Saturday, 12 October 2013

Straw slithers out from under his stone

Can you name the most egregious politician in the UK? There are plenty of candidates. Here is one worthy of serious consideration.

Slime forward John Whittaker ‘Jack’ Straw. 

So why him and why now? Is he not yesterday’s man? 

Sadly, slimy Jack keeps popping up in the media going on about ‘security’ and ‘official secrecy.’ His latest offering came yesterday: 
“The Guardian has shown "extraordinary naivety and arrogance" over the publication of articles based on NSA  documents leaked by the US whistleblower Edward Snowden, the former foreign secretary Jack Straw has said.
Straw, who was foreign secretary at the time of the Iraq war in 2003, said the Guardian was wrong to assume that it could judge whether details from the files would pose a threat to anyone's security. The Guardian has said that it is taking care not to publish documents that would threaten national security or the security of individuals.
The former foreign secretary told the BBC: "I'm not suggesting for a moment anybody in the Guardian gratuitously wants to risk anybody's life. But what I do think is that their sense of power of having these secrets and excitement – almost adolescent excitement – about these secrets has gone to their head.
"They're blinding themselves about the consequence and also showing an extraordinary naivety and arrogance in implying that they are in a position to judge whether or not particular secrets which they have published are not likely to damage the national interest, and they're not in any position at all to do that." Guardian 11/10/13

Fair comment some might think. But can this be the same slimy Jack who back in April this year was citing ‘official secrets’ as the reason why he could not possibly defend his action to render to Libya two enemies of Gaddafi? It surely can.

Former foreign secretary Jack Straw and Sir Mark Allen, a former senior MI6 officer, have said they cannot respond to allegations of conspiracy in the torture of a prominent Libyan dissident, pleading the need to protect official secrets.
They do not deny being involved in rendering Abdel Hakim Belhaj into the hands of Gaddafi’s secret police in 2004 but say they did nothing unlawful.
Their blanket refusal – and that of MI6, MI5, the Foreign Office, and the Home Office – to explain their alleged role in the seizure of Belhaj and his wife in Malaysia and their flight to Libya on a CIA jet is contained in court documents seen by the Guardian.” April 2013

This was apparently all part of the deal to get Gaddafi back into the fold – and at the same time give BP access to all that lovely Libyan oil. What’s a little rendition and torture between friends?

Since April it has all gone quiet. Very quiet. 

Just like the Chilcott Inquiry into the Iraq War. Remember that? It seems ‘official secrecy’ is proving more than useful in preventing the learned judge from getting access to the necessary cabinet papers thereby preventing him from coming to a clear and transparent judgement about the biggest foreign policy fiasco in the modern era. 
These slimy, mendacious, nasty bastards would rather no-one knew anything about their skullduggery.

Then they can continue to appear on the media with their ‘elder statesman’ persona unchallenged and their self-serving comments demanding their dirty washing stays hidden.

And continue to take their thirty pieces of silver from arms dealers and oil barons.

No comments:

Post a Comment