Britain is to give £3million to Libya in order to provide food and medical assistance in the aftermath of the bombing campaign and so called Arab Spring uprising which was heavily supported by Western interests.
The DFID tells us that "Britain will provide urgent humanitarian support including medical help, food and other basic supplies for thousands of people affected by the conflict in Libya, International Development Secretary Andrew Mitchell announced today."
Hurrah, good old British taxpayer, paying the price again, Mr Mitchell is awfully generous with our money.
On the same day the BBC tells us that "Billions of pounds of Libyan assets - including £12bn in London alone - have been frozen in recent months to prevent them being used by the Gaddafi regime. The US won approval to release $1.5bn (£920m) last week."
Of course they'll cite all sorts of legal and political reasons why that can't be done, but the simple fact is this :
Why on earth should the British taxpayer be left picking up the bill for this uprising, and then trying to clean up the aftermath with copious amounts of foreign aid, when there are huge amounts of assets which belong to Libya sitting frozen?
There are £billions in frozen assets - apparently we have enough control over those assets to freeze or unfreeze them at our leisure.
Would we have unfrozen these assets and handed them back to the Libyan people, err sorry elite, if Gaddafi emerged a clear winner? Of course not.
So, now that it looks like he has been ousted, despite all the political pundits who will say this is too simple, that we've no right to do it and so on, why can we not allocate some proportion of those funds for certain things in Libya - eg the doctors and food the DFID now announce - rather than leaving the British taxpayer on the hook?
Yes, you can have your money back, here it is, but X amount will pay for this, and that, and we're taking some back to cover the multi million £pound cost of the war (may as well call it how it is) which we have just fought on your behalf.
If the Libyan people were so desperate for 'freedom' and 'regime change' then they should consider it a price well paid. After all, Gaddafi would only have used that money to support his personal luxury and oppress his people if you believe everything we're told by officialdom and the media.
Is that too simple?
Of course it is for the politicians and bankers, they want the good old British taxpayer to pick up both sides of the costs, war and peace, we pay for both.
Profits for a few, costs for the rest - that's always the way, and it's not you, me, or the rest of the average British people getting to enjoy the profits.
We should never have been involved in the first place, but it is distinctly unfair that the British taxpayer is now left holding the bill in every way possible.
*Thanks to SL for suggesting the theme, "Why when Libya has money is Britain paying out foreign aid to them".
Britain is to give £3million to Libya in order to provide food and medical assistance in the aftermath of the bombing campaign and so called Arab Spring uprising which was heavily supported by Western interests.
