WTF?! SFO no longer investigating BAE

[jiggajagga]

# Bloooooe birds oo-ver the whiiite cliffs of Dover #

And now, an announcement from Mr Churchill. Stand by.

Nice one!!

 

[detective-boy]

And now, an announcement from Mr Churchill. Stand by.

"Never, ... in the field of international business, ... has so much, ... been extorted by so few, ... from so many ..."

 

[TAE]

Nice one Mr Churchill.

 

[teqniq]

@ laptop & DB

 

[gosub]

You might think its jingoistic, but there is a war going on, which means that the effects of any decision would be felt in unusually short order by those at the sharp end. The affair is sordid but the resons for stopping as outlined in yesterdays FT, I think are unhelpful. Raises the quiestion of how much of the threat the followers of Bin Laden would be to a UK actively exposing corruption in Saudi, and that leads to arkward quiestions about how the UK goverment would go about adopting that sort of strategy with organagrams that I image half the people that bang on about sovereignty, would rather were kept quiet.

So I'll stick to the second tier, which seems blatently obvious, though I do have concerns,there is a real sense of "watch whose money you pick up" about the whole thing - but then there aren't that many orders for air traffic systems in Africa for BAe to do instead I suppose. Still like to know if Blair heeded the Hutton report or if the seat of UK government is still a sofa.

 

[TAE]

You might think its jingoistic, but there is a war going on, which means that the effects of any decision would be felt in unusually short order by those at the sharp end.

How do you think AQ's propaganda will interpret the fact that the british government appears to be ignoring uk law because of the wishes of the house of saud?

 

[DexterTCN]

Weren't Saudis involved in 9/11? I don't see why 'realpolitik' is being used as a 'get out of jail free' card by our esteemed leader when obviously national considerations demand we bring this to a conclusion. And if BAE wish to be considered as acting in the best interests of the British people then they can provide some evidence. 50,000 jobs would be lost if they were investigated, was that it? Nonsense.

One would hope that no-one believes the protestations of the SFO so quickly, either.

'we are being bugged' indeed.

Not that anyone thinks that SFO officers are briefing the government.

This whole thing screams out for daylight.

 

[gosub]

I don't think they are ignoring the law as the international treaty concerned has claviate recognising national interest. Bringing the issue up only does AQ favours. If the problem is the problem and it infested my neighbours endemically (the current senior management has been in place less than a year) there are other cases that could theoretically be bought that addressed the issue in less nuclear terms.


Someone in the US needs a slap, but the outriders are unbelievable​

 

[TAE]

I don't think they are ignoring the law ...

I didn't mean international law, but rather domestic law:

Lord Goldsmith said ... the decision had been made in the wider public interest, which had to be balanced against the rule of law.

It sounds like the wishes of the house of saud are considered more important than the rule of law.

 

[gosub]

The problem with this bb is nobody really seems to take in what other people have said, giving up with GMathews view of business & the EU as well as his ignoring subsidiarity as long as somebody else controls the purse strings.

If you are planning a "WHAT DO WE WANT - REDUNDENCIES, WHEN DO WE WANT THEM -XMAS, WHAT HAVE WE GOT - PRINCIPLES" demo on Government House Road, you will have missed both the point and an opportunity.

 

[TAE]

Not just principles, but the rule of law uppon which a healthy economy depends.

 

[gosub]

/\


http://www.guardian.co.uk/armstrade/story/0,,1946486,00.html

 

[TAE]

Well to you too.