UK's unravelling relationship with Libya

Heard mr Balls on R4 this is the dying days of a sad and discredited goverenmet that cannot no remember what untruths it has told to whom.
Left hand not knowing what the right had is doing. but continues to smear those that dare to challenge them.

Is this the governemt that has pushed this country to the closed it has been to a revolution in its resent history ?

The various government ministers are all over the place. In the Blair years there would be a harmonious chorus, now we have a discordant mass of sound a bit like an analogue TV that has not been tuned properly - fuzzy images and crackling noise.

Every time someone pops up the worse it gets. Balls's intervention today is unbelievably stupid, his statement really lives up to his name. What BP and Shell make of all this, God only knows. If there is a banging noise in Canary Wharf it is Blair banging his head against the wall in total and utter despair.

an unfortunate name (Ed) for a politician so hats off to him for making such a good career out of it - not sure his views on Libya are of much interest, however ... Schools, isn't he?

You are spot on, Nick, Brown is in a hole and just keeps on digging.

Again, no leadership, Blair had the guts to bury the Arms inquiry in the national interest and brazen it out. Brown runs, hides and tries to compromise with 'sound bites' that pleases nobody.

One the other hand, how much did Sein Fein get in expenses? Should the IRA victims not be getting the compensation from them?

Good Morning Nick,

I thought that your appraisal of the situation over the compensation for victims was spot on. It is not a u-turn, it is a change of position. Accordingly, we must ask how many other changes of position can people identify from the past, and maybe see where there may be a change of position in the future.

Surely, one of the first must be the support of the 'elected' Afghan President Karzai. How can we deal with this man and his government. Surely, our soldiers are not going to be injured and killed for a totally discredited 'government' in Afghanistan.

We have been in Afghnaistan since 2001, why has it taken until now for the government in this country to identify that a way out will be for the local police and army to be trained, or partnered, or mentored, so that we can bring our boys home. In the meantime I do remember that at first America put 'advisers' in to Vietnam, and it escalated from there. So are we partners, are we mentoring, are we advising, or what change of words, not position will be using in ten years time, to describe the situation in Afghanistan. It is all about newspeak, or possibly just a change of position.

Given the fact that we don't seem to have a functional government at the moment, are there any suggestions as to who can run the Country for the next 7 months?
Answers on a pledge card please.
And another thing.....
This government (and Blair) has always been obsessed with the word 'strategic'. Look at Browns 'vision' thing. It produces statements like 'we need to be more strategic' (how?) and locks up street level public services provision (police, NHS, Councils) in piles of strategies and targets. But, they have forgotten that you have to deliver. Didn't work? - get a new vision and push out a pilot programme. They are just not comfortable in the 'now' - mere detail, gets in the way of visionary stuff. To my mind, this is why they make a Balls (pun intended) of every 'event' as Macmillan would say. Press conferences, masses of facts, prefixing every sentence with 'look', treating the public like morons - the same reaction every time, and the same result - utter contempt.
If labour (Brown, Balls, Milliband(s), Mandelson.....) want to regain any credibility, here's something they should try. Whn confronted by a difficult situation, tell the truth. Don't could it, obscifate, mislead, retcon or shilly shally. Just say you were wrong and say sorry. Go on, give it a whirl - you never know! There's a strategy everybody can enjoy.

The government's handling of this affair is far from extraordinary - simply further evidence that they have lost control.

There appears to be no vision or purpose and instead lumber on with unco-ordinated reactions to the days news.

This shambles is a result of UK politicians attempting to run with the hare and the hounds.
On the one hand, they're sending our brave soldiers to die in places like Afghanistan, ostensibly to thwart Islamic terrorism and mollify the US. On the other hand, they're soft on nutcase "clerics" and racist "fundamentalists" at home to display their multi-cultural credentials and bribe the inner-city Muslim voters . And now on top of that, by appeasing Libya for oil they're destroying what little (if any) credibility they had left.
Interesting that Gaddafi's son has said that anyone here wanting compensation from Libya for IRA atrocities will have to go through the courts. He didn't have the same respect for due legal process when he was bleating about freeing Megrahi. And these are the kind of people our cowardly politicians have been disgustingly fawning over. Caledonian Comment

Hmmm, given the number of people worldwide who might want to seek compensation for death or injury caused by weapons supplied by this country, it is hardly surprising that HMG is a bit reluctant to go down this route

I can't remember the Major government in 1996 being this incompetent. Most of the scandals relating to it were caused by greedy or oversexed backbenchers but the actually business of gvernment was handled reasonably competently and the economy was growing strongly under Ken Clarke.

This lot are just hopeless.

What bugs me is why politicians spend so much time arguing over whether this is a U-turn.

Seriously, who cares?

For the Tories to jump up and down shouting "U-turn, U-turn, nah-nah-na-nah-nah!" does them no credit at all. So what if it's a U-turn? They wanted the UK to seek compensation for the victims of terrorism. Now they are doing that. That's a good thing, surely?

For Labour to deny that it's a U-turn makes them look equally ridiculous. It's a matter of fact that they have changed their stance, and that is self-evidently a U-turn. To deny it simply gives the voters further evidence that Labour tell lies.

And they wonder why we don't trust politicians.

Roll in the newlabour party conference.

Can't wait to see what kind of message they intend to give to their adoring public.

We don't supprt troy cuts we do believe inlabour cuts; we do support the release of terrorists but we didn't want to release this one; we do believe in the banking sector but we don't think they should be paid anything; and so on.

This is a party sinking faster into its own contradictions than a fast sinking thing.

Call an election.

I would have thought from a legal perspective that the responsibility would lie with the user rather than the supplier?

Interesting perspective Nicholas.

I'm intrigued as to exactly what you mean by unravelling... do you mean that something that was previously not questioned by the plebs and looked like a good deal for both Libya and the UK is now in danger of falling flat on its proverbial derriere? That we werent meant to question any of the building blocks that went to make up the deal?

Ghadaffi's cruise missile comment is very interesting as well, one that had passed me by. 25th November 2001, he said it. Could he have been referring to the place otherwise known as "Londinistan" at the time? Bit of a poke in the eye for the then PM, was it not?

For what its worth, oil interests notwithstanding, the person who had most to gain by Libya coming back in from the cold was Ghadaffi himself. Not in many ways dissimilar to Saddam - gained power in a coup, ostensibly marxist, dictator, would use Islam to incite, when it suited him but was otherwise apostate, brooks no internal dissent - Following the invasion of Iraq in 2003, Ghadaffi could see the writing was on the wall. Both he and Saddam had thumbed their noses at the US in particular for decades, but without their regimes being directly threatened.

2003 changed all that. If a coalition of the willing could be assembled to depose Saddam, whose external terrorism links were tenuous (compared to those of Ghadaffi and certainly to those of Iran), how much longer would Bush have waited to have knocked over Ghadaffi? How much popular support would he have received for such an action? Particularly as John Bolton gave a speech in 2002 at the UN extending the Axis of evil to include Syria, Cuba and Libya? The world would not have mourned the passing of Ghadaffi's regime.

Ghadaffi knew the game was going to be up before long and that he was likely to be next.

International politics is sometimes a dirty business and you have to do things that are otherwise distasteful (See Syria during Gulf War 1, Chile during the Falklands war). The thing is though, the dratted electorate arent meant to understand all this though are they? And they're most certainly not supposed to question it.

It is becoming increasingly clear that Brown and Balls have lost control. The government seems paralysed with indecision and when it does make decisions they are knee-jerk and as a result of opposition/media pressure. They are not leading the country as they should.

I have just seen a governwent minister walking into a JCB show room to order there lastest and biggest digger, to dig more holes.

the only question is what for

1) oil
2) bury themselves with what a slice of luck that would be
3) tom, dick or harry to try and escape from there untruths.

all the time we drift further into the abyss utterly leaderless

So Ed Balls has told us that "none of them wanted to see him released from prison"; yet only the other day we were told (and it was confirmed) that the PM and Foreign Secretary "didn't want to see him die in prison".

Given that al-Megrahi was sentenced to life imprisonment, how can Balls expect us to believe that he's telling the truth?!

Is there no sanction that can be imposed on Ministers that are caught blatantly lying through their teeth in such a shameful way??

Saga, Ed Balls is an over-promoted SpAd with an ego the size of Asia in a position way above his station who has never done a days useful work in his life. Why he thinks he should stick his oar in on a subject not in his portfolio is beyond me... ah, now hang on a minute, one of Gordons inner circle, keeps the flies off the PM for another 24 hours... Ah, now I see it.

He's also the third most dangerous man in the current government, after Brown and Mandelson.

Well Scotland gave away our ace of clubs in handing over the bomber of who is making a some what remarkable recovery? May have gained some recompense for the family of PC fletcher.

For some time, probably measured from the point that Blair/Campbell walked away, Government Ministers have acted more and more as individual politicians rather than as a team, all more-or-less singing from the same hymn sheet.

As Nick points out, this political incoherence has been bought particularly into focus during this controversy.

From that we can reasonably deduce that Mr. Brown is not particularly good at managing people.

As The Economist pointed out recently, a Prime Minister needs to have a pretty daunting array of talents.

Mr.Brown, by definition, is a talented man but probably falls somewhat short of what is required for the top job.

Still, Mr. Brown can always blame the Civil Service, who quite possibly, in one sense, as illustrated by a recent Times article, are the 'enemy within', in the Blairite sense of 'the forces of conservatism' impeding progessive politics at every turn.

I have to admit that there was a certain common sense to restoring the diplomatic ties with Libya, both for them and for us. That's not the point in question here. The problem we have now is that Gadaffi is playing Brown like a violin, something Blair, vile as he was, would never have let happen.

At the same time, I agree with SurreyABC in post #4. Shouldn't we be seeking compensation from Sinn Fein rather than Libya? Otherwise we might as well be demanding compensation from the Chinese for inventing gunpowder.

If these compensation claims to a supplier of weapons are upheld, what would be the impact on arms manufacturers and suppliers in general?

Also, would Iraqi civilians who suffered lossed during the "search" for WMDs have a claim against those who did the searching, or supplied the armaments?

We have a dysfunctional government, led by a non-elected and discredited Prime Minister.

This is causing immense harm to the United Kingdom, at home and in the world at large. But Gordon Brown clearly intends to cling on by his finger nails until the last possible moment. Whatever happened to statesmanship and integrity?

I despair.

Didn't I read in the last few weeks that Teddy Kennedy did fund-raising for the IRA? Wasn't he a mainstay of the US Democratic party? Shouldn't we demand compensation from that party now, as we do from Libya?

21/22#

Indeed... conceivably, there would be no end to it. Strictly, legally speaking, the onus is on the user not the supplier... Not that Sinn Fein would have had public liability insurance, mind you.

This compensation issue is just a fig leaf. It'll rumble on for ages, then it'll go quiet and only the lawyers would get fat.

Personally, I'd have thought that the last thing any of the victims of any of the IRA atrocities would have wanted now would have been those wounds re-opening after all these years. Token financial compensation isnt ever going to bring their lost loved ones back.

Whatever next? Is there anything, anywhere, that we will not demand to be compensated for?

Good morning each & Nick.

Semtex.
It could easily be a breakfast boon.

What we have yet to hear much of in regard to compensation and allies in the fight against terrorism is comment from Thatcher, Tarzan and the rest.
I doubt that the Libyans took Punts as payment and to avoid losing out to exchange rates both sides in any Semtex deal would far have preferred the mighty Dollar.
BUT
Where does one get Dollars?
Could it be that the Swimming Senator and others allowed/encouraged/enabled a certain group to raise funds from the US public?
It may be that in saying no more about this we could bring the US on-side with our fight against terrorism.
Not so BTW.
Many IEDs in Afghanistan are dismantled. Where is the Afghans' explosive purchased?

Out of interest, what exactly is Ed Balls supposed to be doing these days? Isn't he childrens or schools secretary or something? With all due respect (of which there's very little, admittedly) what's it got to do with him anyway?

Perhaps Bob Ainsworth could start commenting about the decline of exam standards? Or maybe telling us how much capital gains tax he paid after flipping his house expenses? ;)

If nothing else, this demonstrates yet again how spectacularly out of contral Gordon Brown is over this and every other situation. Currently we're not so much under the leadership of a government, we're watching the beginning of the next Labour party leadership campaign. I just wish they'd at least have the decency to call an election so we'd be put of of our misery and they could just get on with it.

266 days to go I think!

Unfortunately the Government is now approaching meltdown, they have lost the goodwill of the press and every single decision is being dissected by the media.

I dare say many of these behind the scenes deals are common place in any administration, where what you say publicly differs to what goes on behind the scenes.

I do not defend the governments as I think their handling of this has been spectacularly inept but the prospect of another 9 months of this perpetual nit picking before the next election is just depressing.

Given whatever a Minister or Government Aide says on any subject turns out to be Balls, with hindsight Mr Brown's silence re al-MeGrahi may just have been the right strategy!

So much for our so called "ethical foreign policy", far from any sort of consistent approach, the government are absolutely all over the place on this one.

Ed Balls would not have spoken out without his masters approval, though I am not sure what his comment actually tells us. As for Gordon Brown's new found support for IRA victims, lets see what actually happens. With Gordon Brown, you have to watch what he does, as opposed to what he says. I doubt that the results of the apparent "U-turn" or whatever will actually amount to very much in real terms - they never do.

The old saying "you do not kick a dog when it is down" clearly does not apply to the SNP Scottish Justice Secretary who is now thinking about releasing the confidential papers relating to the Megrahi trial subject to the permission of witnesses who made statements. Thanks to the Labour party's arch enemies this story will run and run, even if cabinet Ministers are gagged and there is no chance of that with this shower.

These are desperately sad days for a once great nation. Even a change of government will find it very hard to be taken seriously in a banana republic let alone the developed world.

So this government, after opening the jails and releasing those who were responsible for the terrorism in Northern Ireland (in the name of peace), are now proposing to help the victims gain compensation from the people the terrorists bought their explosives from...??

Well, that makes sense...

At the risk of sounding crude and out of touch with certain elements of this country...

Such avarice. Grief distorted by greed. A shameful sight - witnessing once grieving families now clamouring for millions. Blood money.

Is anyone else disgusted by this? I don't particularly care if Libya supplied semtex or munitions. The IRA used the semtex and the bullets - not the Libyans.

The faux-indignant act of asking for compensation from Libya for supplying materials to maim and kill would be on par with East Timor massacre survivors suing the UK government for its arms deals with Indonesia. Or as some have pointed out - the US citizens responsible for bankrolling the purchase.

I've lost close family in unfair and unjustified circumstances before - but never once did money motivate me to get answers. These individuals seeking to exploit the deaths of their kin in return for riches are beneath contempt. I have no pity for them.

And to cap it off, the premise of asking the Libyans to show (financial) compassion in reciprocation for the release of al-Megrahi is a false one. Scotland made the decision, not the UK - as so many on this board love to point out. It's fair to note then that no Libyan procured IRA semtex was ever used against a Scottish Target. The Libyans owe the rest of the UK nothing.

The electorate are weary, this government is inconsistent, confusing and lack integrity.

This saga merely demonstrates once again that the Labour administration is run by unprofessional oppportunists desperate for survival.

The nation weeps.

"These individuals seeking to exploit the deaths of their kin in return for riches are beneath contempt. I have no pity for them." GAberdeen.

Very charitible of you. Suppose you knew a widow who'd lost her husband in a terrorist attack and had children to bring up and no income to do it with.

Clearly you'd feel comfortable telling her she was beneath contempt for trying to gain some compensation and that you had no pity for her? What a lovely person you sound.

Seems that Balls has Ballsed it up again.



Ba dum chh

I can potentially understand the deal done for Megrahi for compassion and the potential trade but why can't any of them be straight with the people? We're not idiots. The whole thing smells worse now that we know a bit more, and I am sure there is more to come. Plus Gaddafi Jnr lecturing our politicians to stop scoring cheap points is a bit of a joke really - a dictator's son who doesn't allow any political discussion is really not the person to tell our politicians what they can and cannot talk about.

Tragically the UK standing on the international stage is right at the bottom of the pit. I doubt there are many countries in the world who look so duplicitous right now. This should bring the government down but unfortunately it won't

Cuckoo-Cuckoo-Cuckoo. This cloud laden land is where the Prime Minister lives and will continue to do so. That is until either the next election or when his party dumps him.

Al the pontificating in the world will not change matters; so either live with it or do something about it. May I suggest that action is required. We all can moan but little will be done about moans - direct action is required and now.

I feel the BBC and other news media are sadly trying to make something out of nothing. The release al-Megrahi was sanctioned by the Scottish Government not by the UK government, supported by Nelson Mendela - can't the media just let it go - no, they have to keep gnawing away at nothing until it turns into something of nothing.

Al Megrahi probably (I say probably) was a minor player in the Lochkerbie bombing as evidence mounting seems to be showing and was probably a sacrificial lamb to the slaughter. The advance of Libya to the side of the west is something that needs to be encourgaged for the future of world peace and the needless picking away by the BBC and others to discourage this important Libyian movement needs to be curtailed in some way - help the friendship dont discourage it. What ever you may think of Gaddaffi and Co. needs to be played down - time is a great changer and healer and when Gaddaffi goes, I feel the son will encourage a less dictatorial and more democratic arrangement.

Even now he is offering a compromise through the courts.

I find the attacks on Gordon Brown and other Labour front benchers on this blog frankly to be by persons who are not living in the real world. Gordon Brown (I believe)is a good man with the country and its people at heart. He is a social democrat and reformer and an intelligent, intuitive man along with most of his front bench including (yes) Lord Mandelson and Ed balls. Unfortunately Gordon and Co have had to contend with the most difficult world times I can think of in the last 40 years with the 'credit crunch', Mps expenses and the wars in Afganistan and Iraq. I feel, given the difficulties he has done a pretty good job.The phrase you can please some of the people some of the time but definitely not all the people all the time come to mind. Would the Torys if they were in power really have have done anything different?

If you want a tory front bench of 'old etonian millionaires'in power - all well and good, but to the majority of UK citizens this will be a catasrophe of gigantic proportions. It will be another round of slash and burn like past tory governments. You just have to look at the culture of Mps expenses where David Cameron and George Osborne (both Millionaires in their own right) chose to almost max out their mortgage allowances $21000 and £18000 respectively on their second homes. David Cameron has a £750000 constituency home in Oxfordshire and a similarly valued home in London. George Osbourne sold his second home in London for £1.45 million in 2006 after letting the taxpayer pay a considerable amount of the mortgage.

These are seriously rich people who want nothing more than a return to victorian values where a poor majority pay hommage to a rich elite and have little care about what happens below. Is this what the UK public want in power?

The Labour party has done reasonably well in very very diffcult times. I admire them and long may they continue

...It is all but certain that the Libyan would have won his release through the courts. Scotland has therefor done a great service to those who have failed to secure the well-being of us all.
As I suspect that Libya played no part in the Lockerbie bombing they have long-awaited their pay back.
#33 GAberdeen.
I, a Scot, lived (do live) in London during the bombing campaign of the 70's and used some of the pubs that were bombed. That the wrong people were consistantly imprisoned for these and other attacks re-doubles the harm to the common-weal; to now bring the whole thing down to money proves that the democracy we export is matched by the import of blood-money deals and much else of the culture of the countries we 'conquer'.

Will there be the same demands placed upon the people of America who funded the purchase of the bombs and welcomed the bombers with celebrations and open arms

We now appear to be ruled not by Brussels but by Ghadaffi.

Hey Balls, why did you not say this the day the Lockerbie (mass murderer) bomber was released?

#39 sweene1j

Gordon Brown's motivations are not the issue at hand here, I've no doubt that he is intelligent (up to a point) and that he wants to make a difference and make things better. The issue is that he's terrible at doing so and has demonstrated this pretty much every time he's made a decision or opened his mouth to give a statement.

Your comments regarding the Tories, however, just demonstrate that you gauge your opinions based on partizan jealousy, bordering on cliche.

do you honestly believe that no-one in or connected to the Labour government gotten rich as a result of them being in power? Wake up.

39#

May I refer you to Sean Woodward, Geoffrey Robinson and Eric Joyce to name but three, when it comes to maxing out expenses. Whilst the conservatives are hardly saints, the Labour benches arent either. Oh, and Geoff Hoon as well, who has managed to acquire a property portfolio of over 1m GBP whilst being a Labour minister.

And with regards to paying homage to a rich elite with no regard for what happens below - what do you think has been happening for the last 12 years?

I understand you having Labour principles at heart, fair enough - but playing the class warrior card on the electorate is a dead donkey. Especially when you happen to have selective myopia with regard to what is happening on your own Labour government benches.

At least they are all singing off the same hymn sheet.

Hymn number 538

Onward multifaith and secular soldiers
marching as to a war we must continue because I have asked myself and it's right
With the Cross of the postal vote
Carrying all before...

With apologies to Sabine Baring-Gould

#39 sweene1j

I take it that your post was in jest?

As an aside you mention Jason McCue's closeness to Brown - via his wife. Last week someone else was commenting on the number of ex ministers and pals of Labour who step into highly paid jobs in quangos , think tanks and so on. I think all of these connections and networks are interesting. New Labour have made themselves the new establishment.We in Scotland have had this for some time.The Labour aristocracy were the likes of the Alexanders, Brown and all the cronies.They all know each other, give each other jobs and spread across society, the media etc.There's definitely a good story in there for someone who's not in the magic circle.

Perhaps a delegation from the government can also go to the USA and negotiate IRA victims' compensation for their raising of funds for the IRA which went on to buy the Semtex in the first place. Of course we also want to keep the USA on side in opposition to terrorism now they have exited the axis of evil.

Nick,

I thought that Jack Straw originally said that he would not release Ronnie Biggs and that he should serve his full term in prison. He then changed his mind and on compassionate grounds Ronnie Biggs was released. He is still alive, as far as I am aware, as is the convicted Libyan terrorist. I hope that these people could die within the next few weeks or months. In the meantime I would ask people to check with their local PCT and find out if there is a limit as to when they will admit people to a hospice, or Nursing Home. I think that you will find that they have experts who will more or less guarantee that the individual will not live for longer than six weeks. Just ask, you will be surprised at the answer.

Please note that I used to be a member of the local Community Health Council, and was also on the local PCTs Clinical Governance Committee!

#38 b-b-Jack

Action! Encourage neighbours to vote, vote, vote.

#39 sweene1j

"The Labour party has done reasonably well in very very diffcult times. I admire them and long may they continue."

Self inflicted wounds; each and every one!
I agree the Tories would have done no better.
There is an alternative. We may be spoiled for choice there.
Vote independent!
DO NOT VOTE Red, Blue or Beige. Get them ALL out reclaim the very basis of democracy. We should all feel thoroughly ignored and irrelevent to this mob and the rest and resist them. "People power!"

#39 sweene1j hum you seem to be saying that in general its good to talk as in the end this is the only thing that brings peace. And that is a good aspect of this governement. We then lets apply you logic to issues
close to home about them being good people etc.

Lets take the family courts for the whole of there period in power they have sort to smear and undermine anybody that has darred to speak out at the abuses and an ever increasing toll of deaths that have occurred in there secrecy. and there is nothing that needs to be fixed with the system.

I think you are viewing them through rose tinned glasess. there only mode of operation is to keep themselves in power at ALL costs, never ,mind what happens to people lifes in the process.

#27 "what exactly is Ed Balls supposed to be doing these days?"

It looks like he's still mad at not getting made Chancellor in June!

Heard Balls on r4 this morning trying desperately to spin, so they must be quaking now that the full game is up

The holidays don't appear to have been kind to Brown either, he looks even more tired and his speech doesn't seem to be able to be raised above a monotone

Have just seen elsewhere that Nadine Dorries has served court papers on Damian McBride and Dolly Draper over their smears. Could that actually haunt the Labour Party conference?

39. At 12:40pm on 07 Sep 2009, sweene1j wrote:



I find the attacks on Gordon Brown and other Labour front benchers on this blog frankly to be by persons who are not living in the real world.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Oh my giddy aunt, it is incredibly scarey the utter denial from Labour apologists to ever see any fault in their Party

@ 39

If you want a Clown front bench of 'old etonian millionaires' in power - all well and good, but to the majority of UK citizens this will be a catastrophe of gigantic proportions

mmm ... a grisly prospect, isn't it?

I've just recently been trying out this new video game ... "What a Tory Landslide means for the Average Citizen!" it's called, rather snappily ... and it's an XXX rated top shelf jobbie, believe you me

What happend to Brown's "moral compass"? He won't talk to the Taliban and save our soldiers from being killed in a futile war, because he says he doesn't negotiate with terrorists. Yet he is happy to sell out IRA victims to another terrorist in Tripoli in exchange for a trade deal!

This treacherous man is a disgrace to Britain. He belongs in The Tower, not Downing Street!

`Tony Blair diplomatically embraced Colonel Gaddafi on his visit to Tripoli in 2004'

Have you seen the film of that embrace? Talk about embarrasing. Tony did the embracing whilst the Colonel held back. Tony seemed so ....enthusiastic?

It appears now that he did not go to Libya with a list of demands but to grovel. Why?

#39sweene Suggest you stick to the hair dressing barbers shop forum.But keep an eye out for sherlock homes as I'm sure you will no doubt come under his jurisdiction.

55. At 1:22pm on 07 Sep 2009, sagamix wrote:
@ 39

If you want a Clown front bench of 'old etonian millionaires' in power - all well and good, but to the majority of UK citizens this will be a catastrophe of gigantic proportions

mmm ... a grisly prospect, isn't it?

I've just recently been trying out this new video game ... "What a Tory Landslide means for the Average Citizen!" it's called, rather snappily ... and it's an XXX rated top shelf jobbie, believe you me

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yeah, there is a game i've been trying out about the last 12 years of Lbour rule and the prospect of another 4 years it's called ... Hell on Earth

In government serious decisions have to be taken and sometimes situations change in the national interest. But this Prime Minister seems incapable of explaining the options and explaining why he takes the decisions he does. Instead he ducks and dives, spins and maneuvers and ultimately treats us all like idiots - incapable of dealing with the truth. I for one would do not agree with the decision to free this convicted terrorist, but I could have much more faith and trust in a Prime Minister who explained his position honestly and stopped treating us like children.

"I've just recently been trying out this new video game ... "What a Tory Landslide means for the Average Citizen!" it's called, rather snappily ... and it's an XXX rated top shelf jobbie, believe you me"

Sagamix

Excellent. Scare tactics backed up by nothing in particular. Why not warn that the Tories plan to put a horrible monster under everyone's bed when they come to power?

Since I work hard, have a decent job and don't claim any benefits, I rather suspect I'll be better off under the Tories than I would be under Labour. Who knows, perhaps this will encourage others to put themselves in the same position. Or we could carry on with a benefits system that sees millions of people better off doing nothing while millions of foreign nationals come here and do the jobs that the lazy indiginous say don't exist.

#39 sweene1j

Are you a product of labours 'education, education, education' by any chance?

Out of interest, not that I expect a reply from the BBC moderators, can anyone shed any light on why two posts of mine to this thread have been completely deleted??

Both were on topic; were not in any way offensive, derogatory, or libellous; and didn't contain any foul language...

Are posts simply now removed without any reason??

"Every time I hear of a casualty, I ask myself is it right that other people die for political goals I would not put myself in danger to achieve and the answer is yes"

#39
This is a glowing endorsement for a government that stepped willingly into two middle east wars and then sleepwalked into a huge financial crisis. Brown began his career as chancellor by saying that boom and bust was over, and single handedly undermined the final salary pension structure - the results of which we see today. Brown is not simply a nice man to whom a lot of nasty things have happened, but he is the author of our current, and his own, predicament.

I can appreciate that perhaps you have been on a space mission to Jupiter for the last 12 years or so, but even a Martian, fresh from his home planet, would recognise that Brown's influence on the economy has led us into the biggest financial mess the country has ever seen - and he has no idea how to get out of it other than bluster that government spending will continue and there will be no cuts - except by the Tories - and that his intervention has somehow created 500,000 new jobs!!

He's not being truthful or even attempting to be truthful.

Open your eyes - we are in the middle of a disaster now, we do not need a change of government to create one.

Semtex isnt dangerous. Its the use of it that is dangerous.

Can I claim compo from BMW because I was knocked from my motorcycle by some dozy mare who bought a one series? Surely they are at fault for providing such a weapon to someone cleary not capable of either indicating or using mirrors before switching lanes.

Or perhaps I can sue the DofT for not imprinting Mirror Signal Manouever on her brain effectively enough.

Next stop, we owe a fortune to Dresden for Mr Harris's indescretion, But dont worry that claim is against Messr's A V Roe for providing the means of hauling all those incedaries

"ghostworld wrote:
39. At 12:40pm on 07 Sep 2009, sweene1j wrote:

I find the attacks on Gordon Brown and other Labour front benchers on this blog frankly to be by persons who are not living in the real world.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Oh my giddy aunt, it is incredibly scarey the utter denial from Labour apologists to ever see any fault in their Party"

Perhaps the poster is one of the under 24s year olds that Gordon has been trying to find jobs for. The only question is does the tax payer pick up the wages for the new role or does the Labour party?

28. At 12:04pm on 07 Sep 2009, meninwhitecoats wrote:

"I do not defend the government as I think their handling of this has been spectacularly inept but the prospect of another 9 months of this perpetual nit picking before the next election is just depressing."

All the more reason why this country desperately needs a General Election sooner rather than later. This Autumn would be fine.

Nick,

Good points. As you comment:

"So why does the victims' lawyer insist it is not, in fact, a U-turn? In part, it's because Brown said then, and still says now, that he will not engage directly with Gaddafi to get compensation - that, he insists, would not be "appropriate".

I find the whole thinking pattern of this mob quite extraordinary.

Why was it "appropriate" to negotiate a Prisoner Transfer Arrangment. when there was only one significant Libyan prisoner held in the UK?

It seemed it was "appropriate" for the US government to lean on Libya for compensation for the Lockerbie victims. They assumed Libyan responsibility and Gaddafi coughed up - although there have been rumblings about the broad culpability for years.

So why should it be "inappropriate" for the UK to attempt to squeeze out payments for victims of IRA bombs using Libyan-provided Semtex? I've never seen any serious rebutal of the idea that the Libyans did supply those explosives.

And why is it suddenly a good idea to have a working group within the FO to provide support, when it was not offered previously?

Given that Brown also distanced himself from any genuine on-going Government anger about the bombings or support for potential legal action, it's hardly likely to frighten Gaddafi into submission, is it?

It simply looks like a bunch of people jumping around from one ice-floe to another, depending on the perceived depth of public irritation.

Not a way to run a country...

AndyC555 wrote:
"Every time I hear of a casualty, I ask myself is it right that other people die for political goals I would not put myself in danger to achieve and the answer is yes"

Interesting quote, who said it?

#55 Saga

A landslide victory for either side is undesirable but surely a change of government is not only desirable but essential if some of these problems are going to be worked through?

The press will dog this administration all the way through to the next election and beyond in the unlikely event they hang on to power - it is just time for a change now and is a necessary correction of the balance of policy.

If you listen to the transcript of this interview it sounds like Ed Balls is trying desperately to smear the tories for their position on this rather than say anything useful about what the governemnt or Gordo Brown actually believe.

What is it about newlabour MPs that makes them roputinely troty out the line 'the tories are playing politics with this issue'.

Wake up Ed Balls; this is politics and you are supposed to be a politician - evidently not a very good one.

Call an election this shower are worse than useless.

#39 ack to control permission to open fire.Tracer or he?

@ 39 & @55

Ahhh, the old ‘anti wealth, anti public school’ ploy. A charge that can never be levelled at Labour, their current Deputy leader and previous leader to name but two aside.

What this sorry mess is telling me is that there is not one single ‘Statesman’ n ‘respected political or government leader’ (or woman to be PC) in our current government. And at a time like this we NEED a statesmanship not politics.

Who was it (Tony Blair I think - I’m sure someone will put me right if not), who said a year or so before leaving office that Gordon Brown ‘was not temperamentally suited to being the Prime Minister’. How right they were.

However, as much as I despise Gordon Brown and his government, I genuinely don’t believe he is a liar. He may say things that are not true, but, I believe he has always convinced himself that what he is saying is the truth. Could this be the ‘temperamental unsuitability’ that was being referred to?

The upshot of all this is that we now have a Government that very few people in the Country believe (and heaven forbid, probably in other national governments too), even when they are telling the truth. Every statement is taken ‘with a pinch of salt’ and every re-evaluation of the situation (which any good government should do) is seen as a ‘U-turn’.

We as a nation are left in limbo until after the next election – I wish Gordon Brown would just ‘do the right thing’ and call one.

How did the Britain allow itself to let one man, Gordon Brown, to single-handedly, ruin the country?". How could we have been so stupid!!! Now he had a lot of help with Blair but half the reason New Labour has ultimately failed is because Brown was effectively Joint Prime Minister. He controlled all the money and social policies and if he didn't like something it did not happen. Blair was more interested in grandstanding on the world stage but make no mistake about it, Gordon is personally responsible for the current financial situation we are in and is vicariously responsible for the social mess we are in - everything from crime to schools to health ultimately all lead back to him - he should arrested, tried for treason and sentenced to 20 years hard labour (excuse the pun!!) - the man is a joke. He must go and so must all his communist comrades, especially that odious, sorry excuse for a human being - Ed Balls.

An election will only be of use if Parliament is again the hot-house of debate not something to rubber-stamp deals worked out in private as is the case at present.
VOTE non-party and let the work begin.
One day every five years or so 'we the people' get our one chance to elect a government that works for us. I know of none like this in the house or partys.
"Up-with-this-we-should-not-put!"

It seems we only have a group of four and the spinhouse left trying to run this country.

Even with so few they still cannot get their act together.

Ed Balls ranting rubbish Gordon Brown trying to be all things to all men and women Byrne well no more to be said about that one and Mandelson who appears to be keeping a discreet silence over the Libyan affair. I suppose if Brown didn't do it somebody had to.

Any decent politician that Labour had in cabinet has now gone so there is no-one left to give any credibility to anything they say.

Perhaps it's time we had a new reformed Labour party. Minus the gang of four.

"Up-with-this-we-should-not-put" Can i take it that your head is in material then? #76

Michel`s`Iron Law of Oligarchy` commented on socialist politicians who embrace the values of their class of destination by acquiring property and wealth.Plus ca change...
Is this the price we pay for innovation?
Elites like Mr.Cameron and Mr.Osborne,affiliated to a traditional ruling class, tend to retard social and economic change because they and their class have nothing to gain by it.
Mrs Thatcher was a hybrid: Economically radical and socially conservative,her ideas were those of a provincial lower-middle class of a pre-Keynesian generation;small state,limited welfare and self reliance.Mr.Osborne`s current flirtation with these ideas is not nostalgia but a dangerous misunderstanding of the function of the state in an capitalist crisis.
The Libyan business becomes more complex,and the back story is more interesting than the headlines.
A control order has just been lifted on a man whose family are affiliated to a dissident group opposed to Mr.Gaddafi.The order can no longer be enforced because the government cannot bring evidence to his appeal on intelligence grounds!
Events cast a long shadow.

#78 quietoldinthetooth

Cloth-capitalism?

49. T A Griffin (TAG).

Sorry, I think you are barking up the wrong tree here.
You would be better off looking into the significance of the 3 months period &, more importantly, who paid the Doctors involved & how much they where paid?
Seems an increasing number of people appear to have been paid off in this whole sorry affair.

39. sweene1j:

And of course we don’t have any Ex Public School boys on the front benches of a Labour Government do we?
Heaven forbid that the former Vicar builds up a significant property portfolio that was worth a darn site more than the examples you are giving.
I notice that things got rather quiet in the Vicarage during the expenses scandal as well. Wonder why?
Time to get real, the Labour Party sold out years ago & the whole Libya fiasco is just another example of their spin & lies.
Like the US, the UK is only too happy to sell victims out if it
furthers their cause.
Trouble is, Brown still doesnt understand that if you are in a hole you cant get out of, the very least you can do is stop digging.
Still, its nice to see that he can still jump when the Sun says so.

Dead Man Walking.

As a Palestinian, I would love the UK govt to seek or back compensation for IRA victims from Libya. It would mean millions of Palestinians like me can take a class action against the UK govt for 1) creating Israel and displacing us 2) providing Israel with weapons since creation wchi have been used to terrorize us.

Brown is clearly not bothered what the electorate thinks, but is there no one in the Monster Raving Labour Party with the integrity to tell him that HE is the problem and that "getting on with the job" is not the solution?

C555 @ 61

Why not warn that the Tories plan to put a horrible monster under everyone's bed when they come to power?

well funnily enough, Andy, the game I'm talking about ... this WATLMFTAC! ... does feature pretty much exactly that - there's this Thing in what looks like a morning suit and a raffishly loosened bow tie, toting a half swigged bottle of a reasonable vintage, and what it does is it lurks in the houses of people who have "decent jobs" and who think they're all safe and snug, and then it creeps out from under, in the middle of the night, and it starts nicking stuff - only takes a few minutes and everything's gone - hopes, dreams, aspirations, the lot - it's an ultra professional piece of work and when the poor people wake up next morning, the only evidence of what's happened is a faint echo of braying laughter and the merest trace of something sticky on the carpet - nothing obviously serious, then ... not at first ... but before too long, the victims realise they don't feel good - they have the most awful hollow feeling inside - too late by then, of course

(not playing it any more, upsets me too much)

Perhaps now we should now make it a criminal offence for politicians to lie? This government has, in the last 11 years organised politics so that lying as a matter of course to get what you want, at whatever cost, and to whomever, is ethically acceptable. Yes, politicians have always lied to some extent but not on such an organised, methodical wayy. Who do we have to thank for that - another throughly odious man, Alistair Campbell. Nothing and nobody is out of reach. As they say, the end juustify the means. Labour's 'end'? Power, for the sake of power alone. They have only ever had one manifesto pledge from which all other policies flow - "keep the conservatives out". If that means demolishing all parliamentary process and democracy then so be it. I promise you this, they will lie, cheat, steal, break any law, even murder is not beyond this wretched group. And it's not always the ministers, or MPs themselves, it's the fascist left wing activists, the armies of of ideological brain washed fools who can't break free from their student years. Yes, they will do whatever it takes to win the next election. And you can be certain there will be a lot of vote cheating/ballot rigging. It wouldn't even surprise me if they completely changed the rules for the next election - just so long as the Tories don't get back in. I remember that oaf, John Prescott, once responding across the House, smiling and laughing at the same time, "that's if you ever get back into power...". There was a kind of knowing in the way he said as if he knew something we didn't. Perhaps I am giving him too much credit - he is after all probably the worst, and most stupid, cabinet minister in living memory!

"However, as much as I despise Gordon Brown and his government, I genuinely don’t believe he is a liar. He may say things that are not true, but, I believe he has always convinced himself that what he is saying is the truth."

Heh.. not a liar, but may say things that are not true... brilliant. :-)

Go on, convince yourself, you know you want to!

Whassa difference? With apologies to the late Michael Jackson:

"Minky always told me, Be careful what you do
don't go around breaking voters hearts
And Father Always Told Me Be Careful with that moral compass
Be careful of what you do.... Cause The Lie Becomes The Truth"

He's a pathalogical liar. He may not have started out as one, but once he realised it was par for the course for a politician and the way to get on, there was no stopping him. What is a smear if it is not a lie? He and his inner circle have taken smearing and lying to a higher plane, an artform.

73#

"Watch and shoot. At your targets in front, go on. Weapons free"

come on saga and sweene1j lets talk family courts and bady P et al.

I'm ready and willing to defend my status of guilty of love.

you put forward case why they are so great , I put forward a prima example of why they are not.

They talk to gaddafi and the IRA but will not talk to a bunch of fathers why is that then, many of home btw have served in the armed forces that have done the bidding of Zanu-lablour and co. Fit to fight but not fit to be fathers apparently or even allowed to raise issues of democracy in the family courts.

where is you come back then , debate if you are brave enough ?

Post 66, following the same basis of thought could the many thousands that had property damaged and loved ones lost during the blitz claim from Volkswagen or Mercedes Benz as heirs to the German war machine?

We are dealing with semantics here! Sometimes decisions need to be made with a bigger picture view and we have to accept it whether you like it or not and just get on with things. You may not like it but that's the way of the world or we would all be fighting the past rather than trying to move onwards.

I do however find Gordon's bending with the wind both rather sad and also frightening as he clearly seems to move from position to position based on whose position he has heard will serve him best for today rather than the longer term.

The phrase of "in government but not in power" comes to mind yet again.

The man is a liability and must go sooner rather than later.

82#

Yeah, I bet you would, considering how deep the connections ran in the 1970's and 1980s between the Palestinian Liberation Organisation, PFLP-GC and the Provisional IRA.

How do you think the Libyan connection possibly came about??

And the UK didnt create Israel. The United Nations did. There was no such country as Palestine. There was British Mandate Palestine and there was ancient Palestine. Both of which included parts of Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and what is now Israel.

Careful about chucking those big stones when you live in a big glass house, oayche.

UK's unravelling relationship with Libya

Is the UK's relationship with Libya any more ethical, moral and proper than the UK's relationship with China, Zimbabwe, Pakistan, Afghanistan and many other?

It looks to me as if a UK constitution should be drawn up for our politicians to follow?

In the event that our politicians and government cannot be trusted, then surely we need a reserve mechanism to bring them in line - this should be done in Parliament and the House of Lords but the current systems are not giving guidance to our errant government/ representatives.

When our politicians meet with dictators, 'Mr Bigs', big yatch clubs - surely there is a minimum need for full transparency.

Libya could well implode on the transition of power from the 'mad-dog' to his successor(s)?

It all smells like a camels ?

International politics has always been murky.

I expect domestic politicians to be rather opaque when they talk about some matters of diplomacy. Actually, I agree it is sometimes necessary. I don't suppose anybody would have applauded if Winnie Churchill had got up in the HoC and said, "Well, folks, we don't have a snow-flake's chance in hell of getting out of this mess. We don't have the ships, aircraft, weapons, troops, whatever and we don't have the money to fight.. And let's face it, if Great Britain were still joined to mainland Europe, the Germans would have swept in here after they turned over France in six weeks!"

But that was a rather different world!

The problem is that nowadays a blanket of obscurity is pulled down over every aspect of public life. "Selective facts" are mined from any report or study, then carefully polished and presented well before the detailed stuff (which are often less "favourable") is made public.

Glaring blunders are hidden away. Pet projects are provided with massive amounts of money.

Laws are thought up locally - or not blocked in Brussels, which should happen every day - at a rate never previously been seen throughout history. The odd "useful" bits. Lots of heavy-handed, poorly thought through garbage.

For goodness sake, we have 11,000 pages of TAX law! (Now that really is World Leading. No other country has such a massive mess of laws. How can you need such a mass of paper - I thought we were supposed to be going green and not chopping down forests!)

Forget about all the stuff we don't know about that has created 3,000 plus "new" offences defined over the last 12 years...

The UN Alliance forces should just forget about bombs and drop the massive volumes of UK and European laws onto "rogue states".
That would keep them busy for years, as they try to work out why they'd want to become a "developed nation" if that was the result! No self-respecting dictator would try and get away with imposing such a mess of pottage on his/her subjugated people!

I do sympathise with posters who say it's a bit difficult to try and get compensation from Libya for bombs made and set by the IRA. Though I think that "Conspiracy and/or Incitement to murder" remains as an offence on our statute books...
Never been too keen on selling weapons to "doubtful states", but there really is a difference between providing arms to governments recognised by the UN and selling stuff to terrorists.

The big problem seems to be that distinguishing the "good" from the "bad" depends on the point at which you stand before making judgements.

Blair released hundreds of N.I. terrorists, for the "greater good".
No surprise that the odd overseas terrorist - or at least one convicted under Scottish law - pops away.

Strange that people who have been convicted of terrorism in their own countries are allowed to live here and talk whatever stuff they like, because it would infringe their "Human Rights" if they were sent home. I still struggle with that! If you want to fight against tyranny of any sort - I'm with you. But don't abuse the tolerance of people who give you sanctuary.
Just like I struggle with the notion that people convicted of brutal acts within the UK can be given "new identities" at huge public expense so they can live "productive lives".

I have lived a fairly productive life without demanding state aid, and work to help my family. There are times when I'd like a new identity to explore other parts of me. Does "Human Rights" legislation apply to me? Nah. Only for people who have brutalised and shortened the lives of others. Why is that?

For goodness sake, the problem we have as a nation is that politicians believe that THEY have all the answers, but the population is too thick to allow them to share real information. That seems odd, when we've been told for years that people must be more intelligent because so many get wonderful GCSE and A level results and millions go on to uni...

That's a bit of a sad post. It's really on-topic, unlike a lot of stuff on here, so I can't see why it should be moderated out or referred.

I don't really care which party makes up a government. I was amazed when New Labour became so enthralled with the financial sector, until I realised that there was a lot of tax-take on offer. Funny that, when the tax-stream slowed there was a sudden change of heart. Wonder why?

Yes, great blog Nick, and some great comments. But all I can say. reading through the whole seedy saga is that I have an overwhelming feeling of disgust at the behaviour of those in power. Great Britain really is now firmly in the gutter of international diplomacy. All I can see, from any coverage, at any angle, is self seeking politicians, nary a one of them has shown any care at all for their country. Brown is wriggling like a cut snake, Straw is baring all, but only in order to save himself. Balls is hysterically transparent in his "Support" for the boss (Whilst being brilliantly and totally off message!) Salmond displays no interest in Soctland whatsoever, just furthering his own aims.

What a sad, sorry, despicable bunch they all are. I am ashamed to be British

Yet again Brown is chasing the toilet paper, long after the Andrex puppie has ran off with it, leaving Brown with nothing to clear up the mess with.

Can someone just clarify though, does giving "diplomatic support" actually mean that he will support them financially, or set up some group to help them, or is it just another meaningless phrase?

#75 brownkilledbritain - "How did the Britain allow itself to let one man, Gordon Brown, to single-handedly, ruin the country?". How could we have been so stupid!!! "

Because a significant minority will vote Labour, irrespective of how incompetent that party is. They do it because they have a chip-on-shoulder class envy, or because they are in receipt of benefits, or because they work for the State, or simply because they would like to be in charge of a Marxist worker's paradise, and don't know that the Comintern collapsed a long time ago. Read sagamix and his fellow-travellers and tell me I'm wrong !

87. Fubar_Saunders wrote:

73#

"Watch and shoot. At your targets in front, go on. Weapons free"

=

Or in contemporary terms, Light that sucker up like a christmas tree.

As usual this is a backward looking message board. Whatever the quality of the intentions of Brown and his pals is, their ability to handle any situation is pathetic. For what it is worth, I think Brown is a man who was used to pressurising people in his own pond but is quite incapable of doing the same in the ocean that is the rest of the world. In fact he cannot even stand up to them.

However my concern is the ability of the incoming Tory government do to any better. While the Westminster villagers and the gossips who monitor them failed to note was that before Ed Balls was interviewed William Hague talked tough but was not exactly clear about what he would actually do. He got away with it because he is part of the opposition, but when he is in government comment FOLLOWED by ACTION is required. Of course he is in an awkward position as if he appears too tough he could just frighten the Lybians into giving concessions now and having agreements with Brown, giving him the chance to claim a victory.

Brown bashing is boring and serves no purpose. Watching Cameron and his cronies is what we should be doing. If we start rattling their cage we might make them into a better government. Winning an election by default might get them into government. It will be a better government than our present one, but will it be a good one?

To quote from The Times Online August 22, 2009

"Lord Mandelson steps in over Lockerbie

Lord Mandelson has stated any suggestion of a trade deal over the release of Lockerbie bomber Abdel Baset Ali al-Megrahi is 'offensive'."

Does his lordship have a different interpretation of the truth from the rest of us?

84#

Saga, I've been noticing things like that happening for the last 12 years... do you think I've been "Clowned" by a clone??

fairly @ 92

There are times when I'd like a new identity to explore other parts of me. Does "Human Rights" legislation apply to me?

yes you're covered just like anyone else - if you were deemed to be in danger of potentially lethal, vigilante violence because of ... let me see ... I know yes because of one too many inflamatory blogs, for example, gratuitously attacking Lady Drivers and/or Traffic Wardens ... then you'd get the protection you need - pretty sure you would, anyway