Polly
Courtier
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2006
- Messages
- 664
- City
- Mebourne
- Country
- Australia
I don't know what law Andrew is alleged to have broken: can anyone enlighten me?
Here are a few salient facts. First, the government cannot sack him - his is not a government or ministerial appointment. The government will have to bring considerable pressure to bear on the Queen to do so.
Second: the prince can hardly be accused of associating with 'despicable tyrants' when the governments of most Western countries have done precisely the same thing, and governments of all political persuasions, at that. Time and again, the West has overlooked, if not condoned, the excesses of tin-pot dictators and tyrants to secure financial advantage, particularly in pursuit of oil supplies, for itself.
Third: lots of people love fawning on royals and Middle Eastern royal families and other rulers alike – whose fine old collection of petro-dollars the West is desperate to get its hands on – don't feel comfortable talking trade unless there's a British royal serving the drinks. Partly, it's an historical and ex-colonial hang-up.
The UK's export strengths which it is the trade ambassador's role to foster remain thus: Big Pharma; weapons of war; the Royal Family. The two former inform the bulk of the UK's export income these days and the Royal Family is, dutifully, instrumental in promoting the sales.
Buckingham Palace has pointed out that Andrew's interactions with the Gadhafi regime – and Tunisia's ousted dictatorship, too- fell within the mandate of his job as special trade representative.
"It was part of the British government's engagement with Libya at the time," a palace spokesman said on customary condition of anonymity.
The spokesman confirmed Andrew met Moammar Gadhafi twice. Both meetings were properly conducted and of public record and should not come as news.
However, Andrew's friendship with Epstein is a problem of some moral dimension, and reflects poorly on his lack of nous, and what can only be described as stupidity. Still, in most countries, stupidity remains a personal failing, not a crime. As for Epstein, there's not space enough and time to discuss his massive influence, powerful friends, and how and why the elite so frequently escape full retribution for their crimes.
Here are a few salient facts. First, the government cannot sack him - his is not a government or ministerial appointment. The government will have to bring considerable pressure to bear on the Queen to do so.
Second: the prince can hardly be accused of associating with 'despicable tyrants' when the governments of most Western countries have done precisely the same thing, and governments of all political persuasions, at that. Time and again, the West has overlooked, if not condoned, the excesses of tin-pot dictators and tyrants to secure financial advantage, particularly in pursuit of oil supplies, for itself.
Third: lots of people love fawning on royals and Middle Eastern royal families and other rulers alike – whose fine old collection of petro-dollars the West is desperate to get its hands on – don't feel comfortable talking trade unless there's a British royal serving the drinks. Partly, it's an historical and ex-colonial hang-up.
The UK's export strengths which it is the trade ambassador's role to foster remain thus: Big Pharma; weapons of war; the Royal Family. The two former inform the bulk of the UK's export income these days and the Royal Family is, dutifully, instrumental in promoting the sales.
Buckingham Palace has pointed out that Andrew's interactions with the Gadhafi regime – and Tunisia's ousted dictatorship, too- fell within the mandate of his job as special trade representative.
"It was part of the British government's engagement with Libya at the time," a palace spokesman said on customary condition of anonymity.
The spokesman confirmed Andrew met Moammar Gadhafi twice. Both meetings were properly conducted and of public record and should not come as news.
However, Andrew's friendship with Epstein is a problem of some moral dimension, and reflects poorly on his lack of nous, and what can only be described as stupidity. Still, in most countries, stupidity remains a personal failing, not a crime. As for Epstein, there's not space enough and time to discuss his massive influence, powerful friends, and how and why the elite so frequently escape full retribution for their crimes.
