UK Oil Deal for Pan Am Bomber

Brown the Betrayer: Britain’s Sellout Prime Minister Has Broken Faith and Ties with U.S.
NEW YORK DAILY NEWS – Editorial: It was Winston Churchill who asked in the aftermath of Pearl Harbor, "What kind of people do they think we are?" And it is Gordon Brown who has given grounds to believe that today's British are a cowardly, unprincipled, amoral and duplicitous lot. Because he is all of those.

Can he remain in power having been revealed as at least complicit in an atrocious miscarriage of justice and breach of faith? That will be up to the Brits, but on this side of the Atlantic Ocean it is inconceivable that an elected official would have a snowball's chance after sanctioning an oil-for-terrorist deal.

Surely Brown can hardly survive the revelation that his government assured Libya that the prime minister did not want the Lockerbie bomber to die in prison, a message duly passed on to the Scottish official who released Abdelbaset al-Megrahi on "compassionate grounds."

As for the "special relationship" between the U.S. and Britain, the storied alliance built on the resolve of World War II and carried on through Thatcher and Blair, through Iraq and Afghanistan: It is, in a word, gone.

Brown's maneuverings to get into the good graces of Libyan mass murderer Moammar Khadafy broke the bond between America and the Blessed Plot beyond his ability to repair it. That work will fall to someone else, someone who values human life more than commercial expediency, someone who is stalwart rather than a sneak, someone true to his pronouncements.

The U.S. and the U.K. committed to imprisoning Megrahi in Scotland after the Libyan spy was convicted of blowing Pan Am Flight 103 out of the air over that country in 1998. The atrocity was a direct precursor of 9/11, and no one could have imagined that Brown - leader of a nation that, too, has been terror's target - would trash the pledge.

But Brown did trash the pledge, and in the most revolting terms, letting it be known, it bears repeating, that he did not want Megrahi, author of 270 murders, to die in prison.

So, Megrahi has returned to Libya a hero, perhaps dying of prostate cancer, perhaps not. Brown got his way, and he will never outlive the stain. [Source: New York Daily News] | Wednesday, September 02, 2009

MAIL ONLINE:
Brown the betrayer: U.S. fury over British broken promise to keep Lockerbie bomber in jail >>> James Chapman | Wednesday, September 02, 2009

Dubious Deals Come with the Territory
TIMES ONLINE: The real scandal is the lost opportunity to uncover the conspirators behind the Lockerbie plot

The accusations would hurt any government, let alone one untested abroad. Alex Salmond’s administration has been accused of a political fix, a squalid commercial deal and a plot to protect its legal system. President Obama called the release of Abdul Baset Ali al-Megrahi “highly objectionable”. The FBI was more devastating: Scotland had made a “mockery” of the Lockerbie families’ grief and given “comfort to terrorists around the world”.

But there is an indictment still more damning. In his cack-handed handling of the case, Kenny MacAskill, Scotland’s Justice Secretary, has now made it impossible to find out what really happened. There will be no judicial appeal. No court will ask the vital questions left unanswered by the trial in The Hague eight years ago. Who masterminded the atrocity? Who financed the bombers? Who else plotted the deaths of innocent passengers on Pan Am 103?

Lockerbie will remain, for ever, an unexplained horror. The answers instead will be supplied by conspiracy theorists and cranks. Lockerbie will become another Kennedy assassination, open to ever more outlandish explanations — except that this atrocity, unlike the killing in Dallas, will never be investigated at the highest judicial level.

The vacuum will be filled not only by bogus historians and those with a political axe to grind; history’s verdict will also, by default, be swayed by the only man convicted of the bombing who now claims new evidence would exonerate him. He has promised to write his memoirs. Even if he lives long enough to complete them, al-Megrahi alone will be unable to relieve the anguish of the victims’ families. Would he dare jeopardise his family by revealing all he knows?

Had his appeal gone ahead, at least his protestations could have been tested. He might have been cleared. Or his supposed innocence — now taking on a public plausibility — might have been definitely disproved. Instead, he will for ever remain in an absurd limbo, not innocent but somehow not wholly guilty.

A scandal is now swirling over the “deal” said to have been made to set al-Megrahi free. Did Muammar Gaddafi promise Gordon Brown lucrative energy contracts for British companies? Did Lord Mandelson discuss Lockerbie in his meetings in Corfu with Saif al-Islam Gaddafi, the Libyan leader’s son? Was there an understanding that the prisoner would be home in time for Ramadan and, more importantly, to join in the 40th anniversary celebrations of Gaddafi’s seizure of power? >>> Michael Binyon | Monday, August 24, 2009

It’s Not Independent to Cosy Up to the Colonel
TIMES ONLINE: Lockerbie was a plot against American lives. Of course the US has every right to be outraged by the bomber’s release

Yesterday the Bishop of Musselburgh somehow tricked his way into the Scottish Parliament in the guise of Kenny MacAskill, the Scottish Justice Secretary. How else to account for the transcendent moral tone of the statement made concerning the release of the convicted bomber of Pan Am Flight 103?

Scotland was, the Right Rev MacAskill implied, a superior place where “we define ourselves by our humanity”, a humanity obliging the Justice Secretary to show compassion to Abdul Baset Ali al-Megrahi, in the form of letting him fly home, the occasion being the supposed proximity of the prisoner’s death.

And nothing else, note. The utterly unrepentant al-Megrahi, according to Mr MacAskill, who had by now switched to high sanctimony, was facing a “sentence imposed by another power ... He is going to die.” The word “soon” was of course implied.

So these are the new “laws and values of Scotland” — if you’re going to snuff it within a reasonably short time (let’s say months, or a year or so) you are thought to have been transferred into the custody of God and you get let out. How could one not agree with that?

Easily. One wonders how widely Mr MacAskill would like to see this form of humanity applied. Let us imagine that Robert Black, the Scottish serial killer of young girls, or Ian Brady, the Scottish-born Moors Murderer, were discovered to be on their last knockings. Like al-Megrahi, they, too, have shown a resilience in their refusal to help the authorities to uncover the full extent of their crimes, and have thus made matters worse for the victims’ families.

But surely they will soon be beyond the capacity to inflict harm, their maker’s finger beckoning to them, so wouldn’t it be best to return them from England to Grangemouth and Glasgow respectively, to die in the bosom of whatever families they can discover there? >>> David Aaronovitch | Tuesday, August 25, 2009