Sam PF's Journal - Breathtaking

[Recent Entries][Archive][Friends][User Info]

December 15th, 2006

01:19 am

[Link]

Breathtaking
This is almost beyond belief. Actually, nothing is beyond belief. Just that it should be done so brazenly.

I posted a couple of weeks ago about the Serious Fraud Office investigation into bribes paid by BAE Systems in relation to arms deals with Saudi Arabia, leading to the Saudis threatening to cancel a new £6bn contract for 72 Eurofighters. Well now the British government has stepped in, with the Attorney General Lord Goldsmith calling a halt to the investigation.

Lord Goldsmith's statement said "It has been necessary to balance the need to maintain the rule of law against the wider public interest." he spoke of damage to diplomatic and security relationships with Saudi Arabia if the investigation continued. This is astounding. Politicians have intervened in a judicial process, have suspended the rule of law, at the behest of one of the most corrupt and tyrannical regimes on the face of the planet. BAE are effectively told that they are allowed to carry on bribing to their hearts content. There are no words. There really are no words.

But the hand controlling the puppet here is not principally the Saudi government, it is BAE Systems, of whom the late Robin Cook said that he had never known Tony Blair to take a decision that discommoded them. We have known for a long time that the government essentially belonged to BAE in matters of arms exports; now it seems that the entire legal system of this country is theirs to play with where it affects their vital interest.

Tony Blair still plays the Christian card. Talks, like butter wouldn't melt, about how we mustn't 'betray' the people of Iraq. About the virtues of democracy. About how African governments must crack down on corruption. "You may disagree with me," he seems to say, "but I have followed my conscience. I have acted for what I believe to be right." For anyone paying attention, that lie ought already to be palpable; but if it wasn't then, it is now.

One day the House of Saud, that presides over a regime of brutal execution, torture, total suppression of free speech and suppression of women (another of Blair's favourite causes when it suits him) almost unrivalled in the world, will fall. Then we will see how much it was in our "national interest" to support them so absolutely and unconditionally, to bribe them billions to buy our arms, and now even to prostitute our entire legal system to their wishes.

Tags: arms trade, politics, uk politics

(Leave a comment)

Comments

From:	mirabehn
Date:	December 15th, 2006 12:26 pm (UTC)

(Link)

Good grief.

As you say. It's so *blatant*. Why isn't it front page news? Why is there so little outcry?

(Oh, I know. Those were rhetorical questions. It's *always* the case in this country that the priorities of the media - and therefore the public - are absolutely screwed.)

Grrrrrr.

(Reply) (Thread)

From:	the_lady_lily
Date:	December 15th, 2006 05:48 pm (UTC)

(Link)

It has turned up in the Beeb thanks to the Lib Dems coming down like a hammer on an anvil and accusing the PM of 'burying bad news' again - has it turned up in mainstream media yet? I know it was on the Today programme this morning, but that's not the same as a slot on the 9pm news.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

From:	vectorious
Date:	December 15th, 2006 07:42 pm (UTC)

(Link)

It was front page news the the Grauniad. I have to say that I am surprise that a politician is allowed to make such a decision. I thought prosecutors were independant - otherwise a politician coudl halt an investigation into himself.

I thought when I saw the Saudi demands to stop the investigation that that showed their misunderstanding of the workings of a (relatively) corruption free democracy. But perhaps they understood it much better than me...

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

From:	smhwpf
Date:	December 15th, 2006 08:24 pm (UTC)

(Link)

I think technically the SFO decided to drop the case, but I don't think the government are even trying to pretend that this is an independent position. The fact that our most senior law officer, the Attorney General, is a political appointment, perhaps doesn't help.

I thought when I saw the Saudi demands to stop the investigation that that showed their misunderstanding of the workings of a (relatively) corruption free democracy. But perhaps they understood it much better than me...

Even I wasn't expecting anything quite so blatant.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

From:	smhwpf
Date:	December 15th, 2006 08:22 pm (UTC)

(Link)

The thing that gets me is nto that it isn't making the news - but the relativelty sympathetic hearing the decision's getting. The Guardian were a noble exception, being stronly condemnatory. But the Independent, who have been excellent on civil liberties, were much more muted, and I even saw one Business section headline talking about the "extraordinary naivete" of the SFO in pursuing the investigation in the first place. As for the parties, the Lib Dems seem to be the only ones forthrighly opposing - the Tories' only criticism again seems to be that the investigation was allowed in the first place. The phrase "true colours" comes to mind.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

From:	the_lady_lily
Date:	December 15th, 2006 05:45 pm (UTC)

(Link)

The report of Blair's speech in response to the accusations from the Beeb - thank goodness for the Lib Dems keeping their eyes open. Has it made onto the front of any papers or into the television/radio general news?

(Reply) (Thread)

From:	smhwpf
Date:	December 15th, 2006 08:27 pm (UTC)

(Link)

Yes, the Lib Dems have been excellent. As you've probably seen by now it was certainly front page news in the Grauniad, it was also well up there in the Indy, though far from as negative a response as you might think.

Interesting that the Tories have more or less supported the decision, or if they've had any criticisms it's that the investigation was pursued in the first place. However they're changing on other matters, when it comes to anything to do with the military, you can expect them to snap back to their traditional pattern.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

From:	the_lady_lily
Date:	December 18th, 2006 03:08 am (UTC)

(Link)

I don't know if you heard the coverage, but PM was pretty darn scathing about it - should still be available via Listen Again and is well worth having a listen to. I haven't had a look at what the Today program's coverage has been, but I doubt it's been any less sharp. At least some sections of the public will have a clue what's going on.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)