It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

BAE Systems faces bribery charges

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 06:18 AM
link   

BAE Systems faces bribery charges


news.bbc.co.uk

The latest SFO investigations are into contracts BAE won from countries including Tanzania, the Czech Republic, Romania and South Africa.

The BBC understands that the SFO wanted to strike a deal that would involve BAE pleading guilty to charges of corruption and agreeing to pay a substantial sum in compensation - between £500m and £1bn - however no deal was done.

(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.guardian.co.uk
www.cityam.com
business.timesonline.co.uk
www.tele graph.co.uk




posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 06:18 AM
link   
The firm is the UK's largest manufacturer - making everything from British Army kit to warships and planes. It has about 105,000 employees worldwide, including about 32,000 in the UK with customers in more than 100 countries.

The article goes on to quote: "BAE either becomes an ethical company, which involves refusing to get involved in some contracts, or it does not become a fully ethical company reaching the gold standard that we have identified," Lord Woolf said when the report was published in May last year.

"There are contracts that are not worth having and that will do long-term damage to the company, and the company has to accept that."



BAE shares have already taken a hit, as described in the third 'additional link' from the TimesOnline.co.uk.

Remember though, the real story behind the BAE "Al Yamamah" scandal is that, under the arms-for-oil barter deal, we (the British) accumulated well-over £170 billion, in off-the-books, offshore funds, that have been used to finance covert operations, for the past 23 years (the deal was first signed in 1985, and has been regularly updated ever since).

The other nagging matter around the BAE case is that Prince Bandar "inadvertently" helped finance the 9/11 attacks, through funds provided by him and his wife to two Saudi intelligence operatives in California, who, in turn, bankrolled two of the hijackers. This sordid tale is spelled out in Philip Shenon's admirable expose of the 9/11 Commission investigation, in the 2008 book, The Commission--The Uncensored History of the 9/11 Investigation.

To summarize: BAE delivered about £70 billion (approximated) in arms and services to Saudi Arabia. BAE padded the bills substantially, up to nearly £140 billion (again, approximated.) The pad was used, in part, to bribe Saudi officials who helped swing the deal, including Bandar and Prince Turki bin-Khaled, a top official of the Saudi Ministry of Defense. That part is fully detailed in the Guardian and other British coverage of the BAE scandal, going back three or four years.

news.bbc.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)



[edit on 1-10-2009 by Sed Non Credo]



posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 07:04 AM
link   
reply to post by Sed Non Credo
 


I love the line :

However it admitted last year - after an independent investigation - it had not always met the highest ethical standards.

Sounds a bit like " We know we were doing wrong but we wanted the money more than actually doing the right thing". Sounds like a good excuse to get away with Burglary,or some other crime " sorry Officer I know what I did was unethical but I'm doing for a greater good".
Be interesting to see how big of a slap wrist they get. I favour not much after all its for the defence of the country.



posted on Oct, 1 2009 @ 03:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Sed Non Credo
 
We are becoming so PC here in the UK that our one remaining world beating manufacturing industry is looking like facing crippling fines or losing contracts. Let's be honest here in a global market, the Russians, French and Chinese sell weapons world wide too and there are surely sweeteners involved. Are not the brits shooting themselves in the foot?

*Note to Americans I never mentioned you in the sweeteners game - I just assume your products are sold on their technological edge



posted on Oct, 2 2009 @ 11:29 AM
link   
reply to post by ufoorbhunter
 




Couldn't agree more mate, too a large extent at least. There is a line of course, but I cannot see anything here that I wouldn't personally be willing to cross.




top topics
 
1

log in

join