[Omen]

Originally Posted by Shasown

Oil was being drilled in Iraq before the us led invasion, companies had licences to drill and export, profits to the Iraqi government were held by a UN organisation and used to buy non blockaded items like baby food blankets etc.

You still dont get it do you, if Salmond and co had been told to release him by Gordon Brown, it would create a constitutional crisis that salmond would have used to force Scotland out of the Union.He would have shouted it from the rooftops about token devolution etc, then run to Scotland for a referendum, something he doesnt do just now because he knows he wont get the percentage he needs. Believe me he would of used the revelation to gain not just national but international support for a totally independent Scotland.

You assume Salmond was even in the loop. Ever watched Yes Minister? Widely regarded as an accurate portrayal of the goings-on behind the closed doors of Whitehall, where Mandarins make all the real decisions,and are rewarded with directorships in BP and the like. Or, what if Salmond was not only in the loop, but at the centre of it? How much does BP contribute to Scotland's coffers?

The facts are a mass murderer was released, and BP were given drilling righs in Libya. Britain went to war on spurious grounds,and BP are profitting hugely from it. It reeks to high heaven.

Oh, Iraq were extracting only a tiny fraction of their oil prior to invasion. Saddam destroyed most of the infrastructure in the first gulf war to stop the west getting their hands on it.

To witness Obama and Cameron squabble over the spill you get a true sense of the importance of BP to UK plc; they are for all intents and purposes the same thing. Britain will bend all and any rules to protect BP. This is de facto corporatism.

[Shasown]

Originally Posted by Omen

You assume Salmond was even in the loop. Ever watched Yes Minister? Widely regarded as an accurate portrayal of the goings-on behind the closed doors of Whitehall, where Mandarins make all the real decisions,and are rewarded with directorships in BP and the like. Or, what if Salmond was not only in the loop, but at the centre of it? How much does BP contribute to Scotland's coffers?

The facts are a mass murderer was released, and BP were given drilling righs in Libya. Britain went to war on spurious grounds,and BP are profitting hugely from it. It reeks to high heaven.

Oh, Iraq were extracting only a tiny fraction of their oil prior to invasion. Saddam destroyed most of the infrastructure in the first gulf war to stop the west getting their hands on it.

To witness Obama and Cameron squabble over the spill you get a true sense of the importance of BP to UK plc; they are for all intents and purposes the same thing. Britain will bend all and any rules to protect BP. This is de facto corporatism.

Except it seems as if he may not have been guilty after all. Lots of iffy evidence used in his trail is being questioned using more modern forensic techniques.

Incidentally your inaccuracies are getting worse, like any good conspiracy nut, you throw some names and facts in to seemingly back up your case but on checking those facts they are wrong.

Saddam didnt destroy the infrastructure in the first Gulf war in Iraq, his troops had set explosives on the Kuwait oil wells shortly after they invaded, they blew them on retreat. Note Kuwaiti not Iraqi oil wells Gulf war 1

In Dance in the Desert 2 he started blowing wells in Iraq. Something the coalition had anticipated and had oil well fire specialist teams standing by as well as special forces teams inserted to stop them from blowing them.

[Omen]

Originally Posted by Shasown

Except it seems as if he may not have been guilty after all. Lots of iffy evidence used in his trail is being questioned using more modern forensic techniques.

Incidentally your inaccuracies are getting worse, like any good conspiracy nut, you throw some names and facts in to seemingly back up your case but on checking those facts they are wrong.

Saddam didnt destroy the infrastructure in the first Gulf war in Iraq, his troops had set explosives on the Kuwait oil wells shortly after they invaded, they blew them on retreat. Note Kuwaiti not Iraqi oil wells Gulf war 1

In Dance in the Desert 2 he started blowing wells in Iraq. Something the coalition had anticipated and had oil well fire specialist teams standing by as well as special forces teams inserted to stop them from blowing them.

You'll note I didn't say he burned them, he did destroy them, rendering them useless. The capacity was hugely reduced as a result of the first gulf war. (He did set wells on fire though).

I don't really see how that alters the fact that Britain is a corporatist state.

If alMaggy was inocent then he should have got off. He didn't. Nobody gets off cos they might be inocent, not without a court freeing them.

[Shasown]

Originally Posted by Omen

You'll note I didn't say he burned them, he did destroy them, rendering them useless. The capacity was hugely reduced as a result of the first gulf war. (He did set wells on fire though).

I don't really see how that alters the fact that Britain is a corporatist state.

If alMaggy was inocent then he should have got off. He didn't. Nobody gets off cos they might be inocent, not without a court freeing them.

He didnt destroy any of his own wells during or after the first gulf war, the capacity of the wells was reduced because he wasnt allowed to sell the oil, then the UN instigated the OIL for Food Humanitarian program.

With al-Megrahi, his appeal process was thrown out because he was being freed on compassionate grounds, relatives of some of those lost on the flight asked for it to continue, because of the doubt thrown on the initial prosecution.

[Omen]

Originally Posted by Shasown

He didnt destroy any of his own wells during or after the first gulf war, the capacity of the wells was reduced because he wasnt allowed to sell the oil, then the UN instigated the OIL for Food Humanitarian program.

With al-Megrahi, his appeal process was thrown out because he was being freed on compassionate grounds, relatives of some of those lost on the flight asked for it to continue, because of the doubt thrown on the initial prosecution.

Can you give me a reference, I can't find one. I have only my memory to go on.

It doesn't really change much anyway, as far as what I am accusing BP and the british govt. of.

Secondly, this was the biggest mass-murder for which someone was caught, (AFAIK), so ill or not compassionate release should never have even been considered, even if he "might" have been innocent.

[Omen]

This is the prize, and they don't have to drill 1000m under water for it:

Youtube video

[Shasown]

Originally Posted by Omen

Can you give me a reference, I can't find one. I have only my memory to go on.

It doesn't really change much anyway, as far as what I am accusing BP and the british govt. of.

Secondly, this was the biggest mass-murder for which someone was caught, (AFAIK), so ill or not compassionate release should never have even been considered, even if he "might" have been innocent.

Funnily enough I was using my memory too. I got invites to both parties. Try Googling 1991 oil well fires gulf war or some such.