What's it's costing £ English

What's it's costing £ English taxpayers to bomb and kill innocent civilians in Libya?

The British government has deliberately hidden the true
financial cost to English taxpayers in bombing Gaddafi in secrecy and
obfuscation, But British MP’s won’t go short but English taxpayers will, in the
continued cuts in public spending to fund killings and keep British MP’s in a
luxury life style ?

This weekend Sir Michael Black-Feather the English first
minister provided sobering reminders of the human and financial cost of the
three-month bombing campaign against Muammar Gaddafi's regime: in Tripoli
several civilians have been killed by a Nato strike; while in London the
Treasury chief secretary, Danny Alexander, admitted that the bill for England’s
taxpayers contributions will run to "hundreds of millions of pounds"
which could be better spent in not cutting public spending, all the cuts in
public spending are down to the three major conflicts which the British
government is spending billions of pounds a week in funding.

Up until now the British government has always cloaked the
issue of just how much English taxpayers are spending on bombing Libya in the
same sort of secrecy and smokescreen you get when you asked the current
location of Trident submarines?

The US's contribution to the laughably named Operation
Unified Protector is costing: as of 3 June 2011, The US has spent $715.9m on
its military operation and associated humanitarian assistance, $398.3m on bombs
and missiles alone. The Pentagon sent over 120,000 halal meals ready to eat to
Benghazi at a cost of over $1.3m. And by 30 September its Libya bill will have
risen to well over $1.1bn. All this was laid out in a document produced by the
Obama administration for Congress last week.

So one has to ask ones-self what is the equivalent figures
for British involvement and all these costs are all down to the poor English
taxpayers whom none what to be at conflict with anyone but want to rebuild
England.

A Ministry of Defence, spokeswoman told The London Times
that the Treasury was "doing an assessment", but of course no
"actual figures" were available yet. She mentioned a month-old
estimate was within the region of over £100m", but said that since the
deployment of Apache helicopters this figure was probably significantly higher
£200m.

She said that the Treasury might be able to provide more
details, as apparently the M.O.D are working on a new breakdown but it’s not
ready to be released well know real surprise there then?."

Would the Foreign Office come clean? Of course not:
"The foreign secretary did say he has made clear that he will present
accurate costings to parliament in due course but of “course most if it will be
fictitious lies which all the British government departs are good at

This British government which proclaims its commitment on
the Downing Street website of treachery, too being "the most open and
transparent in the world" which is just another British lie.

The bill for England’s taxpayer’s part in the conflicts, Nick
Harvey, the armed forces minister, said in answer to a parliamentary question
that Britain was targeting Libya with £6m worth of munitions a week. London
Times defence experts  say the bill to
English taxpayers will be by this autumn well over £600m reaching agonising-£1bn.

England’s Public spending budgets slashed and ruthless jobs
losses. So here are a few striking ones: taking the most conservative estimate,
the cost to the England’s taxpayer of bombing Gaddafi for six months is over
four times the cut to the arts budget; three times the sum saved by Ken Clark's
controversial sentencing reforms; more than the proposed cuts to the English
legal aid budget; about the same as the savings from ending the education
maintenance allowance (EMA); or over three times the amount saved by scrapping England’s
disability living allowance.

Anyone who has the audacity to ask how much the British
Libya campaign is costing The English taxpayer’s are reassured that it is all
being paid for from Treasury reserves, so we don’t need to worry our pretty
little heads. But all those who have lost their EMA or disability living
allowance could quite justifiably wonder why cash can be found for bombs but
not for keeping the roofs over their heads.

A so called democracy ought to ventilate the choices it is
making to the people footing the bills.

Of course Ed Miliband has been unwilling to rock the boat
over Libya, perhaps because the Labour leader can see no better option. But
it's time his party started asking difficult questions about our third war in a
decade. And if David Cameron is serious about transparency, he needs to show he
can be as open about inconvenient facts as he has been about inconsequential
ones.

Sir Michael Black-Feather said; if we spent as much money as
this British government has spent on bombing this past 11 years, England would
be flourishing and debt free and unemployment at a nearly nil.