Posted on 09/10/2009 3:09:34 AM PDT by Scanian
Back from summer recess, Congress faces continuing outrage over Scotland's release of Libyan terrorist Abdel Bassett al-Megrahi, convicted of destroying Pan Am Flight 103 in 1988. How did this happen? How is it possible, at the supposed height of "Obamamania" worldwide, that Great Britain, our closest ally, would free a terrorist who killed 270 innocents, 189 of them Americans? What does this mean for our policy against terrorism?
British Prime Minister Gordon Brown's own ministers now concede, despite earlier denials, that Megrahi's triumphal return to Tripoli was linked to British interest in greater trade and investment with Libya.
In the United States, polls show over 80 percent of Americans opposed to the release. That disgust spilled over to Libyan leader Moammar Khadafy's impending visit to New York to attend the UN General Assembly opening in two weeks. Khadafy had wanted to pitch his tent, literally, on Libyan-owned property in a New Jersey residential neighborhood. Vociferous popular opposition blocked that idea, and Khadafy's looking elsewhere for a place to stay.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
Not only he dropped the ball, he is running the ball towards the other side’s goal.
I thought that the foreign press was finally getting involved in 0bamys dirt pitch at the ball game.
The Brits have said that Obama was kept informed and knew all along and offered no objection. Only when he realized that Americans were upset enough to blame him for it, did he make a mild demurrer.
I think we all know that Megrahi is simply another beneficiary of Obama’s desire to release all Islamic terrorists who have attacked the US or a Western power.
>>The Brits have said that Obama was kept informed and knew all along and offered no objection.
Have you seen an article where there is an attributed source for this? So far, unfortunately, I’ve only seen articles with anonymous sources.
Actually, I believe it was even Gordon Brown who said it, sometime last week. If you search for “10 Downing Street” (I think that phrase was in the headline) you might find it; it was in the British press.
Was this the article you had seen?
No.10 turns on Obama and Clinton for criticising decision to release Lockerbie bomber
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1211495/No-10-turns-Obama-Clinton-criticising-decision-release-Lockerbie-bomber.html
All it has is “a senior Whitehall aide” and “British officials”.
Obumble didn't drop the ball - he never picked it up.
bttt
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.