'LSE criticised for links with Gaddafi regime in Libya'

The BBC report that:

'The London School of Economics has been heavily criticised for a "chapter of failures" in its links with the Gaddafi regime in Libya.

A report by former Lord Chief Justice Lord Woolf says mistakes and errors of judgement damaged the LSE's reputation.

The school's director, Sir Howard Davies, resigned in March over a £1.5m gift from a foundation led by Colonel Gaddafi's son Saif, a former student.

The LSE says it accepts all Lord Woolf's recommendations.'

Will there be a government sponsored enquiry into the links between senior British politicians and Saif Gaddafi? Maybe it could start by looking at the dealings, both personal and business, of Peter Mandelson and Tony Blair.

Will Saif Gaddafi spill the beans?

If Saif Gaddafi ever goes on trial I wonder if he will shed some light on the business relationships he is reputed to have had with Tony Blair, Peter Mandelson and others. Alex Masterley has his own question:

'One of the more interesting asects of the upcoming trial of Saif-al Islam Gaddhaffi will be if we find out whether in 2006 former Prime Minister Blair became an adviser to the Libyan Investment Authority, a £40 billion fund established by the Gaddafis. '

Interesting...

Saif Gaddafi's connections with New Labour and the liberal elite glossed over

'However, at one time he was considered one of the more liberal of Col Gaddafi's sons and was courted in the West.'

That's the only line alluding to Saif Gaddafi's previous courting by such as Peter Mandelson and the LSE in the BBC article about his arrest. Somehow I think if it was a bloodthirsty tyrant who had previously associated with leading Conservative politicians the BBC's coverage would be less muted.

And I thought I had a low opinion of Peter Mandelson and his links to the Libyan Gaddafi regime!

My recent posts about Peter Mandelson's links to Colonel Gaddafi's Libyan regime have been plentiful (most recently here) but Alex Masterley has written a piece, delightfully, entitled 'Like a fly on a dung heap' that is even more hard-hitting. Do read it all although bear in mind that I couldn't possibly agree with all that he says in the article.

Peter Mandelson and Libya

The links between Peter Mandelson and Libya just keep on appearing, yesterday hidden away in a report in The Telegraph (I have the newspaper and it's on page 19) entitled 'LSE feared snubbing Gaddafi son's money' was this line:

'Yesterday it emerged that the Government has decided to suspend a deal struck for Lord Mandelson for every British university to be twinned with a Libyan counterpart within five years.'

I'll repeat the salient part of that just for emphasis '... a deal struck for Lord Mandelson for every British university to be twinned with a Libyan counterpart within five years.'

So Peter Mandelson decided that every British University should be twinned not with an American, French, German or even Indian University but with a Libyan University; why? Why the special treatment for Libya? Did Peter Mandelson not realise the sort of regime he was dealing with; a regime that had murdered thousands of its own people and many foreigners, a regime that had murdered a British policewoman on the streets of London, a regime that had funded terrorists including the IRA and therefore was linked to deaths of British soldiers, police and civilians, a regime linked closely to the Lockerbie bombing. Did Peter Mandelson not know this history or did he not care?  Why was Peter Mandelson so keen to help Libyan links with the UK?

The links between Peter Mandelson and Libya clearly need investigating in depth. In fact there seem to be quite a few questions surrounding some of Peter Mandelson's political dealings during the 1990s and 2000s whilst near the top of both the UK and EU governments, I am sure he would cooperate fully with any investigation so as to clear his name.

The BBC hiding Labour links to Saif Gaddafi

The BBC claim to report on 'Gaddafi's son Saif's ties to LSE and Britain' but being the BBC the links with Labour are downplayed. There is quite a lot about the links between Saif Gaddafi and the London School of Economics (LSE) but although the BBC report the words of Professor David Held two years ago: "I've come to know Saif as someone who looks to democracy, civil society and deep liberal values for the core of his inspiration.", oddly enough there is no mention of the close links between Professor David Held and Ed Miliband. Are the BBC unaware of these links or just trying to hide them from their viewers and readers? If they claim the former, then could I suggest they read my recent piece that explains the close links that they have not reported. I am more inclined to believe the latter explanation, especially as the BBC manage to mention Lord Desai in the piece without informing its readers that he has been active in the British Labour Party, becoming Chairman between 1986 and 1992 and was made a Labour life peer as Baron Desai in 1991. The BBC do manage to mention Peter Mandelson's past association with Saif Gaddafi but only near the end of the article and without using the words Labour Peer.

It seems that the BBC are actively hiding the links between the Libyan regime, in the person of Saif Gaddafi, and the Labour party's leader Ed Miliband. As I mused last week 'That's the BBC for you; facts are less important than ensuring the narrative is maintained and that Labour gets back into power as soon as possible. Is it possible to find anyone to support the BBC over this editorial decision?' I received no replies supportive of the BBC's editorial decision last week and I doubt that I will today.

Imagine the BBC's reaction if...

Imagine the headlines on the BBC news website if links with Libya's rulers had been uncovered between not only John Major, Nigel Lawson & Ken Clarke but also David Cameron. I'm sensing a banner headline along the lines of 'Tory links to Libya's tyrant rulers' and iin depth articles from Michael Crick, Jeremy Bowen and comment from several of the Labour party front bench and Alastair Campbell.

However what has emerged today are links between senior Labour figures and the Libyan regime. Guido reminds us of the already known links between the Gaddafis and Tony Blair & Peter Mandelson (as well as Gordon Brown's government) but also reports this:

'Professor David Held is ghost-writing a big-ideas book for his Dartmouth Park neighbour Ed Miliband, he is also co-director of the London School of Economics’ Centre for the Study of Global Governance. The Centre took £300,000 off Saif Gaddafi. (as I reported a few days ago)

Held also oversaw Saif’s dodgy doctorate which is under great pressure to be revoked. Professor Held chairs the “Special Ralph Miliband Lecture” series and in November 2009 invited Ed to give one in front of his mother. Watch how Ed heaped praise on Held for all the work he has done for his family (the video is on Guido's site)

...

Six months later Held chaired another “Special Ralph Miliband” event, only this time with a slightly higher profile guest. The details have mysteriously been pulled from the LSE website, but Guido can confirm Held welcomed Saif as a “Representative of the Miliband program” with the sort of sycophantic introduction that only a large sum of money can buy:


Guido understands that Held was visiting Saif in Libya only just last week when things began to kick off. When you hear him trying to distance himself from it all in the Guardian, remember he was until last Friday enjoying the regimes hospitality.

Ed Miliband’s ideological lodestar is a professor funded by Gaddafi’s bloody money who says he is friends with Saif. Great judgement…'

So I turn to the BBC to see how they are reporting this story - Not a word. I look to see what their latest Libya headline is and it's this -

'Cameron in Libya response apology - Prime Minister David Cameron says he is "extremely sorry" for the delays in getting Britons out of Libya and "lessons will be learned".'

That's the BBC for you; facts are less important than ensuring the narrative is maintained and that Labour gets back into power as soon as possible. Is it possible to find anyone to support the BBC over this editorial decision?

So who was right about Libya?

So who was right about Libya? Those on the left who thought the West could bring Libya back into the international fold as he had ideas that 'have common ground with some of new Labour's' or those on the right who knew he was mad, bad and dangerous to know?


For the former point of view here in the New Statesman in 2006 is Tony Blair's advisor Anthony Giddens who interestingly was also from 1997 to 2003 was director of the London School of Economics and a member of the Advisory Council of the Institute for Public Policy Research:

'Dressed in a brown-gold robe, he cuts an impressive figure. There are no guards or minders in view, and the occasion is a completely informal one. He is instantly recognisable and would be so to a great many people across the world, whatever their feelings about him might be. In a way, it is an extraordinary phenomenon. Libya is a tiny country in terms of population, with only 5.8 million people. Gaddafi's global prominence is altogether out of proportion to the size of the nation he leads. He is now 64, in power since 1969. Rumours abound that he is in failing health, but he looks robust.

You usually get about half an hour when meeting a political leader. My conversation with Gaddafi lasts for more than three. Gaddafi is relaxed and he clearly enjoys intellectual conversa tion. We sit close together and occasionally sip mint tea. He has a tiny notebook in front of him, into which he sometimes makes short scribbled entries. He is not a fidgety person but has a calm, articulate manner, and cracks the odd joke or two as we go along. The only other direct participant is a man who has just flown in from New York, apparently especially to do the translation.

Gaddafi speaks some English, and occasionally during the encounter makes comments to me directly. But, for most of the time, we converse through the translator. Gaddafi is interested in the debates and policies involved in social democracy in Europe, which is the reason he has invited me. He likes the term "third way", because his own political philosophy, developed in the late 1960s, was a version of this idea. It has been written up in the form of The Green Book, authored by Gaddafi, on display almost everywhere in Libya.

...

Our conversation is wide-ranging and "The Leader", as he is universally known in Libya, makes many intelligent and perceptive points. He continually reverts to the ideas of The Green Book, but makes it clear that he wants to adapt and update them. Over the past three or four years, Gaddafi has come in from the cold internationally. He has renounced his support for terrorism and Libya has paid compensation to the families of those killed in the Lockerbie attack. Libya has terminated its nuclear and chemical weapons programmes. In conjunction with Gaddafi's son Saif, a PhD student at the London School of Economics, the British Foreign Office played a large part in producing Libya's re-engagement with the wider world. UN sanctions, which had severely affected the economy, have been lifted, and Libya has been taken off the US list of states that support terrorism.

Gaddafi's "conversion" may have been driven partly by the wish to escape sanctions, but I get the strong sense that it is authentic and that there is a lot of motive power behind it. Saif Gaddafi is a driving force behind the rehabilitation and potential modernisation of Libya. Gaddafi Sr, however, is authorising these processes and retains a strong grip upon the country.Our conversation is wide-ranging and "The Leader", as he is universally known in Libya, makes many intelligent and perceptive points. He continually reverts to the ideas of The Green Book, but makes it clear that he wants to adapt and update them. Over the past three or four years, Gaddafi has come in from the cold internationally. He has renounced his support for terrorism and Libya has paid compensation to the families of those killed in the Lockerbie attack. Libya has terminated its nuclear and chemical weapons programmes. In conjunction with Gaddafi's son Saif, a PhD student at the London School of Economics, the British Foreign Office played a large part in producing Libya's re-engagement with the wider world. UN sanctions, which had severely affected the economy, have been lifted, and Libya has been taken off the US list of states that support terrorism.

Gaddafi's "conversion" may have been driven partly by the wish to escape sanctions, but I get the strong sense that it is authentic and that there is a lot of motive power behind it. Saif Gaddafi is a driving force behind the rehabilitation and potential modernisation of Libya. Gaddafi Sr, however, is authorising these processes and retains a strong grip upon the country.

...

I leave Gaddafi's tent to make the trip back to Tripoli enlivened and encouraged. Libya may be small, but it is a front-line nation in global terms because of its leader's decision to open up to the wider world after years of international isolation, and because of the abolition of its WMD programmes. The country is going in the opposite direction from Iran and North Korea and it is in virtually everyone's interest that this process be sustained. On the way back from the desert to Tripoli, I talk to some of the modernisers working to implement specific policy programmes. I am impressed both by their sophistication and their determination to reform.

...

Much will depend upon Gaddafi himself, as he sits ruminating upon the relevance of his political thinking to current times. He could play a crucial role in easing transition if he decides to support the modernisers. He does seem set on this course, but must use his influence to persuade the doubters - yet perhaps, first of all, he must fully persuade himself.'

There you have one of the left appreciating and trusting a man who is now denounced as a tyrant. Did Anthony Giddens not know in 2006 of the massacres carried out in the name of the Great Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya? Did Anthony Giddens not know of the assassination of Libyan dissidents living abroad in 1980? Did Anthony Giddens not know of the reports that Gaddafi was a major financier of the "Black September Movement" which killed Israeli athletes at the 1972 Berlin Olympics? Did Anthony Giddens not know that Gaddafi was accused by the United States of being responsible for direct control of the 1986 Berlin discotheque bombing that killed three people and wounded more than 200, of whom a substantial number were U.S. servicemen? Did Anthony Giddens not know that British WPC Yvonne Fletcher was shot by someone within the Libyan Embassy whilst she was policing an anti-Gaddafi demonstration outside the Libyan Embassy in London. Did Anthony Giddens not know of Gadaffi's arms shipments to the IRA, arms that were used to kill British soldiers, members of the RUC and British civilians? Did Anthony Giddens not know that Gaddafi was a funder of various Palestinian terrorist organisations? Did Anthony Giddens not know that Libya under Gaddafi had been rated for political rights and civil liberties as "7" meaning "Not Free".

Did Anthony Giddens really not know all of this or did he just not care when he went to Libya to meet a man with blood on his hands and hatred in his heart? Was he more interested in meeting a socialist with his own ideas about a Third Way than thinking about who he was dealing with?


By way of comparison, Ronald Regan saw Gaddafi for what he was, said as much and took action. Of course Ronald Regan was belittled for this, as he was for much else but then the left 'knew' he was a moron, an idiot, a fool...



So who was the fool?

Hello Peter, Hello.

Peter Mandelson seems to be keeping a low profile at the moment, I would have thought he would out and about defending the man that he has previously described as representing a new approach in Libyan politics, Saif Gaddafi. Why so quiet Peter?

While I am on the subject of leftists disowning former friends; has the London School of Economics said anything about their former student and the provider of a £1.5million gift from the Gaddafi International Charity and Development Foundation? Why so shy, LSE?

Does Peter Mandelson read The Telegraph?

This morning's Sunday Telegraph will not make cheery reading for Peter Mandelson. This article claims that Saif al-Islam Gaddafi had a conversation with al-Megrahi on the flight back to Tripoli and that it was recorded:

"In a transcript obtained by The Sunday Telegraph, Mr Gaddafi tells Megrahi: “You were on the table in all commercial, oil and gas agreements that we supervised in that period. You were on the table in all British interests when it came to Libya, and I personally supervised this matter. Also, during the visits of the previous prime minister, Tony Blair.... Frankly, we did a lot of work, secret and public, which involved all parties and took years. The work was constant to get your release.”"

So that's Tony Blair fingered, meanwhile

"Downing Street confirmed last night that Gordon Brown had discussed the possible release of Megrahi with Colonel Gaddafi when the two men met on the fringes of the G8 summit in Italy last month. A letter the Prime Minister sent to the Libyans, dated last Thursday, the day of the release, said: “When we met I stressed that, should the Scottish Executive decide that Megrahi can return to Libya, this should be a purely private, family occasion.”"

So that's Tony Blair and Gordon Brown fingered, now to possibly the slipperiest of the trio who designed New Labour (for what real purpose we may very soon discover), Peter Mandelson. Many have been speculating about Peter Mandelson's links to Libya and this morning The Telegraph make some astonishing claims:

"An investigation by The Sunday Telegraph has disclosed that the Business Secretary’s controversial businessmen friends, Oleg Deripaska and Nat Rothschild, have a closer relationship with Mr Gaddafi than has so far been publicly known:

Earlier this summer Mr Gaddafi hosted a birthday party where the guests included Mr Deripaska, a billionaire Russian oligarch, and Mr Rothschild, a wealthy British financier.

The 37th birthday celebrations took place in Montenegro, a tiny country whose interests have been championed by Lord Mandelson and where Mr Deripaska and Mr Rothschild have substantial business interests.

Late last year Mr Rothschild hosted a party in honour of Mr Gaddafi in New York.

Lord Mandelson has met the Libyan at least twice in the past four months. Last week he admitted to a “fleeting” discussion with Mr Gaddafi about the convicted Lockerbie bomber at the Rothschilds’ family estate in Corfu. It came just days before it emerged that preparations were being made for Megrahi’s release and raised questions from opposition politicians. "

Libya’s talk of trade deals has shone the spotlight on Lord Mandelson, who is facing mounting questions over his links with Mr Gaddafi, 37, the man widely tipped as his country’s next leader."

It is this news that Peter Mandelson has met Saif al-Islam Gaddafi not once but twice in recent months that interests me most. Peter Mandelson's office have stated that re the Corfu meeting the pair spoke only briefly but they did discuss Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi. "There was a fleeting conversation about the prisoner; Peter was completely unsighted on the subject". Maybe a journalist will be brave enough to ask what was discussed at the other meeting with Colonel Gaddafi's son...


So read the whole of The Telegraph article I have quoted from as there are more juicy morsels to savour there. You might also want to read this Telegraph article about the seemingly murky world of Peter Mandelson's friends and contacts.

I wonder if Peter Mandelson might soon have to resign from government for a third time...

Release of al-Megrahi was linked to a trade deal? (update)

Further to last night's piece, Newsnight now have last night's edition on iPlayer and the relevant question is from around 12:12 and runs thus from Gavin Esler:

"I notice, just while we've been on air, from Tripoli, Mr Gray, the son of the Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, Saif al-Islam Gaddafi is saying that this release was linked with trade deals with Britain, is that right?"

You can then watch Iain Gray evade the question and answer a completely different one and Gavin Esler does not press the point on a Labour MSP.


Saif al-Islam Gaddafi is the son of Colonel Gaddafi whose interests include diplomatic roles on behalf of his father and has said that Libya admitted responsibility (but not admitted "guilt") for the Lockerbie bombing simply to get trade sanctions removed.

Saif al-Islam Gaddafi is the son of Colonel Gaddafi who has further admitted that Libya was being "hypocritical" and was "playing on words", but Libya had no other choice on the matter.

Saif al-Islam Gaddaffi is the son of Colonel Gaddafi who has said that a letter admitting "responsibility" was the only way to end the economic sanctions imposed on Libya.

Saif al-Islam Gaddaffi is the son of Colonel Gaddafi who when asked about the compensation that Libya was paying to the victims' families, again repeated that Libya was doing so because it had no other choice.

Saif al-Islam Gaddaffi is the son of Colonel Gaddafi who last night said that this release was linked with trade deals with Britain.

Saif al-Islam Gaddaffi is the son of Colonel Gaddafi who met with Peter Mandelson (currently still Secretary of State for Business, Innovation & Skills and President of the Board of Trade) at that now infamous Corfu villa a week before the release of al-Megrahi was announced.

Saif al-Islam Gaddaffi is the son of Colonel Gaddafi who according to The Independent has played a "decisive role" in "each of the major diplomatic breakthroughs that have brought Libya in from the cold and advanced it to the status of "strategic partner" to the UK... he has been at the centre of the secret accords, trade deals, compensation packages and prisoner exchanges that have marked the country's return to respectability."


Which journalist will be the first to question Peter Mandelson about the claims of Saif al-Islam Gaddaffi? I note that The Telegraph have questioned David Miliband, who as Foreign Secretary has some responsibility in this area, however it is Peter Mandelson who may have more to reveal. As I blogged recently, the Financial Times reported that a spokesman for Peter Mandelson said that

"the pair spoke only briefly but they did discuss Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi. “There was a fleeting conversation about the prisoner; Peter was completely unsighted on the subject,” he said.

...

Lord Mandelson said through his spokesman that he had had no involvement in the decision and only learnt of it through the BBC. Mr Megrahi’s possible release was a decision entirely for the Scottish government rather than London.

“It was entirely coincidental,” the spokesman said. "

Interestingly Peter Mandelson's spokesman denied that his boss and Colonel Gadaffi's son discussed in any depth the release of al-Megrahi, but he was not questioned about the trade deals that link Libya and the UK, were they discussed?


The more I find out about the al-Megrahi "compassionate" release, the more I think that this story has legs and could actually prove to be the downfall of this Labour government. More and more people are beginning to realise quite how this Labour government operates, in the interests of money & power and not of justice and the people don't like it. Maybe soon a point will be reached where enough people feel angry enough that a general election may be forced upon Gordon "courage" Brown and Peter "twice disgraced" Mandelson.

Release of al-Megrahi was linked to a trade deal?

Tonight's Newsnight is claiming that one of Colonel Gaddafi's seven sons is claiming that Mohamed al-Megrahi's release was linked to trade deals. I wonder if Peter Mandelson, one of whose many responsibilities in government is Trade, would like to comment; maybe with reference to his meeting in Corfu with Saif al-Islam Gaddafi (one of Gaddafi's sons).

Another question that needs answering is was the son Newsnight are quoting the same one that Peter Mandelson met?

Wikipedia records re Saif al-Islam Gaddafi that:

"In 1997, he founded the official charity, the Gaddafi International Foundation for Charity Associations, which has intervened in various hostage situations involving Islamic militants... Saif also performs public relations and diplomatic roles on behalf of his father... On December 10, 2004, shortly before a trip by Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin to Tripoli, Saif requested in an interview with The Globe and Mail a formal apology from the Canadian government, for joining U.S.-led sanctions against Libya after the Lockerbie bombing... In an August 2008 BBC TV interview, Saif said that Libya had admitted responsibility (but not admitted "guilt") for the Lockerbie bombing simply to get trade sanctions removed. He further admitted that Libya was being "hypocritical" and was "playing on words", but Libya had no other choice on the matter. According to Saif, a letter admitting "responsibility" was the only way to end the economic sanctions imposed on Libya. When asked about the compensation that Libya was paying to the victims' families, he again repeated that Libya was doing so because it had no other choice. He went on to describe the families of the Lockerbie victims as "trading with the blood of their sons and daughters" and being very "greedy": "They were asking for more money and more money and more money"... Interviewed by French newspaper Le Figaro on December 7, 2007, Saif said that the seven Libyans convicted for the Pan Am Flight 103 and the UTA Flight 772 bombings "are innocent". When asked if Libya would therefore seek reimbursement of the compensation paid to the families of the victims ($2.33 billion), Saif replied: "I don't know." Saif is involved in negotiating compensation from Libya's former colonial power, Italy, and according to prime minister Silvio Berlusconi a bilateral "friendship treaty" is expected to be signed by the end of August 2008. He is also negotiating with the United States in order to conclude a comprehensive agreement making any further payments for American victims of terror attacks that have been blamed on Libya — such as the 1986 Berlin discotheque bombing, the 1988 Lockerbie bombing and the 1989 UTA Flight 772 bombing — conditional upon U.S. payment of compensation for the 40 Libyans killed and 220 injured in the 1986 United States bombing of Tripoli and Benghazi""

I think the al-Megrahi release story has legs as more facts emerge could actually prove to be the downfall of this Labour government. More and more people are beginning to realise quite how this Labour government operates and they don't like it. Maybe a point has been reached where enough people feel angry enough that a general election may be forced upon Gordon "courage" Brown and Peter "twice disgraced" Mandelson.

"entirely coincidental" I am sure

The FT reports that:

"Lord Mandelson met Colonel Gaddafi’s son at a Corfu villa only a week before the announcement that the perpetrator of the Lockerbie bombing could be released from prison...

Saif al-Islam Gaddafi, widely seen as the Libyan leader’s most likely successor, was a fellow guest of the Rothschild family at its Greek property a fortnight ago in a wider annual gathering of powerful friends.

Stays by the two men overlapped by only one night, according to Lord Mandelson’s spokesman.

He said the pair spoke only briefly but they did discuss Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi. “There was a fleeting conversation about the prisoner; Peter was completely unsighted on the subject,” he said.

...

Lord Mandelson said through his spokesman that he had had no involvement in the decision and only learnt of it through the BBC. Mr Megrahi’s possible release was a decision entirely for the Scottish government rather than London.

“It was entirely coincidental,” the spokesman said. "

It is odd how confusion and peculiar incidents of synchronicity seem to follow Peter Mandelson around; it is almost as if his whole being attracts controversy, rather like s**t attracts flies.

The best line in the FT's report is this one:

"news of the meeting could renew questions about Lord Mandelson’s affinity for rich and powerful individuals and his ability to create controversy."

Now that's journalistic understatement!

Talking of journalism there is currently no mention of this odd meeting on the BBC news website. Somehow I think that if George Osborne had met Colonel Gaddafi's son the BBC would have plastered the news all over their website.