The Lockerbie Bomber's Release, BP, and Obama

What do those three have in common? Read on, and you will see.

Americans should be outraged to hear that the Lockerbie bomber, who had killed 270 people in a terror attack on Pan Am Flight 103 in 1988, 189 of whom were Americans, is not expected to die anytime soon. The Scots had freed him out of "compassion" because he was said to be dying of prostate cancer and had only three months to live, and they sent him back to Libya, where he was incidentally greeted as a hero. Well, the three months have come and gone, and now we are closing in on a year.

There are some other disturbing factors to consider in this case. The much-hated BP was involved in the negotiations for Megrahi's release in exchange for access to oil fields, and it is looking increasingly like President Obama gave his approval for the deal, even though he acted shocked after it went down.

Read from Liberty Pundits:

President Obama’s Collusion With BP?

"Color me unsurprised by the news that President Obama okayed the release of a terrorist to help out BP who was helping him out with his Green initiatives. You know, you scratch my back, I’ll have no principles?

Ed Morrissey notes this about a recent WaPo article:


'The White House certainly gave a different impression of the situation at the time. When the deal was announced, the Obama administration used the harsh diplo-speak phrase “deeply regrets” to describe their reaction to Megrahi’s 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.

At the time, many of us wondered why the British and the Scots would renege on such an agreement without negotiating it with the US. If the Post’s source is correct, then it appears that London did negotiate it with us — and that the Obama administration signed off on releasing a man who murdered 189 Americans in an act of international terror. It seems difficult to believe that such a decision would have come from anywhere else but the Oval Office. And it seems equally clear that any Libyan deal that didn’t involve Megrahi would hardly require our participation or approval.

BP certainly has a lot to answer for in this situation. The White House should be answering a few questions, too.'


You know, at this point, I don’t give a rats a** about BP’s lobbying. Businesses lobby, it’s what they do. I care about our terror-coddling, unprincipled President."