Corruption is in the "National Interest"

**Tom Paine** · December 15, 2006, 10:13 AM

Tony Blair has hit back at claims a corruption probe into a Saudi arms deal with BAE Systems was dropped after commercial and political pressure.

The Serious Fraud Office's sudden decision to wind up a two-year inquiry was in the national interest, he said.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6182125.stm
For once(?) the Liberal Democrats have got the right idea;

Liberal Democrat peer Lord Goodhart told the Today programme: "I think what has happened here is that we have been bounced into this decision by what is effectively blackmail by the Saudi Arabian government.

He added: "It is clear it was not the SFO's own decision, and it was not something that was instigated by the SFO. This came from the top."

I mean what the hell? We're talking about a billion pounds sterling if not more, over about 20 years, that has been given in bribes to the Saudi royal family by Britain's chief arms manufacturing company. A billion pounds, and we shouldn't investigate it because otherwise, the Saudis will pull out of a deal they were bribed into in the first place? If anything that's more reason to investigate it! Ah, what a corrupt government we live under... and have done for the past 20-odd years (this started under Thatcher. Continued under Major. Investigated, until the investigation was nixed, under Blair...)

**Rhah** · December 15, 2006, 10:15 AM

This is an incredibly tricky situation. Personally, I couldnt give a **** about what happens to any government officials that might be convicted in said investigation, but if it leads to the Saudi's cancelling the contract then thousands of totally innocent people will lose their jobs and their livelihoods.

It really is a no win situation, but in the interest's of the workers I think it should left alone.

**Tom Paine** · December 15, 2006, 12:07 PM

Um... why? Its a matter of covering up because of corruption. What doing this does, is sends a message that corruption is perfectly okay in the arms industry. Is this a message we want to be sending to the people making our weaponry? To exporters who seem not to care about international embargoes either? No, I think not... I say cleaning up the arms industry is somewhat more important than the jobs, sorry.

**Rhah** · December 15, 2006, 12:23 PM

Originally Posted by Ozymandias

Um... why? Its a matter of covering up because of corruption. What doing this does, is sends a message that corruption is perfectly okay in the arms industry. Is this a message we want to be sending to the people making our weaponry? To exporters who seem not to care about international embargoes either? No, I think not... I say cleaning up the arms industry is somewhat more important than the jobs, sorry.

Perhaps it is morally the correct thing to do, in the grand scheme, but I can't help but look at it from the point of view of the poor saps who will end up suffering because of it.
It wont be Blair, or the Arms industry, or the Saudi's, it will be the people that get made redundant.

Mind you, this sympathetic notion may have been deliberately seeded by the government to try and fool the country into "letting this one go".

**Dromikaites** · December 15, 2006, 12:45 PM

Money makes the world go round, what else is new?

I find it hard to believe that only the Saudis got the money and the Britsh politicians first turned a blind eye (when it happened in the '80s) and then dropped the investigation just because they wanted to save the jobs of the BAE Systems workers and because of the need to cooperate with the Saudis in the War of Terror. I'd say some of the money were channeled into either private pockets or into the banck accounts of the main parties or both.

**Da Skinna** · December 15, 2006, 12:58 PM

I bet the Swiss are happy though...

**Tom Paine** · December 15, 2006, 01:01 PM

Drom, I suspect not; no, BAE will have been handing cash to both parties up front and openly... also, its the closest thing to a national corporation we have, in the end.

The motive for dropping it by the by is the threat by the Saudis to a 72-plane deal "we" have with them.

**Aristophanes** · December 15, 2006, 04:31 PM

Originally Posted by Ozymandias

Drom, I suspect not; no, BAE will have been handing cash to both parties up front and openly... also, its the closest thing to a national corporation we have, in the end.

The motive for dropping it by the by is the threat by the Saudis to a 72-plane deal "we" have with them.

Government and big business, a match made in hell!!!

**Tom Paine** · December 15, 2006, 05:28 PM

Originally Posted by Aristophanes

Government and big business, a match made in hell!!!

Its more like government covering the ass of big business, which responds by tax evasion and other ways to screw government over, while donating to the parties... Did I mention I loathe BAE and New Labour both?

**Stalins Ghost** · December 15, 2006, 06:31 PM

As usual our business is dictating politics, and whats worse its down to the ****ing arms industry. I'm going to be predictable and say I'd like the lid to be blown off of this barrel of lies. Frankly BAE in all its activities smacks of corruption, but I guess we couldn't expect much less from a company built on a foundation of bodies.

Rhah has a valid point though. The government owes it to them to support them if made redundant. I'm sure they could direct some money from somewhere to keep them afloat - wait no, its all going on illegal nuclear proliferation.

**Tom Paine** · December 16, 2006, 02:50 AM

SG, that's the thing... the amount going into graft would keep BAE afloat pretty well. Problem being its all going on graft that the government has just all-but stated is totally acceptable and to be ignored.