Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Blair did secret deal with Saudis

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
IChing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-19-07 05:44 PM
Original message
Blair did secret deal with Saudis
Source: The Australian

Blair did secret deal with Saudis
David Leppard, London
March 19, 2007

BRITISH Prime Minister Tony Blair struck a secret deal with the king of Saudi Arabia,
assuring him there would be no criminal charges against anyone implicated in bribery
in Britain's biggest arms deal. In July 2005, Mr Blair assured the then crown prince, Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz,
who is now the Saudi King, that Britain would abandon an inquiry by the Serious Fraud Office
into alleged massive corruption.

It concerned a £60 million ($146 million) "slush fund"
allegedly set up by BAE Systems, Britain's biggest military contractor,
to support the lifestyle of some members of the Saudi royal family.
Mr Blair told crown prince Abdullah during a visit to Riyadh,
the Saudi capital, that the evidence would instead be offered to the Saudi authorities.

Sources with knowledge of the discussions say that even as the major fraud inquiry was
expanding with the arrest of five British business executives, Mr Blair was telling crown prince
Abdullah that the inquiry "was going nowhere".>>>>snip

Read more: http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,21403694-2703,00.html



This is rather major news and the end of Blair.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
mod mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-19-07 05:49 PM
Response to Original message
1. I remember Blair's eloquent speech after 9/11. It's pitiful that he decided to align
with criminals intent on destroying the goddwill of both nations. Lesson : those who play with fire (or grossly evil war profiteers) get burned.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RUMMYisFROSTED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-19-07 06:23 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. "...decided to align?"
He was there from the beginning.

False flag.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ends_dont_justify Donating Member (367 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-19-07 07:50 PM
Response to Reply #1
6. To add to the lesson...
Gasoline should not cut deals with fire :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saigon68 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-19-07 08:08 PM
Response to Reply #1
7. He is a Petty Hooligan and a War Criminal
A Poodle too :-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheBaldyMan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-19-07 05:54 PM
Response to Original message
2. can't he just torture a terror suspect to take the blame? seems to be all the rage nowadays
apparently Tony is claiming that it wouldn't be in the national interest to investigate any wrongdoing. I wonder whose nation he's talking about.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gratuitous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-20-07 09:37 AM
Response to Reply #2
15. Another interrogation session, and I'm sure they'll get a confession
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed seems like a chatty guy after a session with the questioners. Or did you want something that can actually be used in a court of law?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-19-07 06:16 PM
Response to Original message
3. You know, if BAE was paying bribes, Lockheed-Martin, Halliburton & the rest were, too.
Seems to be the price of doing business with some of our Mid-East allies. Go along with the flow.

You know, the White House has to be "actively overlooking" this, as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IChing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-19-07 07:30 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. Could this be tied to even Cunningham in a odd way?
I really don't think so but that would be nice to see
the military industrial complex go down
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IChing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-19-07 10:49 PM
Response to Original message
8. shameless kick
I am still looking for more takes on this story
Can anyone from Europe give us more?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
muriel_volestrangler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-20-07 06:45 AM
Response to Reply #8
11. It's highly believable
I haven't seen any more specific stories about it recently. The OECD has criticised Britain for dropping the investigation, and is going to carry out its own inquiry.

The Al Yamamah deals go back over 20 years - to when Thatcher was in power, and her son Mark was getting money from the deal. There appears to have been huge amounts of bribes, and successive British governments have ignored it, on the grounds that it props up one of the few remaining bits of British manufacturing, and keeps the Saudi royal family on good terms.

For an example of the background on this, but which shows how frustratingly shadowy this all is (Paul Foot, the author of the review, was a great investigative journalist, but he never uncovered it all), here's a review of a book about Jonathan Aitken, a Conservative cabinet minister, who was convicted of perjury in the 90s:

'By the middle of 1976,' these three Guardian journalists report, 'Jonathan was effectively on Prince Mohammed's payroll': probably the fattest payroll on earth. The Prince provided Aitken with sumptuous offices in Mayfair, the money to invest (surreptitiously) in a newly franchised television company (TV-am), a merchant bank (Aitken Hume), a health hydro (Inglewood), a wonderful house within easy walking distance of the House of Commons, a mansion in his Kent constituency, a Jaguar. In return, Aitken put himself entirely at the Prince's disposal. He would do anything, his secretary reported, to 'keep the Arabs happy'. He would even help to provide them with what they were denied at home by their wives and their laws: prostitutes. All the gifts which providence had showered on Jonathan Aitken were devoted to pimping for the billionaires from Riyadh.

The relationship between Prince and pimp grew closer after 1985, when Margaret Thatcher signed the first of the Al Yamamah agreements on behalf of the British Government. Al Yamamah, Arabic for 'The Dove', was the biggest arms deal in history. Over the next decade, 20 billion dollars' worth of Saudi oil and cash were to pay for bombers and guns and warships made in British factories. The price in every case was far higher than the manufacturing cost. Harding et al quote some examples: 'A Tornado fighter-bomber which cost Nato £20m was to be sold to the Saudis for closer to £35m . . . Each 2000 lb bomb that went on the planes was fitted with a sophisticated electronic fuse made by Thorn-EMI . . . a total of 26 per cent in commissions was paid by Thorn EMI on each transaction.' The authors conclude: 'An underground river of money of at least £300m a year in secret commissions began to flow, corrupting British business life.'

Mrs Thatcher liked to talk about 'good husbandry': here, in its place, was unimaginable profligacy and corruption. Yet even the most inquisitive journalist with access to government press offices and accounts found it impossible effectively to expose the great outrage of the time. We were dealing almost entirely in rumour. For instance, it became 'common knowledge' that Mark Thatcher enriched himself to the tune of £12m from the Al Yamamah deals. Thatcher himself never denied it or sued anyone for mentioning it. Yet no one, not even the authors of Thatcher's Gold, an entire book on the subject, could produce a single hard fact to prove it. The name of Wafic Said, a multi-millionaire friend of the Thatchers, was bandied about as a beneficiary of the Al Yamamah commissions. Once again, there was not a single document or reliable piece of evidence to prove the connection. In 1991, the National Audit Office carried out an inquiry into Al Yamamah. Incredibly, the report was never published. At the first whiff of the burglar, the watchdog slunk away. The report was suppressed by order of Bob Sheldon, the Labour chairman of the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee, and his Tory deputy. I remember contacting Sheldon in his Lancashire constituency on the day before the 1992 General Election, and remonstrating with him. Did he not have a reputation in the House of Commons for prising unpalatable facts and figures out of the ministries? Did he not believe in open government? Was he not suppressing a report which ought to be in the public domain? Yes, yes, yes, he muttered mournfully, but 'there are too many jobs at stake here.' The report, he promised, found 'no evidence of corruption, or of public money being used improperly'. Sheldon said he had spent 'many many hours worrying about his decision' but in the end he came down on the side of obfuscation and silence.

Even the three Guardian authors, who have had access to documents which writs have forced out of the previous government and the Aitken entourage, are short on hard facts about the extent of the Al Yamamah commissions and their destinations. Somehow, hundreds of millions of pounds are still being diverted every year from government-to-government arms contracts via scores of hidey-holes into the secret bank accounts of the Saudi royals and their British acolytes.

http://www.lrb.co.uk/v20/n01/print/foot01_.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Theduckno2 Donating Member (905 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-20-07 12:18 AM
Response to Original message
9. K&R
Didn't Gen. Smedley Butler say that "War is a racket."?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-20-07 12:55 AM
Response to Original message
10. hmmm, wonder if OUR so-called press will ever cover all the shady, secret deals that the BFEE has
Edited on Tue Mar-20-07 12:55 AM by kath
made with the Saudi's???
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sutz12 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-20-07 07:00 AM
Response to Reply #10
12. Well, I see a trend of sorts...
We seem to get our most accurate reports from the British press (Guardian, etc).

This report of Brit corruption comes from Australia.

Seems nobody has a very reliable home press these days.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
muriel_volestrangler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-20-07 09:29 AM
Response to Reply #12
13. It's actually a reprint from the UK Sunday Times
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
goforit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-20-07 09:31 AM
Response to Original message
14. Proof that Britain and Saudi Arabia sponsor Al Qaeda. Supreme terrorist
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AikidoSoul Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-20-07 09:52 AM
Response to Original message
16. The MIC has become a monster that is sucking the life's blood
from our lives and the futures of our children.

This monster is out of control and has been for years.

What can the public possibly do to cut down it's power and influence? We've already seen how intricate these networks of influence are here in the U.S. Everyone in power in Washington is in some way connected and obligated to this monster.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-20-07 11:52 AM
Response to Original message
17. someone here has probably made the same promises about 9/11.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Dec 26th 2024, 12:40 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC