It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Shell drafted letter Tony Blair sent to Gaddafi while Prime Minister

page: 1

log in


posted on Apr, 27 2010 @ 04:39 AM

Shell drafted letter Tony Blair sent to Gaddafi while Prime Minister

While it is common for government ministers to champion British interests abroad, Shell’s draft reveals an unusual assurance in its ability to dictate Mr Blair’s conversation with the Libyan leader. It also raises questions about the motives behind Britain’s improved relations with Libya and the subsequent release of Abdul Baset Ali al-Megrahi, the Lockerbie bomber. Lockerbie victims have claimed that the Government paved the way for al-Megrahi’s release as part of a deal with Libya to give British companies access to Libya’s lucrative oil and gas industry.

In the draft, Shell te
(visit the link for the full news article)

Related News Links: .uk

Related Discussion Threads:
Tony Blair's secret lucrative advisory job with Iraq oil firm

posted on Apr, 27 2010 @ 04:39 AM
Good old Blair eh?

The guy is as corrupt as they come. The big hoo-ha about Libya getting rid of its non-existant WMD programme was actually a cover for Shell to make massive amounts of money in tapping into Libya's vast energy reserves.

We seem to have a common thread here. Firstly Blair leads Britain into Iraq alongside the U.S. partly to command the energy reserves of the country. Next Blair makes an agreement with Libya on behalf of Shell so they can get at the oil in the country.
''The correspondence, written while Mr Blair was Prime Minister, bears a striking resemblance to a briefing note by Royal Dutch Shell weeks earlier promoting a $500 million (£325 million) deal it was trying to clinch in Libya.''

And finally Blair is paid hundreds of thousands as a consultant for U.I. energy, one of the biggest investors in the oil fields of northern Iraq.
''Tony Blair landed a lucrative advisory job in a secret deal with an oil firm operating in Iraq.
The former Prime Minister took the contract with UI Energy two years ago - just 14 months after leaving No10''.

It seems Blair became PM solely to earn a great deal of money through the connections it granted him when he left office. This is all heavily linked to Oil and the access to it in conflict zones, some of which he was directly responsible in creating, i.e. Iraq.

Tony Blair=War Profiteer.
(visit the link for the full news article)

posted on Apr, 27 2010 @ 05:02 AM
If this isn't proof enough that the governments are run by money and greed as opposed to morals and law then I don't know what is.

posted on Apr, 27 2010 @ 05:04 AM
I bought into the Blair dream.

'Education, education, education!'

It was going to be a new world.
Such hope, such vision.
Oh how we were let down.

Blair took up where Thatcher left off and misused his position for personal gain and advantage.

Like all Prime Ministers, and HRH Queen Elizabeth II, he should be tried with Treason for conspiring to give up British Soverignty.
In addition he should be charged with misleading the House Of Commons and the general public, conspiracy to murder and corruption.

posted on Apr, 27 2010 @ 05:08 AM
I am disgusted. Please forgive my lack of meaninful input but that is my most honest response. Does this surprise me? Not really.

On a more positive note, good find Peruvianmonk!

posted on Apr, 27 2010 @ 05:14 AM
reply to post by Freeborn

I also voted for him which i still feel highly embarrased about. The bloke is even more of a neo-con than the likes of Rumsfield and Cheney.

You could hear it at the Inquiry when he was banging on about the threat of Iran. No doubt he will try and get involved in their oilfields if the West and Israel decide to overthrown the regime.

It is not just in the Middle East Blair has got his dirty mitts in the money pot. Remember this?

In 2001, Tony Blair wrote a letter to Adrian Nastase, the Romanian Prime Minister, congratulating him on granting a contract to a company owned by Lakshmi Mittal (even though it employed only 100 people in Britain).

Could the letter have anything to do with the fact that Mittal had given a £125,000 donation to the Labour Party just before the 2001 election?

The man is beyond reproach. And i agree that he should be put on trial at the Hague, for conspriacy to launch a war of aggression (All other crimes against humanity in Iraq and Afghanistan stem from this).

[edit on 27-4-2010 by Peruvianmonk]

top topics

log in