Surely the NYT’s on this one. . .
Well the UK Times is I believe.
See the thread above which goes to an Aussie paper....post #6.
Obama Administration Signed Off on Lockerbie Bomber Release
Friday, July 16, 2010
Obama Administration Signed Off on Lockerbie Bomber Release [Daniel Foster]
Ed Morrissey points to the buried lede in the Washington Post's new story on BP's role in securing the release from a Scottish prison of convicted Libyan terrorist Abdel Ali al-Megrahi: the complicity of the U.S. government.
A source familiar with BP negotiations at the time said BP kept the U.S. government informed of its discussions with Libya and the United Kingdom, including talks about prisoner releases. BP had also hired Mark Allen, a Middle East expert and veteran of Britains MI6 intelligence agency, and other former British government experts to help talks with Libya.
The Libya deal was done with the full blessing of the U.S. government, said the source, who sought anonymity to preserve his business relationships. There was always a policy of no surprises with the U.S. government.
As Ed goes on to say, the administration certainly did not behave as if it blessed Megrahi's extradition:
When the deal was announced, the Obama administration used the harsh diplo-speak phrase deeply regrets to describe their reaction to Megrahis parole. The decision violated a standing agreement with the UK on Megrahi, which was that the US would not press for extradition as long as Megrahi served his full life sentence in Scotland.
A lot of this turns on whether the deal was done "with the full blessing of the U.S. government," as per the Post's source, or merely with the full knowledge of the U.S. government. There are plenty of things foreign powers and allies do, and tell us that they are going to do, that we don't like.
UPDATE: The Spectator's Alex Massie calls BS, says there was no U.S./U.K.-Libyan 'deal' to release Megrahi, and that BP had zero to do with any of it.
Not seeing anything from them so far....WaPo is in the mix.