Did the UK renege on Lockerbie promise to US?

posted at 11:15 am on August 29, 2009 by Ed Morrissey

The government of Gordon Brown in the UK insisted it had nothing to do with the “compassionate release” of terrorist Abdul Baset Ali al-Megrahi, the Lockerbie bomber who killed 270 people, the majority of them Americans.  The Times of London has correspondence which appears to dispute that, and shows that the UK reneged on a promise to the US to keep Megrahi behind bars for his entire sentence (via Newsbeat1):

According to confidential correspondence obtained by The Times, ministers urged the Scottish government to consider returning Abdul Baset Ali al-Megrahi to Libya under a prisoner transfer deal in an apparent breach of a decade-old pledge.

A former Cabinet minister and two sources close to talks over the handover of suspects in 1999 told The Times that Robin Cook, then Foreign Secretary, promised Madeleine Albright, US Secretary of State at the time, that anyone found guilty would serve their sentence in Scotland, where the airliner exploded with the loss of 270 lives.

A senior US official said: “There was a clear understanding at the time of the trial that al-Megrahi would serve his sentence in Scotland. In the 1990s the UK had the same view. It is up to them to explain what changed.”

Not only did they renege on that pledge, but they also had a lot more to do with the decision to release Megrahi than first disclosed:

Lord Falconer of Thoroton, the Lord Chancellor, made reference to the deal — to which Libya also agreed — in a letter to Alex Salmond, Scotland’s First Minister, in June 2007. “Libya agreed prior to al-Megrahi’s trial that anyone convicted of the Lockerbie bombing would serve their sentence in Scotland,” he wrote. Britain had reminded Libya of this through diplomatic channels, he said.

The position was reversed two years later when the Libyans applied for al-Megrahi’s transfer. Ivan Lewis, the Foreign Office minister, told the Scottish government that Britain had never provided a “definitive commitment” to the US because it had not wanted to “tie the hands of future governments”.

The disclosure casts doubt on Britain’s insistence that it did not interfere in the devolved Scottish government’s decision last week to let al-Megrahi return to Libya. It also explains the Obama Administration’s anger.

The Scottish government has insisted that the decision to release Megrahi came organically from their own “values” of humane treatment of prisoners.  This shows that the impetus for the release did not come from the Scottish courts but from the Libyan government, by way of London.  The Scots apparently queried back as to any commitments made by London to the US on Megrahi, with the Brown government insisting that none were made.

This puts an entirely new light on the release, and tends to confirm what the Libyans have said all along.  The British government cut a deal to release Megrahi, and apparently manipulated the Scottish government to make it work.  Why?  The only possible reason is to secure its oil contracts in Libya, which means that Megrahi got traded for commercial purposes.  They sold out justice for Libyan euros.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

still pissed about the DVD’s, the iPOD and the Churchill thing I see?….

ted c on August 29, 2009 at 11:17 AM

why would anyone keep a deal with Obama, his own party ignores him.

rob verdi on August 29, 2009 at 11:21 AM

Megrahi backs Lockerbie inquiry

aengus on August 29, 2009 at 11:21 AM

“still pissed about the DVD’s, the iPOD and the Churchill thing I see?….”

Actually, who can blame them. Mr Smart Diplomacy has been pissing on our former allies since the day he got in office.
Mr Smooth, of course, continues to believe that he can have everything both ways.

GarandFan on August 29, 2009 at 11:23 AM

No need to honor any deals with the US since we have Obama at the helm. Double talk and not keeping one’s word is something he totally understands and appreciates.

The Brits have a gift for telling you to pound sand and making it sound like prose.

Hening on August 29, 2009 at 11:23 AM

They can enjoy their libyian euos because they won’t be getting my tourist dollars.

Blake on August 29, 2009 at 11:24 AM

I do wish people would stop referring to the Scottish Satrapy as a ‘government’. Scotland is not a country, it is a region of the United Kingdom. It does not issue its own currency, provide for its own defense, or raise anything other than nominal taxes. It is not independent of the UK in any but the most minor matters.

The UK government (an actual government) control the purse strings and by extension the entire region.

It is a wholly owned subsidiary of the government of the United Kingdom. Its creation was a sop to Scottish Nationalism. Scotland ceased to be a nation state several hundred years ago.

The blame for this disgrace lies wholly at the feet of the UK government, despite the obfuscations and lies perpetrated by a UK government that has long been dominated by Scots.

Anders on August 29, 2009 at 11:25 AM

So let’s boycott all products and services from the UK as well as Scotland. I’m as big an Anglophile as it gets, but I’ll make the sacrifice.

Sekhmet on August 29, 2009 at 11:25 AM

I’m not happy that either the UK or Scotland gov’ts might be corrupt and double-cross us. On the other hand, the US gov’t today would double-cross them in a heartbeat, so I can’t get too worked up over this particular angle of the story.

JiangxiDad on August 29, 2009 at 11:26 AM

still pissed about the DVD’s, the iPOD and the Churchill thing I see?….

ted c on August 29, 2009 at 11:17 AM

Exactly the first thing I thought. Can’t wait to see what the next 3.25 years bring.

Actually, I can wait.

SouperConservative on August 29, 2009 at 11:28 AM

Well, it was a compassionate betrayal. In 5 years, we’ll practically be thanking Brown for doing this….you’ll see.

BobMbx on August 29, 2009 at 11:32 AM

Somewhere in all of this is a big fat greasy Obama fingerprint. I can’t help but feel he had a hand in this. Somehow. Some way.

Guardian on August 29, 2009 at 11:32 AM

I was betting that Sweden would be the first Islamic republic in Europe. Now I’m changing my mind and believe it will be the UK. After decades of socialism and the attendant massive welfare state, unimpeded Muslim immigration, enforced multiculturalism I believe the people have lost all sense of self worth, patriotism, and pride in themselves, their country, and Western civilization in general. The UK government is more interested in creating welfare state clients to ensure their perpetual reelection (sound familiar) than they are in preserving their nation.

Unless the people of the UK can find their inner Conservatives the UK is dead.

DerKrieger on August 29, 2009 at 11:34 AM

A consequence of the NHS in Britain has been the decline in the number of domestic doctors. To overcome the doctor deficit the UK started importing doctors from the 3rd world, like the ones that attempted to blow up the airport in Scotland.

That may be changing finally – a snippet from the article.

“The change will end a long tradition of importing doctors to the NHS. Among the 277,000 now registered with the General Medical Council, almost half got their first medical qualifications abroad — the majority from India, Pakistan, South Africa and Australia. Without them the NHS could not have run a service since the 1960s.”

DerKrieger on August 29, 2009 at 11:38 AM

Well, if President Obama wants to treat all other countries equally – favor none, disfavor none – don’t be surprised if that is reciprocated.

America’s “special relationship” with England may be ending. But both sides appear to be agreeing to that divorce.

SteveMG on August 29, 2009 at 11:42 AM

Now I’m changing my mind and believe it will be the UK.
DerKrieger on August 29, 2009 at 11:34 AM

I think you are right about the UK and making deals with the devil over one terrorist is just the beginning. We are about to close down Gitmo, or anyhow Obama wants to. The UK has as big a stake in fighting terrorism as we do it seems like a race to see who capitulates first.

fourdeucer on August 29, 2009 at 11:48 AM

Margaret Thatcher shakes her head in shame.

Knucklehead on August 29, 2009 at 11:52 AM

still pissed about the DVD’s, the iPOD and the Churchill thing I see?….

Let’s not forget the Uighurs we dumped on Bermuda.

reaganaut on August 29, 2009 at 11:52 AM

I wouldn’t honor an agreement with a Marxist country either.

faraway on August 29, 2009 at 11:55 AM

still pissed about the DVD’s, the iPOD and the Churchill thing I see?….

ted c on August 29, 2009 at 11:17 AM

Bing. Hard to imagine that Brown feels any sense of obligation to the douchebag in the White House. So after scorching that hapless Scottish pos, we find that the truth is Brown sold the honor of 270 dead American and Scottish folks for a better deal on crude oil from the terrorists in Libya, and he did it with a very casual disregard for the idiot Obama.

What a world, what a world.

Jaibones on August 29, 2009 at 11:58 AM

Different age, all bets are off.

OldEnglish on August 29, 2009 at 11:59 AM

When will Barry come out for “special relationships” with Cuba, Bolivia and Venezuela? After all, they know Barry’s heart is in the right place or should I say, left place?

GarandFan on August 29, 2009 at 11:59 AM

everyone will hate me for saying this (& i’ve said it on different threads). this terrorist was an asset to UK. they traded him to libya for oil contracts.

justice is only a worthy concept if you want it.

kelley in virginia on August 29, 2009 at 12:10 PM

After Bush initiated the fall of Baghdad, Gaddafi= quiver mass of jello.

After Obama coronation, Gaddafi= kiss my rosy red….

Hows that reclaim hope (aka begging), leadership and world’s respect work’n our for ya?

Speakup on August 29, 2009 at 12:11 PM

kelley in virginia on August 29, 2009 at 12:10 PM

I have to agree.

OldEnglish on August 29, 2009 at 12:11 PM

There are advantages to the death penalty.

Little Boomer on August 29, 2009 at 12:12 PM

oh, c’mon guys, the UK was showing a bit of empathy.

ndanielson on August 29, 2009 at 12:16 PM

Just more reinforcement for the premise that terrorists should never be taken alive.

Tommy_G on August 29, 2009 at 12:17 PM

think on this. if bambi wanted to release those GITMO terrorists, why didn’t he get something from that?

he took alot of heat for doing it. if he’d been smart, he would have gotten some deals for Israel or Iraq or Afghanistan or something.

kelley in virginia on August 29, 2009 at 12:24 PM

Unless the people of the UK can find their inner Conservatives the UK is dead.

DerKrieger on August 29, 2009 at 11:34 AM

It’s not dead, it’s just slowly committing suicide.

There is a “Conservative Party” in the UK. They aren’t what Americans would consider conservative at all. They will win the next election by default – simply because the current administration is incompetent and deeply corrupt. But there will be no real change. They are sworn to uphold the massive unsustainable state spending at this point in time and their leadership is dominated by privileged pretty boys with no real inclination for any kind of substantive change because they lack a coherent ideology.

The UK is plagued with the legacy of multi-culturalism, unsustainable debt, mass immigration, and out of touch politicians. It is part of the reason the UK Independence Party (which advocates secession from the EU) and the BNP (fascists, and not very bright ones) did so well in the recent elections.

Anders on August 29, 2009 at 12:31 PM

Let’s not forget the Uighurs we dumped on Bermuda.

reaganaut on August 29, 2009 at 11:52 AM

Careful with that “we” stuff. Unless you’re identifying yourself as part of the “we” that did it.

BobMbx on August 29, 2009 at 12:31 PM

I’m not happy that either the UK or Scotland gov’ts might be corrupt and double-cross us. On the other hand, the US gov’t today would double-cross them in a heartbeat, so I can’t get too worked up over this particular angle of the story.

JiangxiDad on August 29, 2009 at 11:26 AM

I would guess that the Washington junta was part of this deal. The same way that The Precedent was well aware of what was going on in Honduras, and worked hard to aid and abet Zelaya’s coup before he was finally tossed out, I would be surprised if the traitor-in-chief wasn’t also in discussions with the UK, encouraging them to release Megrahi. The American people (at least those who love America) have no representation, at this point. Everyone is working against our interests.

progressoverpeace on August 29, 2009 at 12:33 PM

Obama is just mad he didnt get cut in on the oil deal.

aikidoka on August 29, 2009 at 12:36 PM

We can afford to lose Britain as an ally, and tick them off. After all. We’re gonna get Chavez, Castro, Achh man as friends instead. *THUD*

capejasmine on August 29, 2009 at 12:37 PM

Careful with that “we” stuff. Unless you’re identifying yourself as part of the “we” that did it.

Don’t be a pinhead, you know what “we” means.

reaganaut on August 29, 2009 at 12:42 PM

I called the limey embassy and said that while they are busy giving their country to the cretins that maybe they should consider giving Ireland back the north too.

Sonosam on August 29, 2009 at 12:48 PM

Under Clinton, the failed Oil for Food Program.

Now, thanks to the Brits (and I don’t exclude Obama), it’s the Oil for Terrorists Program.

Any questions?

TXUS on August 29, 2009 at 12:48 PM

One question: Does Scottish values not apply to Scottish prisoners or did Donald Forbes die suddenly?

Dusty on August 29, 2009 at 12:50 PM

So we send terrorists to British protectorates without discussing it with them first, and they release terrorists they promised they would not.

Looks like the first major “success” of Obama’s new foreign policy. I can’t see what alliance he will end next!

18-1 on August 29, 2009 at 12:51 PM

Don’t be a pinhead, you know what “we” means.

reaganaut on August 29, 2009 at 12:42 PM

Half of “wee wee”?

progressoverpeace on August 29, 2009 at 12:51 PM

Don’t be a pinhead, you know what “we” means.

reaganaut on August 29, 2009 at 12:42 PM

Half of “wee wee”?

looks more like a third…

ndanielson on August 29, 2009 at 12:53 PM

ndanielson on August 29, 2009 at 12:53 PM

Touche!

progressoverpeace on August 29, 2009 at 12:55 PM

Sonosam on August 29, 2009 at 12:48 PM

I’m not at all sure that Southern Ireland wants the North back – and I wouldn’t blame them.

OldEnglish on August 29, 2009 at 12:56 PM

It should be remembered that this case was one of aviation security, and that while we may not be able to achieve our demands that the British hold resolute against killers of innocents, we do not have to reward them in other areas of civil aviation. The British have been hoping to get greater access to US markets, including flying domestic routes and having increased ownership of US airlines. Since the United Kingdom appears only to be united against victims and not perpetrators, are is unable to take the steps necessary to insure in the minds of our citizens that those who would kill innocents in pursuance of a cause will be held accountable when caught, and thus are hazarding, not helping, the principles upon which aviation safety rests, no British airline should be allowed to offer domestic service within the United States, nor have ownership in a US airline beyond a small token percentage.

Horatius on August 29, 2009 at 1:01 PM

The American people (at least those who love America) have no representation, at this point. Everyone is working against our interests.

progressoverpeace on August 29, 2009 at 12:33 PM

Not only little or no representation, but we must also come to accept that the US gov’t is now a force for evil in the world. I don’t know how far it has already gone, or how much more damage we’ll do. But I do know that right-thinking people in the military must be in a very difficult place contemplating whether they are being used as agents of this evil. No good will come of this.

JiangxiDad on August 29, 2009 at 1:02 PM

So I will go out on a limb to say, Hussein will support Gordon Brown for making such a rediculous recommendation,as he, Hussein, will embrace those who vow to kill us!

Before you all get into a uproar, what has he, Hussein, done to protect this nation? He is disassembling our National Security and apologizing to 3rd world nations for what? Hiring CZARS who’s philosphy are influenced by 3rd world tyrants. Threatening the American Public to bring Enemy Combatants into this country.

We should boycott the UK, Lybia, and Scotland but we won’t b/c our president thinks we are to arrogant and bullied other countries for too long…..

And that murderer SOB Qadaffi should never be allowed enterance into the United States and damn the UN for his membership! I was 50% satisfied with the punishment we gave to Lybia when Ronald Reagan flew the fighters over Lybia!

Remember to vote in our next election……..We have mant vacant seats that need filled by those who will work for this Great Nation and not some 3rd World Nation like Cuba.

BigMike252 on August 29, 2009 at 1:04 PM

Old English (or anyone who might know),

Do you think Brown’s involvement in this affair could provide the tipping point for his fall?

TXUS on August 29, 2009 at 1:06 PM

If they wanted to get Barry all wee wee’d, shouldn’t they have bombed Iran…

The explanation is very simple… Euros have turned into total P*$$ies over the last two generations, and Barry has always dreamed of being a Euro…

phreshone on August 29, 2009 at 1:11 PM

Unless the people of the UK can find their inner Conservatives the UK is dead.

DerKrieger on August 29, 2009 at 11:34 AM

Did you mean UK or US there?

(joke)

IlikedAUH2O on August 29, 2009 at 1:12 PM

TXUS on August 29, 2009 at 1:06 PM

Sorry, TXUS, I haven’t been in England for nearly forty years, but I do believe that he is out in the next election, but not because of this.

OldEnglish on August 29, 2009 at 1:16 PM

Payback (not wise) for Bermuda.

Limerick on August 29, 2009 at 1:26 PM

It is up to us as Americans citizens to remember incidences like this when we choose where to vacation. I think Slovenia, and Hungary sound far more interesting places to go than England and Scotland.

paulsur on August 29, 2009 at 1:29 PM

“still pissed about the DVD’s, the iPOD and the Churchill thing I see?….”
-
BINGO. Obama is a rude, arrogant, dishonest representative of America to the world and that’s going to be reflected in actual important decisions by foreign governments.

Simona on August 29, 2009 at 1:31 PM

too bad Obama’s probably delighted with this development – on principle of course.

Simona on August 29, 2009 at 1:32 PM

progressoverpeace on August 29, 2009 at 12:33 PM

100% dead-on.

At last the claim of the Bush-haters has come to pass: we have lost our moral standing in the world.

It took a Democrat, Osama Obama, to do that.

It is up to us to find a way to put not only the Child-President, but the political system he and his fellow lice espouse, out to pasture and restore our nation to a position of respect, decency and power.

MrScribbler on August 29, 2009 at 1:33 PM

Britain has been ruled by progressive socialist tards for over a decade now. America has had 8 months of it. Sell your principles for a momentary gain? That is what progressive people do everywhere.

BL@KBIRD on August 29, 2009 at 1:40 PM

Do you think Brown’s involvement in this affair could provide the tipping point for his fall?

Possibly but you have to remember that the Conservatives are not doing as well as media likes to make out. The media (including the BBC) are trying to push the Conservatives over teh finishing line but many people outside of the South of England will never vote Tory no matter what. So Brown could keep spluttering on, even though he looks (literally) like a walking corpse.

aengus on August 29, 2009 at 1:40 PM

There’s another controversy brewing over the release of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi, and it deserves to be quoted at length.

Justice secretary Kenny MacAskill was last night under pressure to reveal more details of the medical evidence that led to the release of the Lockerbie bomber, after it emerged that only one doctor was willing to say Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi had less than three months to live.
Labour and Conservative politicians have demanded the Scottish Government publish details of the doctor’s expertise and qualifications, amid suggestions he or she may not have been a prostate cancer expert.

The parties have also raised questions over whether the doctor was employed by the Libyan government or Megrahi’s legal team, which could have influenced the judgment.

The evidence provided by the doctor is crucial as compassionate release under Scots law requires that a prisoner has less than three months to live.

To summarize, although several doctors examined Megrahi, only one so far has been willing to certify that had only three months to live. The others have respectfully declined.

There is also the unresolved question of whether the doctor who did certify Megrahi’s condition was even a prostrate cancer specialist.

Mr MacAskill has said he based his decision to release Megrahi on the opinions of a range of experts.

But this is contradicted by a decisive report sent to Mr MacAskill on 10 August.

While it noted that four prostate cancer specialists – two oncologists and two urologists – were consulted, the summary said: “Whether or not prognosis is more or less than three months, no specialist would be willing to say.”

Shorter MacAskill: four confirmed prostate cancer specialists will not sign off on Megrahi’s prognosis.

There was also a suggestion that Megrahi might not be as ill as had been claimed. The report said: “Clinicians who have assessed Mr Megrahi have commented on his relative lack of symptoms when considering the severity and stage of underlying disease.”

And suggestions that the doctor who gave the prognosis may have been employed by the Libyan government emerged in the report’s notes. It said that a professor from Libya had been involved in Megrahi’s care and the medical officer who wrote the report had been “working with clinicians from Libya over the past ten months”.

The report also said Megrahi met the conditions for early release, but fell short of making a specific recommendation.

So the Libyan government not only may have influenced Megrahi’s release by bribing the Scottish government, they may have had a direct hand in crafting the very medical report which lead to Megrahi’s release.

Further, apparently Megrahi was not displaying any or most of the symptoms normally associated with the end stages of his disease. Which makes establishing the credentials of the one doctor who certified Megrahi’s condition even more paramount…

The calls for details of the doctor’s employers, experience and qualifications have been echoed by Labour health spokesman Dr Richard Simpson, who is a former associate member of the British Association of Urological Surgeons and its Prostate Cancer Working Group.

In parliament on Monday, Dr Simpson said that his reading of the notes suggested Megrahi may have eight months left, not the three months or less on which Mr MacAskill said he based his decision.

… especially when it appears that Megrahi may have as much eight months to live, not three.

But despite promises that Mr MacAskill will publish “all relevant documentation” once permission has been received from the parties involved, a source close to the justice secretary said this would not include information about the doctor – including his or her name and qualifications.

As Mr. Spock would say: There are two possibilities. Either the doctor is credentialed after all, and the Scottish government simply fears that if they revealed his name, someone might retaliate against him (or her). The other possibility: the doctor isn’t a prostate cancer specialist, and the Scottish government doesn’t want anyone to know that because it’s the Scots themselves who fear reprisal.

Bones, your analysis?

DubiousD on August 29, 2009 at 1:56 PM

Old English (or anyone who might know),

Do you think Brown’s involvement in this affair could provide the tipping point for his fall?

TXUS on August 29, 2009 at 1:06 PM

Brown is finished – has been for a long time. He has the right to call an election and will do so at the absolute end of his democratic mandate – May 2010.

The Labour party has no future beyond 2010 which is why there have been a series of corruption scandals, people resigning from the government to pursue new careers, and scandals like this. Worse still, the rampant unaffordable public spending has continued unabated in what can only be viewed as a scorched earth policy. The Conservatives (big ‘c’), who I repeat are not what American’s consider conservative (small ‘c’), will be swept to power to preside over their devastated economy.

Anders on August 29, 2009 at 2:05 PM

DubiousD on August 29, 2009 at 1:56 PM

Sounds just like the fake hijacking that the Germans used as an excuse to release the Munich terrorists. Very European.

progressoverpeace on August 29, 2009 at 2:05 PM

Maybe the Brits are getting back at Obama for all the snide remarks and the backstabbing. Whatever happened, this is just another example of how the death penalty can actually be a deterrent.

Terrye on August 29, 2009 at 2:12 PM

Rep. Peter King–for years, the congressman was alinged with “one of the most violent terrorist groups in recent European history”–the IRA

http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/news/member-87856-attention-politicians.html

The politician once called the IRA “the legitimate voice of occupied Ireland,” he was banned from the BBC by British censors for his pro-IRA views, and he refused to denounce the IRA when one of its mortar bombs killed nine Northern Irish police officers. But Mr. King is now one of America’s most outspoken foes of terrorism.

He forged links with leaders of the IRA and Sinn Fein in Ireland, and in America he hooked up with Irish Northern Aid, known as Noraid, a New York based group that the American, British, and Irish governments often accused of funneling guns and money to the IRA.

He spoke regularly at Noraid protests and became close to the group’s publicity director, the Bronx lawyer Martin Galvin, a figure reviled by the British.

Much of the conventional weaponry and a great deal of the money necessary for IRA violence came from Irish-American sympathizers. Mr. King’s advocacy of the IRA’s cause encouraged that flow and earned him the deep-seated hostility of the British and Irish governments

During his visits to Ireland, Mr. King would often stay with well-known leaders of the IRA, and he socialized in IRA drinking haunts.

At one of such clubs, the Felons, membership was limited to IRA veterans who had served time in jail.

Mr. King would almost certainly have been red-flagged by British intelligence as a result, but the experience gave him plenty of material for the three novels he subsequently wrote featuring the IRA.

mags on August 29, 2009 at 2:16 PM

I can’t help but feel he had a hand in this. Somehow. Some way.

Guardian on August 29, 2009 at 11:32 AM

He sure did.

misslizzi on August 29, 2009 at 2:19 PM

Old English (or anyone who might know),
Do you think Brown’s involvement in this affair could provide the tipping point for his fall?
TXUS on August 29, 2009 at 1:06 PM

Thanks to all who weighed in on my question above, proving once again that we at HA have some of the smartest guys and gals in the room, in the sincerest sense of that overused term.

TXUS on August 29, 2009 at 2:30 PM

mags,

The current British Defence Secretary, Bob Ainsworth, was a ‘candidate member’ of the International Marxist Group in 1982-83 when he was 30 years old. One of their slogans was ‘Victory to the IRA!’

It’s also the case that American tax monies have been spent on funding Albanian terrorist organisations like the KLA.

aengus on August 29, 2009 at 2:33 PM

I do wish people would stop referring to the Scottish Satrapy as a ‘government’. Scotland is not a country, it is a region of the United Kingdom. It does not issue its own currency, provide for its own defense, or raise anything other than nominal taxes. It is not independent of the UK in any but the most minor matters.

Anders on August 29, 2009 at 11:25 AM

It is a country, and last time I was there, they did issue their own currency.

atheling on August 29, 2009 at 2:33 PM

It is up to us as Americans citizens to remember incidences like this when we choose where to vacation. I think Slovenia, and Hungary sound far more interesting places to go than England and Scotland.

paulsur on August 29, 2009 at 1:29 PM

Central and Eastern Europe are great tourist destinations. The Dalmatian Coast, Prague, Budapest, the Carpathian Mountains, Kiev, the Black Sea. All kinds of history and tourist attractions, places to see, and things to do. The people are very friendly, and they truly LIKE Americans. The major cities and tourist areas are well worth seeing, and much less expensive than Western Europe. Why more people don’t vacation here is beyond me.

Dan859 on August 29, 2009 at 2:38 PM

The world needs a new Duke of Cumberland who will lay waste to Scotland.

Percy_Peabody on August 29, 2009 at 3:08 PM

For all the distance that the so-called leaders of today want to put between themselves and George W Bush they have perverted themselves to the point that if they do have souls, then I doubt very much that they are able to look in the mirror anymore.

I hope someone with the mettle of our past President surfaces again to wash the bitter taste from our mouths….

Sonosam on August 29, 2009 at 3:21 PM

Why would any of the leaders in Europe or Asia worry about what this administration would say or do. They know that we have elected a bunch of clowns and they recognize our eminent demise as a capitalistic/democratic country.

hillbilly on August 29, 2009 at 3:37 PM

Guardian: I can’t help but feel [Obama] had a hand in this. Somehow. Some way.

The boss questioned Obama’s hand in this in her Human Events piece today;

Which begs the question: Why allow [Kaddafi] to set foot on U.S. soil at all?

Why indeed. If Obama thinks Megrahi’s release is “a mistake“, then why is Kaddafi scheduled to follow Obama on the floor of the UN Parliament of Thugs in September?

Something’s definitely not quite… Wright.

Terp Mole on August 29, 2009 at 5:17 PM

Gimme a break. Obama loves the fact that the Lockerbie bomber is free. It serves to make us look helpless, powerless. In his eyes, we still need to be punished for our arrogance and interference in world affairs. This serves his purpose and furthers his agenda.
Leveling the playing field means lowering America and Americans, thereby making other nations appear to have risen.
Obama is a liar and Truth is
killing his Marxist agenda.

Army Brat on August 29, 2009 at 5:37 PM

We missed out on a target rich environment on that tarmac. I believe a well placed missile there and we could have called it even.

orlandocajun on August 29, 2009 at 6:12 PM

America’s “special relationship” with England may be ending. is over.

SteveMG on August 29, 2009 at 11:42 AM

FIFY…

Khun Joe on August 29, 2009 at 8:22 PM

UFB! Saif al-Islam Kaddafi uses Jedi mind powers in NYTimes;

NYTimes: No ‘Hero’s Welcome’ in Libya

CONTRARY to reports in the Western press, there was no “hero’s welcome” for Abdel Basset Ali al-Megrahi when he returned to Libya earlier this month… from the Libyan point of view, the reception given to Mr. Megrahi was low-key. Had it been an official welcome, there would have been tens if not hundreds of thousands of people at the airport.

So, who are you going to believe? the Sword of Islam?… or your own lying eyes?

/chutzpah on stilts!

Terp Mole on August 29, 2009 at 10:03 PM

Is there any thug that the US has that we could release that would piss off Britain?

lavell12 on August 29, 2009 at 11:23 PM

Do we have any IRA leaders we can send home to Dublin… with weapons…

phreshone on August 29, 2009 at 11:37 PM

Naturally, the Grand Wizard of necklassing terrorism applauds this miscarriage of justice;

Mandela backs Lockerbie decision

Nelson Mandela has backed the Scottish Government’s controversial decision to free the Lockerbie bomber… “Mr Mandela sincerely appreciates the decision to release Mr al-Megrahi on compassionate grounds.”

It added: “Mr Mandela played a central role in facilitating the handover of Mr al-Megrahi and his fellow accused to the United Nations in order for them to stand trial under Scottish law in the Netherlands. His interest and involvement continued after the trial after visiting Mr al-Megrahi in prison. The decision to release him now, and allow him to return to Libya, is one which is therefore in line with his wishes.”

Mandela claimed Megrahi’s imprisonment in The Kaddafi Cafe (with his family visiting from Megrahi’s Scottish estate) was “psychological torture.”

/spit

Terp Mole on August 30, 2009 at 10:38 AM

NO OIL FOR BLOOD!

profitsbeard on August 30, 2009 at 10:54 AM

Do we have any IRA leaders we can send home to Dublin… with weapons…

phreshone on August 29, 2009 at 11:37 PM

There are plenty of I.R.A members in the U.S and plenty of weapons have been sent.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Provisional_IRA_arms_importation
That campaign of terror, waged against British citizens

for more than 30 years, was bankrolled by donations from the USA — and in those 30 years the U.S would not extradite wanted terrorists to face charges here, despite our repeated requests.
Both federal and local US courts refused extradition requests almost as policy, while the funding of the IRA continued without interruption and was still raking in the money even after 9/11, when the Americans suddenly decided that they ought to start proscribing certain terrorist groups. The IRA was not, for some time, one of the groups so proscribed.

http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/news/member-87856-attention-politicians.html

The U.S gave visa’s to known I.R.A members to fund raise against our governments wishes.

Gerry Adams was given the keys to New York by Rudy Giuliani.
He has even had a street named after him.

Bars in Boston had drinks called ‘kill a brit’ and ‘carbomb’(The I.R.A invented the road side bomb that is killing our soldiers and yours)

Weapons sent included semtex and surface to air missiles,we didn’t intercept them all.

These were used to bomb places like Harrods on Christmas Eve.
Shopping centres the day before mothers day killing children shopping for their gifts and card’s.
On remembrance sunday they blew up a church service killing old soldiers with their medals on.

Money was sent to help the families of killed or imprisoned ‘comrades’ and to keep their graves nice and tidy.

The IRA nearly killed Prime Minister Thatcher and her cabinet with a bomb in 1984, and it assassinated prominent British politicians and members of the royal family.

Nobody deserves terrorism. We supported you following 9/11.

mags on August 30, 2009 at 4:08 PM

The awful irony (lost on Brits and Scots) is that Kaddafi was the IRA. Kaddafi financed, supported, trained and armed the IRA for decades.

Up to 6,000 innocents were killed or injured with Libyan supplied guns and explosives. And many IRA bombs employed the same Libyan Semtex that destroyed Clipper Maid of the Seas.

IRA victims still demand Kaddafi accept responsibility and pay reparations for those countless bloody atrocities.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/8219433.stm

Kaddafi’s IRA proxies might still be in business if not for the heroic efforts of the Lockerbie victims’ families to censure, sanction and isolate Libya.

/but no good deed goes unpunished

Terp Mole on August 31, 2009 at 1:50 PM

Terp Mole on August 31, 2009 at 1:50 PM

We know.At least Libya were the bad guys.America was supposed to be our allie.

Libya stopped funding the I.R.A before the U.S even tried to restrict the flow of money and weapons that went to kill and maime the same people you critisize libya for helping to kill.

‘Kaddafi’s IRA proxies might still be in business if not for the heroic efforts of the Lockerbie victims’ families to censure, sanction and isolate Libya.’

‘/but no good deed goes unpunished’

We had to wait till 9/11 for some Americans to begin to view terrorism differently.

Not only did the U.S give the I.R.A the weapons and money to kill us.You gave them political cover, the biggest platform-the whitehouse.

We viewed U.S funding of the I.R.A with much more distain then Libya.

Maybe our victim’s could sue the U.S?

mags on August 31, 2009 at 2:33 PM