White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber Abdel Baset al-Megrahi

[DeadEyeDyck]

Source: The Australian

The note added: "Nevertheless, if Scottish authorities come to the conclusion that Megrahi must be released from Scottish custody, the US position is that conditional release on compassionate grounds would be a far preferable alternative to prisoner transfer, which we strongly oppose."

Mr LeBaron added that freeing the bomber and making him live in Scotland "would mitigate a number of the strong concerns we have expressed with regard to Megrahi's release".

The US administration lobbied the Scottish government more strongly against sending Megrahi home, under a prisoner transfer agreement signed by the British and Libyan governments, in a deal now known to have been linked to a pound stg. 550 million oil contract for BP.


Read more: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/white-house-backed-release-of-lockerbie-bomber-abdel-baset-al-megrahi/story-e6frg6so-1225896741041

---

At the time, the WH did not know that he was not actually dying though the Scots sure would have. I wonder what kind of deal was in the works?

[davidinalameda]

1. I'm a bit confused

The document, acquired by a well-placed US source, threatens to undermine US President Barack Obama's claim last week that all Americans were "surprised, disappointed and angry" to learn of Megrahi's release.

Scottish ministers viewed the level of US resistance to compassionate release as "half-hearted" and a sign it would be accepted.

The US has tried to keep the letter secret, refusing to give permission to the Scottish authorities to publish it on the grounds it would prevent future "frank and open communications" with other governments.


so did we approve of it or not; who's lying here

[sandnsea]

2. "Nevertheless"

"Mr LeBaron wrote that the US wanted Megrahi to remain imprisoned in view of the nature of the crime."

Nevertheless, Scotland released him anyway.

No story here, except trying to mitigate more BP damage.

[24601]

21. There is a story: "What did the President know and when did he

know it?"

We can take poor decisions, that's par for this course. But if the administration jerked us off and then covered it up, that's the real issue.

[sandnsea]

24. It says what the Administration "knew"

It says the US asked that he not be released, and if he were, to not send him back to Libya.

Nevertheless... Scotland released him anyway.

What is to know?

[24601]

32. So if they knew. how was it a surprise? And, "The Administration"

could mean the basement night shift janitor in the State Department. No, what did the President know before hand? When this story came out, I seem to recall that "the administration" acted as surprised as I was. Why the charade? This isn't Nixon here - I expect a higher standard. If we get the SOS, why bother to even vote?

As counterintuitive as it sounds, Clinton was at his best when government control was split.

[sandnsea]

33. Wow. Sick that I have to, but will try once more

They sent the letter and strongly urged Scotland not to release the guy.

That's it.

So why wouldn't the President be surprised when he was released?

As he, nevertheless, was.

[SydneyDundee]

35. So I guess he would have no problem seeing...

all correspondence with the Scottish Government being made available then?

[sandnsea]

41. All correspondence with the Scottish Government??

Yeah, I think he would have a problem with ALL correspondence with any government being made public.

I don't know what was in the specific letter so I would have no idea whether it would be appropriate to release it or not.

I do know the title of this article does not remotely match the content. It takes some pretty hateful "Democratic" minds to twist this into a scandal when there isn't a thing there.

[SydneyDundee]

43. I can see where you are coming from...

..although am not sure there is a slant forming against Obama directly on this. I just can't see why Obama or his administration wouldn't want to make public the "relevant" documents that Alex salmond alludes to - i.e. the conversation that occurred between washington and edinburgh on the release and its grounds on the basis of Scots law and humanitarian conventions in that country's laws

[No Elephants]

49. Nope. They strongly--and successfully-- urged Scotland not to transfer the guy.

The language about "compassionate" release was much less strong--and "far preferable" to a transfer. Heck, use of the word "compassionate" alone was a tip off. Please see Reply # 48.

[SydneyDundee]

58. On a related note though.....

An interesting leader in the Sunday Times last Sunday with the headline 'America look in the mirror'.

Methinks the US senators are on very thin ice accusing BP of lobbying Libya for oil exploration concessions, when Exxon and Mobil had already negotiated exploration rights with the Libyans in the same manner - their hypocrisy knows no bounds.

One wonders about the calibre and intelligence of US politicians when they lead with their chins like this. I say, Publish and be damned! - then watch certain politicians faces go red.

[boppers]

34. That "Nevertheless" points to the lie pretty obviously, doesn't it?

Sometimes I think people are willfully blind to words right in front of their faces.

[No Elephants]

50. LOL. Right backatcha, Boppers. "Compassionate" release' "far preferable."

Words like that in diplomatic communications mean a lot. Message received by the Scots.

Implausible deniablibity. Feigned surprise. Shades of Bush I and Kuwait, only we won't start raining missles on Scotland.

[No Elephants]

48. LOL. What does "surprised" mean? What does "we unconditionally oppose" mean?

We unconditionally opposed transfer, but we did not unconditionally oppose compassionate release. Rather, we found it preferable to transfer. In diplomatic language, distinctions like that mean a lot. The U.S.'s message was received.


"I'm shocked, shocked to find that gambling is going on in here!" "Your winnings, sir!"

[dipsydoodle]

3. Not actually dying..........

According to Alex Salmon c. 3 months was his life expectancy had he remained in a Scottish prison. What may have extended his life is further treatment in Libya. There seems little doubt he has got terminal prostate cancer. Under a transfer agreement he would have been required to agree he would never appeal the verdict at his trial. Under the way in which he was released he didn't have to agree that. Had he not been released there also seems little doubt that his appeal which was current at that time would have been allowed to proceed. The delay in delaring a mistrial was caused one of the judges being sick.

In the event that the USA continued to withold the evidence which was withheld from his original trial its doubtful he'd have been found guilty again anyway. Broadly speaking what's going on at present is actually a load of stuff and nonsense and BP is a red herring - both governments prefer to have him out of the way in order to keep the case closed.

[SydneyDundee]

30. I agree that BP is a big Red Herring

BTW its Alex Salmond :) Cheers

[dipsydoodle]

47. Correction appreciated

It will stay in mind forever now. :thumbsup:

:hi:

[DesertFlower]

4. we wouldn't release susan atkins when

she was dying. why would we want to free this guy?

[DeSwiss]

13. +1000! n/t

[No Elephants]

51. Dunno. Why did we not "unconditionally oppose" his release, as we did his transfer?

Please see Reply 48.

[Raggz]

5. Effective presidents make decisons

He could have made either choice and he would now be fine. He tried to have it both ways and got caught.

Effective presidents minimize trying to have it both ways - and when it is actually necessary, they don't get caught at it.

[Imagevision]

6. in a deal now known to have been linked to a pound stg. 550 million oil contract for BP.

[dipsydoodle]

18. That is complete bollocks

Just a red herring.

[SydneyDundee]

26. You are wrong on thatn one - hence why alex Salmond wants all the papers (the US ones) made public!

He knows that Scotland has nothing to hide in the manner of its decion making in the run-up to this. I think Washington and London will be embarrassed though as it will show both the US and UK governments for what they are; arrogant and bullying.

[liberalmuse]

7. I smell bullshit, here.

I wish I still lived in Vegas. I could make some money on this one.

[Pirate Smile]

8. Completely but I'm not surprised that some here want to manage to blame Obama for what

happened in Scotland. Impressive.

[SydneyDundee]

27. No one's blaming him for what happened?

they are calling him on what he said publicly and privately about what happened - he wopuld appear to have been disingenuous with the american public - whilst crticising the Scottish government for doing what it is legally honour bound to do - release terminally ill people from their prisons.....

[bluestateguy]

9. Strikes me as false

After the Shirley Sherrod fiasco, we need to be careful about believing anything the corporate media tells us.

[Zavulon]

22. +1.

If this turns out to be true I'll be seriously pissed at Obama, but in the absence of unequivocal proof I'll give Obama the benefit of the doubt. There is no end to the shit that the media will sling at the guy.

[No Elephants]

52. That post has to win some kind of irony award.

[Pirate Smile]

10. Is this paper owned by Rupert Murdoch? Well, surprise, surprise, yes he does.

http://www.cjr.org/resources/index.php?c=newscorp

But it still has been Rec'd enough to get on the Greatest Page. Hmmm. I wonder why.

[Raggz]

14. Read the Guardian

The government of Scotland has asked Obama to release the memo he wrote to them on this.

They say he supported releasing the terrorist.

All he needs to do is release this memo and disprove their claim.

[SydneyDundee]

28. Good point!

Alex salmond is one of the savviest politicians on the scene - he wouldn't have asked for this without knowing that it would place his own government's actions in a better light and perhaps just perhaps bring the bullies from Washington and London to book a wee bit!

[Name removed]

15. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[harmonicon]

23. not trolls, just Democrats

... and sad as it is, like all of humanity, the majority of Democratic voters would prefer to spend their lives in a cesspool of their own making.

[tabasco]

31. Reminds me of when Humphrey wasn't perfect enough.

We got shitheel Nixon instead.

[No Elephants]

53. Did the paper misquote anything?

[CJCRANE]

11. There's something fishy about this. Let's wait for more information.

There's some Murdoch spin going on here.

[boomerbust]

12. I smell Rupert Murdoch

Or that Australian moron who post on DU.

[canetoad]

17. Which Australian moron?

If it's me, here's an old Aussie curse for you.

'May all your chooks turn into emus and kick your dunny down.' Chew on that.

[boomerbust]

19. No not you

[DeadEyeDyck]

25. I am such as idiot. A classmate sent this to me and I

would never think in a millions years to think that this is from a Murdock paper!!! Guess it is really true that you can't trust what you read in the papers.

[SydneyDundee]

29. Not sure about the Murdoch angle - it's all over the BBC too

[JohnyCanuck]

16. Babbling brooks of bullshit still babble on.

Megrahi was Framed
By John Pilger

The American satirist Larry David once addressed a voluble crony as "a babbling brook of bullsh*t." Such eloquence summarizes the circus of Megrahi’s release.

No one in authority has had the guts to state the truth about the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 above the Scottish village of Lockerbie on 21 December 1988 in which 270 people were killed. The governments in England and Scotland in effect blackmailed Megrahi into dropping his appeal as a condition of his immediate release. Of course there were oil and arms deals under way with Libya; but had Megrahi proceeded with his appeal, some 600 pages of new and deliberately suppressed evidence would have set the seal on his innocence and given us more than a glimpse of how and why he was stitched up for the benefit of "strategic interests."

snip

The new evidence would have shown that a fragment of a circuit board and bomb timer, "discovered" in the Scottish countryside and said to have been in Megrahi’s suitcase, was probably a plant. A forensic scientist found no trace of an explosion on it. The new evidence would demonstrate the impossibility of the bomb beginning its journey in Malta before it was "transferred" through two airports undetected to Flight 103.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article23425.htm

Evidence The US Bought The Megrahi Conviction

One of the filings disclosed yesterday on the website documents a blockbuster finding and allegation by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) on collusion of the Scottish Crown prosecution team and US authorities to effectively buy Shopkeeper Gauci’s testimony against Megrahi by paying Gauci two million dollars and Gauci’s brother, Paul Gauci, a million dollars:

The SCCRC has recovered undisclosed material which indicates that:

(a) The witness Tony Gauci had, at an early stage, expressed an interest in receiving payment or compensation for his co-operation in giving evidence, and that this interest persisted until after the trial

(b) that the witness Paul Gauci had " a clear desire to gain financial benefit" from his and his brothers co-operation and that Paul Gauci exercised considerable influence over his brother

(c) that the U.S. authorities offered to make substantial payments to the witness Tony Gauci from an early stage

(d) that an application for reward monies was made on behalf of the SIO of the investigation team of the Scottish police to the U.S. Department of Justice, after the trial, and that substantial payments were received by both Tony (in excess of $2m) and Paul Gauci (in excess of $1m) after the appeal.

The Scottish Crown prosecution team concealed both the early discussion prior to the trial of financial reward to Gauci for his testimony and the big payoff by the US Government after his testimony and the trial concluded. The prosecution did not reveal the clearly material and exculpatory (in that it gutted the credibility of the sole direct witness against Megrahi) evidence to either the defense or the court. In fact, the investigation and prosecution team put numerous entries into their reports and records that "Tony Gauci has never at any stage sought to benefit" from his testimony, statements that appear to have been designed to mislead.

There were already substantial questions regarding the credibility of Gauci’s identification of Megrahi as the purchaser of the clothes (detailed in the above linked document and summarized here). There further appears to have been a series of inconsistent statements by Gauci prior to trial, and several indications that he was not confident in his identification, many of which were also not disclosed to the defense for trial. Although these are allegations not yet proven up in court, the work and findings were done by the SCCRC and carry some serious weight; they are not self serving pablum from a desperate defendant.

snip

American politicians, including President Obama and AG Eric Holder, Secretary of State Clinton and many Congress members from across the spectrum howled with outrage at the Scottish Justice Ministry’s decision to release Megrahi in return for dismissal of his appeal out of concern that the convicted Megrahi was cut loose in a secret deal by the Brits for oil rights with Libya. Perhaps instead they should investigate whether the US colluded to buy dubious testimony from Gauci in order convict Megrahi in the first place.

One thing is certain, if the evidence uncovered by the SCCRC is accurate, instead of howling US authorities might want to thank Scottish Justice Minister Kenny MacAskill for killing Megrahi’s appeal, an appeal that very well may have led to a reversal of Megrahi’s conviction based on misconduct involving the Americans. While it is unlikely either the US government or Congress will touch this bit of stench, let’s hope the authorities in Scotland take a hard look into the matter.

http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2009/10/03/evidence-the-us-bought-the-megrahi-conviction/

[DeadEyeDyck]

38. So why am I just hearing this now??

This is pure BS. If so many people know that this was a setup, how come I am just reading about this today? I read the News. No one else is reporting this?

[No Elephants]

54. Please see Reply # 29.

[SydneyDundee]

60. and if you want a non-Murdoch, non-BBC looksy....this from Scotland

http://news.scotsman.com/lockerbie/SNP-Lockerbie-letters-must-be.6439023.jp

[Name removed]

20. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[NYC_SKP]

36. "The document, acquired by a well-placed US source..."

:shrug:

[No Elephants]

55. Hey, if the Obama administration immediately fires people on his sayso......

[Name removed]

37. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Brandlon]

39. This is getting confusing ... it would seem that

someone needs to step forward and clear this up. Did LeBaron arbitrarily make that decision? If so, I don't see how this can hurt President Obama.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/world/2010/0726/1224275466282.html

Salmond offers to send all Lockerbie letters to US

MARK HENNESSY London Editor

SCOTTISH FIRST minister Alex Salmond has offered to send all copies of letters exchanged with the US and British governments about the release of convicted Libyan Lockerbie bomber Abdelbaset al-Megrahi to the US Senate’s foreign relations committee – including one from the US embassy in London which allegedly offers reluctant support for his release on compassionate grounds.

The row over the Scottish government’s decision to send the Libyan home threatens to cause a major controversy for the Obama administration, which has strongly complained about the release – particularly since the US Senate upped the ante by beginning a full investigation into allegations that followed lobbying by BP.

In the key letter, the deputy head of the US embassy in London, Frank LeBaron, said the US believed al-Megrahi should remain in prison for his role in downing Pan Am flight 103 in 1988, but he continued: “Nevertheless, if Scottish authorities that Megrahi must be released from Scottish custody, the US position is that conditional release on compassionate grounds would be a far preferable alternative to prisoner transfer, which we strongly oppose.”

<...>

[ProSense]

40. Good grief

Debunked: Political Carnival

Even by a friggin right wing site: Little Green Footballs

There is a serious need for more factchecking.

[No Elephants]

56. LOL. Your allegedly debunking source says the same thing as the OP.

How does that debunk the OP?

From your link:

"In the letter, sent on August 12 last year to Scottish First Minister Alex Salmond and justice officials, Mr LeBaron wrote that the US wanted Megrahi to remain imprisoned in view of the nature of the crime.

The note added: “Nevertheless, if Scottish authorities come to the conclusion that Megrahi must be released from Scottish custody, the US position is that conditional release on compassionate grounds would be a far preferable alternative to prisoner transfer, which we strongly oppose.”

On the wording of the letter, same in the OP as in your allegedly debunking source, please see Reply 48.

[Kringle]

42. what's wrong with, a prisoner exchange? .nt

[SydneyDundee]

45. Because it was linked directly to a "deal" done by the UK Government with Libya

..thereby riding roughshod over the jurisdiction of Scotland in this matter. The Scottish govrnment has always maintained that Megrahi should serve his sentence entirely in Scotland or, and only in the case of terminal illness as per the law in Scotland, to allow him to die at home.....

[Kringle]

46. how very thoughful,

for Obama to be concerned with Scottish sovereignty

[SydneyDundee]

61. ..yeah, I'm sure that's what it was.....thoughtfulness

[ProSense]

44. August 2009

The Guardian: Barack Obama attacks decision to free Lockerbie bomber

Wingnuts:

Hot Air: UK sources: Obama knew about the Lockerbie bomber every step of the way

Atlas Shrugs: BREAKING/BOMBSHELL: BRITISH OFFICIAL: OBAMA LIED; KNEW IN ADVANCE ABOUT LOCKERBIE BOMBER'S RELEASE

They love to recycle outrage.

[No Elephants]

57. Yes, try to move the issues from" right or wrong?" and "honest or not quite?" to "recyled or not?"

[SydneyDundee]

59. The point is though that this would not have been "recycled"...

Had certain senators not tried to make a big deal of demonising BP (which they are capable of doiing quite well themselves) by digging up the "deal in the desert" stuff and connecting to Megrahi's release. The saying, "be careful what you wish for" comes to mind. I do agree though, it isn't new news - its very recycled, but for a new purpose - to demonise BP and make certain politicians look "tough" ahead of the mid-terms.