Prince Andrew in who is the idiot who is trying to stop us bribing Johnny Foreigner SHOCK HORROR!

It is impossible to parody this latest nonsense from Prince Andrew… he has beaten me to it himself…. classic stuff from Wikileaks…

WikiLeaks cables: ‘Rude’ Prince Andrew shocks US ambassador

Guardian: Duke railed against France, British anti-corruption investigations into BAE and American ignorance, leaked dispatches reveal

During the two-hour engagement in 2008 at a hotel in the capital, Bishkek, Andrew, who travels the globe as a special UK trade representative, attacked Britain’s corruption investigators in the Serious Fraud Office for what he called “idiocy”.

He went on to denounce Guardian reporters investigating bribery as “those [expletive] journalists … who poke their noses everywhere”.

12 thoughts on “Prince Andrew in who is the idiot who is trying to stop us bribing Johnny Foreigner SHOCK HORROR!

  1. Indeed Baron Goldsmith was involved in calling off the investigations. What with Iraq, it would be interesting indeed if WikiLeaks ever got their hands on the communications between him and Tony Blair. However, given Blair’s tendency to make policy on the hoof (or rather on the sofa) without formal minutes, then that stuff might never appear.

  2. i am absolutely disgusted by this overprivileged twit’s stupidity!

    this is britain ffs. even at his most idiotic, does he really think we would ever seriously consider stopping bribing foreigners! it happened under blair, it is happening as we speak under cameron and it would quite probably continue under a coalition headed by jesus christ and mother theresa(not may).

    the house of lords had brenda the liberal, hoff the brilliant, bingham the nearest thing we had to gandalf (ntm simon brown and rodger who considered the weighty matters with closed eyes part of the time – quite a good metaphor actually) looking into it and with clear evidence of what was going on they STILL decided it was in the national interest to give some third cousin of the saudi royals every damn thing he wanted from piles of gold to the yet warm bodies of 9yr old virgins.

    i reckon andrew needs to read the law reports.

    or get a new colouring book or something.

  3. I rather suspect that Prince Andrew was motivated by the jobs and exports that BAE is responsible for. Old fashioned nationalism of course, and many would say that it’s morally unnacceptable, but I can tell you that a lot of very ordinary people would understand the “don’t rock the boat argument”.

    As unpleasant as the Saudi royal family might be, as with Saddam, I suspect we might not like what would replace it. I’m rather less concerned with rich countries like Saudi Arabia. To my mind, corruption enegendered in poor countries is much more serious – selling arms to poor third world countries is much more harmful, even if not technically corruption. It distorts economic and social priorities.

  4. Thank you. Acceptance of corruption is not novel, but the level of shamelessness disturbs me. Do I wish for a time when deals are made in the shadows?

  5. Ah – the theory of perfectability of human nature. I’m something of a what does the least damage person, especially when it comes to exporting westernj ethics.

    Anyway, the Prince Andrew thing is a side show. I imagine the UK government will have been aware.

    In this case, the real power was with Tony Blair and one suspects his motivations were primarily economic.

  6. I prefer to let market forces operate. That means private companies,such as BAe, are not given export subsidies or any other kind of special treatment.

  7. Market forces are fine – if all the countries play the same. In effect, it’s countries competing; hence all those trade missions. I suspect the common anti-bribery laws across western countries was an attempt to level some of the competitive playing fields. However, at this level there are all sorts of other sweetners that come into play – many of which are at the government bilateral aid level. Hasn’t there been an indication by David Cameron that some of the (increasing) foreign aid budget will be used to promote British commercial interests?

  8. Methinks that HRH’s gravy train ought to have been stopped. Just what good is he doing? IMHO the US Ambassador’ assessement was about as accurate as one can get to being 100% right!

  9. Steve-you don’t need other countries to play fair (i..e. not have trade barriers) to justify free trade for your own country (i.e. it is economically better) . There is plenty of economic literature on this.

    There is little economic rationale in giving special treatment to a private company such as BAe.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>