I thought we were done with the Lockerbie terrorist story.
The man who was found guilty of bombing Pan Am Flight 103 loaded with Americans was released by Scotland last August. He was going to die within 3 months and was taken back to his home country of Libya to spend his final days. End of story…right?
Evidently not. You see, Abdel Basset al-Megrahi still lives today, almost a year later. His doctors now say that he could live for another 10 years, that his prostate cancer no longer appears to be life-threatening.
OK, let’s revisit what we were told back in August, 2009 when the Scottish government released al-Megrahi. We were told that releasing this terrorist was protocol because their constitution calls for “compassion” toward inmates who are dying. To prove that his death was imminent, Al-Megrahi appeared in front of the press in a wheelchair, so weak that he couldn’t speak, violently coughing, and wearing a mask to keep his weakened body from exposure to germs. An IV drip was attached to his arm.
Liberals all over the world felt compassion for this man.
The rest of us knew better.
Our conservative common sense was affirmed when we saw the homecoming for this terrorist in Libya. Al-Megrahi boarded a flight in Glasgow dressed in a white sweatsuit, scarf over his face, and arrived on the tarmac in Libya looking like a man who had found the fountain of youth aboard the flight. He emerged from the plane with Colonel Gaddafi’s son, Saif, dressed in a grey suit and waving madly to the crowd below.
7 months after his release, Colonel Gaddafi’s son gave us an update. It seemed that al-Megrahi’s condition had improved. He also dropped a little bombshell, one which I imagine was not supposed to see the light of day. Saif told us that al-Megrahi’s release had been negotiated during trade talks with Britain- talks which included lucrative oil deals. We’ve now come to find out that BP, yes the same BP who trashed our Gulf coast in a catastrophic oil spill, may have been involved in the release of this Lockerbie terrorist.
You see, there was a $900 million exploration agreement on the table between BP and Libya. Libya wanted the release of “terrorists” to be included in the deal. BP denies that al-Megrahi was included in the negotiations, but Saif told the Middle East News that Megrahi’s release was, indeed, linked to trade deals with Britain. “In all commercial contracts, for oil and gas with Britain, (Megrahi) was always on the negotiating table.”
Prime Minister Gordon Brown, on the other hand, denied that Megrahi’s release was linked to Britain’s interest in Libya’s oil and gas reserves.
So who should we believe? Brown or Gaddafi?
The San Francisco Chronicle reported that “BP previously owned up to urging the British government to sign a prisoner release agreement with rogue-state Libya, where a $900 million oil drilling deal was pending. BP swears it didn’t suggest including Abdel Basset al-Megrahi” in the deal.
“Swears it didn’t suggest….?” Strange wording, isn’t it?
Sounds a bit like “the meaning of ‘is’.”
While most Americans were not aware of an oil deal involved in the release of this terrorist, it is not news to Glenn Johnson, who’s daughter, Beth Ann, was killed in the Lockerbie bombing. He suspected that al-Megrahi wasn’t dying when he was released because he had heard rumblings of the oil contracts between the British and Libyan governments.
“It was just a deal to get oil contracts for the British government,” Johnson said. He said that he suspected that al-Megrahi’s failing health was a cover-up for the $900 million agreement between BP and Libya.” When he heard that Tony Blair had traveled to Libya before leaving office in 2007, he assumed the deal had gone through.
But wait. London insisted again last week there was no evidence linking Megrahi’s release to protecting a lucrative BP oil deal with Libya.
A handful of Senators in Congress are asking for an investigation. Senator Chuck Schumer from New York said BP could be prosecuted under a U.S. law, the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, if they are guilty of persuading the British government to release al-Megrahi to seal a lucrative oil deal.
Not that I want to defend BP, but “persuading” is now a crime? Wouldn’t Britain ultimately be responsible for its own actions?
Prime Minister David Cameron – who is visiting US President Barack Obama – said it was a “very bad decision”. The New York Post reports that Prime Minister Cameron of Great Britain was clearly against the release of al-Megrahi from the beginning. “All I know is, as leader of the opposition, I couldn’t have been more clear. I thought the release of al-Megrahi was completely and utterly wrong. I have no idea of what BP did. I’m not responsible for BP.”
Remember, this was done before Prime Minister Cameron, was in power.
Where’s Obama in all of this? When the release of al-Megrahi was first announced, we were told that it “caught him by surprise.” Later we found out that Obama had a prior conversation with Colonel Gaddafi where he made it clear that when the Lockerbie terrorist was released, there was to be no hoopla. He wanted it done in a quiet, private manner.
He knew about it beforehand, yet didn’t stop it.
So BP has more power of “persuasion” with the British government than our President?…….
Coincidentally, we now see that BP is involved in writing our Cap and Trade Bill, the one that will tax energy, promote “green” jobs, and discourage American gas and oil production…..
Something ain’t right. Why is a British oil company writing American law- especially law that appears to hurt them? Why are they able to determine the fate of foreign terrorists? Why do they have this much power?
Americans deserve some answers. The parents and relatives of those who died on Pan Am 103 deserve some justice. The problem is that we can no longer trust our government or our media to tell us the truth.
Look at the facts. Obama didn’t stop the release of al-Megrahi, instead asking Gaddafi to “keep the celebration to a minimum.” He’s pushing a Cap and Trade bill which will tax the energy in this country and also will curb drilling for oil in the U.S. He’s pushing for a moratorium on drilling in the Gulf, an initiative which will force oil rigs to leave this area and find work in foreign countries. He gave 2 Billion tax-payer dollars to Brazil so they could drill for oil in deep water, knowing full-well that the largest financial backer of the dems, George Soros, will benefit greatly- just in time for the 2012 elections.
The dots are starting to connect, but the picture is looking darker and darker.
Go to Home Page: www.awakentheelephants.com