Always follow the money...

Wheezer

Diamond Member
Nov 2, 1999
6,731
1
81
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/t...ics/article6814939.ece

The British government decided it was ?in the overwhelming interests of the United Kingdom? to make Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi, the Lockerbie bomber, eligible for return to Libya, leaked ministerial letters reveal.

Gordon Brown?s government made the decision after discussions between Libya and BP over a multi-million-pound oil exploration deal had hit difficulties. These were resolved soon afterwards.

The letters were sent two years ago by Jack Straw, the justice secretary, to Kenny MacAskill, his counterpart in Scotland, who has been widely criticised for taking the formal decision to permit Megrahi?s release.

The correspondence makes it plain that the key decision to include Megrahi in a deal with Libya to allow prisoners to return home was, in fact, taken in London for British national interests.

Edward Davey, the Liberal Democrat foreign affairs spokesman, said: ?This is the strongest evidence yet that the British government has been involved for a long time in talks over al-Megrahi in which commercial considerations have been central to their thinking.?

Two letters dated five months apart show that Straw initially intended to exclude Megrahi from a prisoner transfer agreement with Colonel Muammar Gadaffi, under which British and Libyan prisoners could serve out their sentences in their home country.

In a letter dated July 26, 2007, Straw said he favoured an option to leave out Megrahi by stipulating that any prisoners convicted before a specified date would not be considered for transfer.

Downing Street had also said Megrahi would not be included under the agreement.

Straw then switched his position as Libya used its deal with BP as a bargaining chip to insist the Lockerbie bomber was included.

The exploration deal for oil and gas, potentially worth up to £15 billion, was announced in May 2007. Six months later the agreement was still waiting to be ratified.

On December 19, 2007, Straw wrote to MacAskill announcing that the UK government was abandoning its attempt to exclude Megrahi from the prisoner transfer agreement, citing the national interest.

In a letter leaked by a Whitehall source, he wrote: ?I had previously accepted the importance of the al-Megrahi issue to Scotland and said I would try to get an exclusion for him on the face of the agreement. I have not been able to secure an explicit exclusion.

?The wider negotiations with the Libyans are reaching a critical stage and, in view of the overwhelming interests for the United Kingdom, I have agreed that in this instance the [prisoner transfer agreement] should be in the standard form and not mention any individual.?

Within six weeks of the government climbdown, Libya had ratified the BP deal. The prisoner transfer agreement was finalised in May this year, leading to Libya formally applying for Megrahi to be transferred to its custody.

Saif Gadaffi, the colonel?s son, has insisted that negotiation over the release of Megrahi was linked with the BP oil deal: ?The fight to get the [transfer] agreement lasted a long time and was very political, but I want to make clear that we didn?t mention Mr Megrahi.

?At all times we talked about the [prisoner transfer agreement]. It was obvious we were talking about him. We all knew that was what we were talking about.

?People should not get angry because we were talking about commerce or oil. We signed an oil deal at the same time. The commerce and oil deals were all with the [prisoner transfer agreement].?

His account is confirmed by other sources. Sir Richard Dalton, a former British ambassador to Libya and a board member of the Libyan British Business Council, said: ?Nobody doubted Libya wanted BP and BP was confident its commitment would go through. But the timing of the final authority to spend real money was dependent on politics.?

Bob Monetti of New Jersey, whose son Rick was among the victims of the 1988 bombing, said: ?It?s always been about business.?

BP denied that political factors were involved in the deal?s ratification or that it had stalled during negotiations over the prisoner transfer talks.

A Ministry of Justice spokesman denied there had been a U-turn, but said trade considerations had been a factor in negotiating the prisoner exchange deal. He said Straw had unsuccessfully tried to accommodate the wish of the Scottish government to exclude Megrahi from agreement.

The spokesman claimed the deal was ultimately ?academic? because Megrahi had been released on compassionate grounds: ?The negotiations on the [transfer agreement] were part of wider negotiations aimed at the normalisation of relations with Libya, which included a range of areas, including trade.

?The exclusion or inclusion of Megrahi would not serve any practical purpose because the Scottish executive always had a veto on whether to transfer him.?

A spokesman for Lord Mandelson said he had not changed his position that the release of Megrahi was not linked to trade deals.

then they are "appalled" and "surprised" as his heroes welcome?


They kinda knew it was coming, and yeah I would not be a bit surprised if our government was aware of the deal.

 

TheSkinsFan

Golden Member
May 15, 2009
1,141
0
0
Originally posted by: Uhtrinity
All the more reason to get off of middle eastern oil. Just sickening!!

1. Libya is not in the Middle East.

2. Everything is about money and power? Shocker.
 

rudder

Lifer
Nov 9, 2000
19,441
86
91
Originally posted by: Wheezer


They kinda knew it was coming, and yeah I would not be a bit surprised if our government was aware of the deal.

Seeing as 186 of the Pan Am bombing dead were Americans one would hope the U.S. was notified... whether it be the Amassador, Secretary of State whats her name, or the POTUS. I mean Obama expressed such outrage over the incident...
 

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
102,396
8,559
126
Originally posted by: TheSkinsFan

1. Libya is not in the Middle East.

neither is most of what is called the middle east
 

CPA

Elite Member
Nov 19, 2001
30,322
4
0
And to think when I mentioned Britain in the original lockerbie thread, I was slammed by another member. Guess I was right all along. Isn't that right, DividedbyZero?
 

magomago

Lifer
Sep 28, 2002
10,973
14
76
Funny how of all people, Ghaddafi's son was telling the truth. Perhaps we need to re asses who is habitually lying and who is telling the truth? Makes me chuckle because I think and go back to Iraq and how people are insistent that it isn't about oil (imo its a mixture of oil and geopolitical location of Iraq in the middle east) and that its really cause Saddam was a big bad boy
 

brandonbull

Diamond Member
May 3, 2005
6,363
1,222
126
Originally posted by: rudder
Originally posted by: Wheezer


They kinda knew it was coming, and yeah I would not be a bit surprised if our government was aware of the deal.

Seeing as 186 of the Pan Am bombing dead were Americans one would hope the U.S. was notified... whether it be the Amassador, Secretary of State whats her name, or the POTUS. I mean Obama expressed such outrage over the incident...

Since he has served his time for in the UK for the killings, can we expect him to start serving time in the US?

 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
74,567
6,710
126
Originally posted by: Common Courtesy
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Total lies as you can read here.

Do you expect that the government will own up to such a scenario?

We are not at the point where that is the question. We need to know if the transparency mentioned in my piece is real or not. If it is real we know there IS nothing to own up to.
 

LunarRay

Diamond Member
Mar 2, 2003
9,993
1
76
We accept as true that the 'bomber guy' has been released. Some accept as true that some kind of deal occurred that induced Scotland to effect the release and Some reject that notion.
I think there is always a motive attached to anything folks do especially governments. What that motive may be becomes clearer as facts are known to the folks out side of the decision maker circle.

We are still at the develop the facts stage. How anyone can bury themselves in a cement block at this point is... well, it is unfortunate.
 

Cuda1447

Lifer
Jul 26, 2002
11,757
0
71
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Total lies as you can read here.


You believe some of the most outrageous stuff. Do you really think this story came out of no where? Of course its freaking true. Just because libya 'denies' it doesn't mean jack shit. Clinton denied fucking Lewinsky, but we all know the truth about that too. Come on man, pull your head out of your ass.


*edit* From the article...
Libya has always denied any role in the bombing.


Yea, I believe a fucking word Libya officials say. :roll:

 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
74,567
6,710
126
Originally posted by: Cuda1447
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Total lies as you can read here.


You believe some of the most outrageous stuff. Do you really think this story came out of no where? Of course its freaking true. Just because libya 'denies' it doesn't mean jack shit. Clinton denied fucking Lewinsky, but we all know the truth about that too. Come on man, pull your head out of your ass.


*edit* From the article...
Libya has always denied any role in the bombing.


Yea, I believe a fucking word Libya officials say. :roll:

My Dear Sir, I posted to show the absurdity of believing anything reported on this issue, what I posted and your own absurd certainty, because we don't know much yet about what if anything went on. You might want to note for future reference that I am little interested in the factual side of politics but am fascinated by all the certainty folk of political striped have. You mystical abilities to know facts that are unknown amazes me. I had hoped that by appearing to be as absurd in my acceptance of facts about which I know nothing would prompt you to look at how you have done the same thing. I am. of course, used to the fact that while people easily spot my absurdity they almost never note that I am holding a mirror.

Naturally I could just tell you you are a fucking idiot but I also know that by doing so you'll just get all defensive. No, it is always better for a fool to discover on his own that he is a fool, at least that's how it happened for me.
 

rudder

Lifer
Nov 9, 2000
19,441
86
91
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Originally posted by: Common Courtesy
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Total lies as you can read here.

Do you expect that the government will own up to such a scenario?

We are not at the point where that is the question. We need to know if the transparency mentioned in my piece is real or not. If it is real we know there IS nothing to own up to.

Interesting meeting indeed.

And so it seems the White House has blocked the release of all the documents pertaining to this conversation. Transparency... well it sounds good enough coming off the teleprompter.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,545144,00.html

The Scottish government told FOX News Tuesday that the U.S. government refuses to allow them to release details of any communication between Scotland and the U.S. over al-Megrahi's release.

A source with the Scottish government, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the demand was made in a letter sent Tuesday from U.S. Embassy Chief of Mission Richard LeBaron.
 

TheSkinsFan

Golden Member
May 15, 2009
1,141
0
0
Originally posted by: rudder
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Originally posted by: Common Courtesy
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Total lies as you can read here.

Do you expect that the government will own up to such a scenario?

We are not at the point where that is the question. We need to know if the transparency mentioned in my piece is real or not. If it is real we know there IS nothing to own up to.

Interesting meeting indeed.

And so it seems the White House has blocked the release of all the documents pertaining to this conversation. Transparency... well it sounds good enough coming off the teleprompter.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,545144,00.html

The Scottish government told FOX News Tuesday that the U.S. government refuses to allow them to release details of any communication between Scotland and the U.S. over al-Megrahi's release.

A source with the Scottish government, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the demand was made in a letter sent Tuesday from U.S. Embassy Chief of Mission Richard LeBaron.
Now, why would they go and do something like that? hmmm....