiers. Because this letter is being sent to Queen Victoria who is the most senior authority in Britain, Lord Raglan will want to deflect any blame for the soldier’s suffering by shifting the blame onto his staff and covering his tracks by claiming he has been occupied attending
The speaker also interpreted the word of dishonor by comparing the contribution which the dead made and the evil they did. Thucydides assumed that there were no people who lack of valor and their virtues will never to be lost to their country. As a result, people who bravely dead on the battle field should not be labeled as
Use the four approaches to deciding ethical dilemmas to evaluate whether Arison made an ethical decision to avoid communicating about the sinking of the Costa Concordia. I believe Arison use an ethical approach on handling this type of issue; he was able to use the justice approach which is more of a respectful approach making sure everything done had been done fairly. When put in that type of situation it is best to not discuss much of the issues that occurred to outsiders that have no reason to know about it because at the end of the day people were killed and those family members have lost a loved one and they don’t need people talking about it around them in detail. Making sure the issue was being taken care of was important but also being discrete with people who have no business is also an important