Sam PF's Journal
[Recent Entries][Archive][Friends][User Info]
Below are the 9 most recent journal entries recorded in the "Sam PF" journal:
|
11:26 am
[Link] |
BAE Pwned?
The UK High Court has ruled that the Serious Fraud Office acted unlawfully in calling off its investigation into BAE Systems arms sales to Saudi Arabia. The case was brought by Campaign Against Arms Trade and The Cornerhouse.
(See here and here for some of my previous posts on the subject.)
Not sure yet whether this means they'll have to re-open it (of course it wasn't the SFO's decision, except in the technical sense, it was Blair's), but still very good news, and many congratulations to Ann and Nick and all the others at CAAT who have put a monumental amount of work into this. Having been involved myself on the Steering Committee in CAAT's decision-making around this (and in particular on the BAE spying subplot), very pleased on a personal level too.
Update: Aha, surprisingly enough Yahoo News comes through before the Beeb or the Grauniad. Judges to make further ruling on what happens next. Most likely that SFO will have to reconsider the decision. Nick G. also replied to my querying text with: "Nature of court intervention still argue but fantastic win nevertheless!" Indeed!
Tags: arms trade, caat, corruption, wolfram & hart (uk)
|
|
12:36 am
[Link] |
More on BAE
This is truly astonishing. I mean, we knew this sort of thing was going on, but... wow.
No further comment needed.
Tags: arms trade, corruption, wolfram & hart (uk) plc
|
|
12:20 am
[Link] |
OMG SPIES!
Following various legal proceedings, Campaign Against Arms Trade is now able to say what we know so far on how arms company BAE Systems got hold of a confidential and privileged email from our lawyers to the CAAT Steering Committee, relating to the forthcoming judicial review we are seeking into the calling off of the SFO investigation into BAE's deals with Saudi Arabia.
As the first link says, back in February we won an injunction requiring BAE to tell us how they got the email. In a sworn affadavit, they said they received it from one Paul Mercer, who works for a company called LigneDeux Associates, which BAE acknowledge they pay £2,500 a month to monitor the activities of CAAT and other campaigning groups. The contract between BAE and LigneDeux states that non-public documents are not required by BAE.
We then got an injunction against Paul Mercer, requiring him to tell us how he got the email, which he did, but until Wednesday we were not able to disclose this. He says he received it in a CD ROM from (he says) an unknown sender, and then forwarded the email to Mike McGinty, BAE's Director of Security. McGinty sent it to BAE's lawyers, who sent it to ours (as they had to). However, they removed all routing information from the email, which is why we had to get the injunction. McGinty also tipped off Mercer that he was naming him in BAE's affadavit.
The latest info has made the papers - turns out Mercer is a friend of a prominent Tory MP, though I don't think that's particularly significant.
The matter has now been referred to the police.
The mystery remains as to who was the anonymous person who sent the CD-ROM to Paul Mercer. It does seem strange that someone completely unknown to Mr Mercer, and apparently unconnected to BAE, should send him it, but there we go. Also unknown is whether the original source of the leak is a spy or a hacker. We may never find out. There have been spies in CAAT before, working for a company allegedly supplying information to BAE, most notably our former National Campaigns Co-ordinator Martin Hogbin.
CAAT's news release on the matter is here.
At any rate we, along with Cornerhouse, are pursuing the Judicial Review. We think we have an excellent case, but we shall see.
Tags: arms trade, caat, wolfram & hart (uk)
|
|
07:16 pm
[Link] |
Breaking News
Campaign Against Arms Trade have won an injunction against BAE Systems, requiring them to reveal how they obtained a confidential and privileged email from our lawyers to us, relating to the judicial review we are seeking against the Government over their cancellation of the Serious Fraud Office investigation into bribery allegations against BAE. Under the Norwich Pharmacal order, BAE will now be required to retrieve and provide the email with all routing information, and to provide an affadavit stating how they came into possession of the email. The judge, Mr Justice King, however, declined CAAT's application for BAE to be required to provide any other confidential information from CAAT they had receieved over the past few years. (BAE have, we have strong reasons to believe, infiltrated CAAT in the past). It appears that BAE do not intend to appeal.
Well, I imagine that Wolfram & Hart (UK) plc will do their best to avoid giving us any actually useful information, but you never know. But anyway, definitely one for the good guys.
Tags: arms trade, caat, wolfram & hart (uk)
|
|
12:11 am
[Link] |
More on BAE and the Saudi deal
I have posted a fair bit recently on the allegations of corruption surrounding the gigantic Al Yamamah arms sales to Saudi Arabia by Wolfram & Hart (UK) plc BAE Systems, and how the UK Government called off the Serious Fraud Office investigation into the deals, which appeared to have been getting quite close to the bone.
Well, Campaign Against Arms Trade have not been content to leave it at that, but along with the Cornerhouse Foundation, a small but incredibly active anti-corruption charity, are seeking a judicial review of the decision, on the grounds that it is (in our opinion) flagrantly contrary to the OECD Convention on Bribery to which Britain is a signatory.
Well, the latest twist (as we have just press released) is that BAE Systems recently received confidential and legally privileged material belonging to CAAT relating to the proposed challenge. The material has been returned to CAAT voluntarily, but BAE has refused to state how it came into possession of the material. CAAT is therefore seeking an injunction next Friday (2nd Feb) compelling BAE to assist in identifying the source of the leak.
I'm afraid I can't say much more about this at the moment, given that as a member of CAAT Steering Committee I am a party to these proceedings.
Though I think I might call to mind some of the interesting (flocked unfortunately) history on this kind of matter.
Tags: arms trade, bae systems, politics, uk politics
|
|
11:38 pm
[Link] |
Al Jazeera interview
Well, had the interview on Al Jazeera English. Think it went pretty well - had about 3 minutes, and I got pretty much all the main points I wanted to across - it was, it must be said a pretty friendly interview, in the context of a very friendly piece. And well, in terms of arguing how badly wrong the government is on this one is pretty much an open goal. Still, I think I was reasonably punchy. What I'm less sure of is how I was visually, although the person at the BBC Bristol studio from where the IV was conducted says I was fine. I've only done one TV slot before, so not very used to it. Also, not being able to see the interviewer at the other end. Constantly tempted to look down at the monitor, which is bad because I was never looking good in the monitor, which is because I'm not supposed to be looking at the monitor, but straight at the camera, even though the camera isn't showing me anything back.
I was hoping to catch a repeat on a later bulletin, but it seems to have been bumped from the news cycle. But I've been told I can get a DVD.
This all relates to the government's decision to call off the Serious Fraud Office investigation into alleged bribes by BAE systems to the Saudi government to secure major arms contracts. There's been some more developments - today it transpired that MI6 have disputed government claims that continuing the investigation would have led to the Saudis halting intelligence co-operation, pulling away one of the government's few remaining legs to stand on. In any case, as I said on AJ, the OECD convention on bribery to which Britain is a signatory actually doesn't allow a prosecution to not be pursued on the grounds of either economic interest or relations with another country. In fact, Britain is to be asked to explain the decision to an OECD meeting, although no action is expected to follow from this.
The other juicy little titbit that's just come out is the secret $12m payment to a Swiss bank account by BAE to a Tanzanian middleman in connection with a 2002 sale of a $40m military air traffic control system to Tanzania. That deal was heavily criticised at the time as being overly expensive and far in excess of Tanzania's actual civil aviation needs. Then International Development Secretary Clare Short unsuccessfully opposed the deal. At the time it looked like the Tanzanian government had been duped into buying an unnecessarily fancy system. Now it appears that they were in fact bribed, with the full connivance of the UK government.
Yep, BAE appear to have bribed the rulers of one of the poorest countries on earth to spend $40m of their people's money on something they didn't need, while Tony Blair, even while seeking the moral high ground on debt relief etc., looked on with approval.
I expect I will have more to say about Wolfram & Hart (UK) in the coming days, but that'll do for now.
Tags: arms trade, bae systems, politics, uk politics
|
|
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
|
|
12:21 am
[Link] |
Stop the arms fair!
Just because the one thing the world really needs at the moment is more and better weapons, Spearhead Exhibitions (owned by Reed Elsevier) in association with the UK MOD have organised the Defence Systems Equipment International arms fair (DSEi), from 13th-16th September, at the ExCel Centre in London's Docklands.
The exhibition, heavily subsidised by the UK taxpayer, claims to be the world's largest arms fair. It brings together the major buyers and sellers of arms, and is a crucial meeting place where deals are made or set in motion. Exhibitors at DSEi 2005 include most of the world's major arms companies, including Lockheed Martin, Raytheon and Northropp Grumann from the US, Britain's BAE Systems, France's Thales, and the Franco/German/Spanish company EADS. The guest list of buyers has not yet been made public, but in the past invitees have included numerous countries involved in conflict and/or responsible for serious human rights abuses and/or violations of international law, including Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, Israel, Colombia, India and Pakistan. (And of course the US, who pretty much come under all three categories). More (biased and partisan) information about DSEi can be found here. The full Campaign Against Arms Trade (CAAT) briefing on DSEi can be downloaded here.
A week of action against the arms fair is being co-ordinated by Disarm DSEi, along with CAAT. The main demo is on Tuesday 13th September, to coincide with the opening of the arms fair. The full list of events is:
( list of events )
Disarm DSEi have a Call to Action that can be downloaded from their website, printed and distributed. However because the site uses frames I can't link to it directly.
In addition, or if you can't make any of these events, you could write to Reed Elsevier to call upon them to stop organising arms fairs such as these. And of course, writing to your MP is always an option. CAAT are making a specific call to close down the Defence Export Services Organisation, a branch of the MOD dedicated to promoting UK arms exports at the taxpayer's expense, and which is heavily involved in organising DSEi.
ETA: Naturally, forward at will.
Tags: arms trade, campaign against arms trade, peace, politics, war
|
|
12:42 pm
[Link] |
BAE Corruption
It is most gratifying to read that BAE Systems are being investigated for corruption involving massive 'slush funds' for bribes to Saudi Princes and the like to win arms contracts. The investigation now seems to be involving the BAE Chairman himself.
BAE's corrupt relationship with the brutally repressive Saudi government, the UK's biggest overseas arms customer has been overlooked for far too long. As far back as the early 1990s, a National Audit Office report into alleged 'commissions' paid by BAE to the Saudis to win the £20 billion Al Yamamah arms deal, commissions possibly amounting to as much as 15% of the deal, was suppressed - the only NAO report never to be made public. And, aside from the corruption, it gives me great pleasure to see BAE in trouble - a company that has for so long sold arms to some of the world's nastiest regimes, and which - on a more personal note - paid to have Campaign Against Arms Trade, for whom I volunteered for many a year, inflitrated at the highest level.
However, whether this actually leads to anything, or whether the investigation gets quietly dropped, is another matter. BAE have an exceptionally close relationship with the British Government, which has protected them in all sorts of ways in the past. In fact, I wonder whether this investigation happening now may be a negotiating ploy on behalf of the government. The relationship between the company and the MoD has turned sour recently, due to cost overruns. BAE has meanwhile tried to play the card of being Britain's 'national champion' arms supplier to twist the government's arm into giving them contracts. Most recently, in the contract to build Britain's 2 new aircraft carrier, where the Government has decided that BAE should share the work with Thales of France, based on Thales' design, BAE have threatened to pull out altogether if they are not made the prime contractor.
So maybe the government is, unusually, allowing this corruption investigation to take place as a way of coercing BAE to play ball, and that if and when BAE knuckle under, they will step in to have the investigation halted, or at least endure that no serious charges are brought except possibly against low-ranking officials.
Or maybe I'm just being too much of a conspiracy theorist here.
At any event, I'm sure the CAAT campaigners protesting at the BAE AGM today and asking questions in the meeting as shareholders will be having a field day. (I couldn't be there myself due to teaching committments). It will be rather nice, as it will be the first time in several years that BAE, hopefully, will not have known the questions they were going to be asked in advance, supplied by the traitor bastard who was organising the protest! Of course, they may have someone else in there by now, though I doubt at such a high level.
Current Mood: Vengeful
Tags: arms trade, campaign against arms trade
|
|