Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and Lockerbie: lets get the facts straight, shall we?

In my news round-up yesterday I highlighted Prime Minister Gordon Brown’s feeble attempts to pull what amounts to a “hey, quick, look over there!”-type distraction with respect to the recent release of lockerbie terrorist, Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi, when he turned on President Obama and Secretary Clinton for having been informed about al Megrahi’s release from prison. You see, UK officials are getting a lot of heat now that it appears that the “compassionate release” of al Megrahi, who has cancer, had less to do with compassion and more to do with oil and trade with Libya.

I know, shocking. Raise your hand if you didn’t see that coming.

Unfortunately, current critics of the Obama administration have joined on the “lets lash out at Obama and Clinton” bandwagon because apparently there is nothing that they won’t politicize. The problem is, they don’t really seem to have their facts straight, at least in so far as we know the facts.

Here’s the take from one such blog, Scared Monkeys, based on a story by Gateway Pundit. The Scared Monkeys post is theatrically entitled, ‘The Audacity of Disingenuous’ :

From the continuing tales of Obama, “the Audacity of Disingenuousness” … according to British sources, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton knew about the release of the Lockerbie bomber every step of the way.

Downing Street has hit back at  Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton for attacking the decision to release the Lockerbie bomber.

President Obama and the US Secretary of State fuelled a fierce American backlash against Britain, claiming Abdelbaset Al Megrahi should have been forced to serve out his jail sentence in Scotland – but a senior Whitehall aide said their reaction was ‘disingenuous’.

British officials claim Mr Obama and Mrs Clinton were kept informed at all stages of discussions concerning Megrahi’s return.

How will the families of those who died in the Lockerbie bombing feel about this? They knew. I think Obama approval ratings just went down another 5 points. I cannot wait until Team Obama starts spinning this story as it all depends on what is, is. We never said we did not know what they were doing, we always said we opposed it. Mark my words, they will nuance the story.

Ok, first of all, as I said yesterday, assuming that Secretary Clinton and President Obama were informed “every step of the way” there is a big, not so subtle difference between being informed about the deliberations and agreeing with the release of al Megrahi. Never mind that the folks over at Scared Monkeys seem to accept without question the UK’s version of events but also notice how they seem to delight in the idea that the victim’s families are going to lash out at Secretary Clinton and President Obama for simply knowing about the release ahead of time, as if to suggest that they [Clinton and Obama] were supportive of the decision to release al Megrahi. And that, is preposterous.

Luckily, people like Vicky Ward are trying to get at some of the facts of this case, so lets take a look at some of them:

In Britain’s Sunday Telegraph, the British reporter Andrew Alderson claims that Libya paid three doctors to give the Scottish government medical evidence that Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi, 57, the convicted Lockerbie killer, had only two or three months to live.

In fact, other doctors, according to Alderson’s report, said in June that Megrahi, who suffers from prostate cancer, could have nine months — or more — to live. But the three doctors whom Libya allegedly paid had their diagnoses included in the sealed files that Scotland refuses to open to the public, citing “privacy concerns.’

[snip]

The piece goes on to acknowledge what we already know — that though Britain’s government refuses to accept responsibility for Megrahi’s release — that Jack Straw, Britain’s Justice Minister has now stated on the record that the British were keenly aware that if Megrahi was not released trade deals worth billions, including a massive one with BP, would be canceled.
 
Alderson writes: “British businessmen were also told that plans to open a London office of the Libyan Investment Authority, a sovereign fund with $136 billion (£83billion) to invest, would be jeopardized if Megrahi died in jail.

Britain provided aid for Libya, believed to be the first since the Lockerbie bombing, when the release of Megrahi was being discussed. The £146,000 grant — which senior Tories suspect was a “sweetener” to Libya — was provided by the British Embassy in 2007-08 at the behest of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office…

Ward then follows up with another article/commentary over at HuffPo, where she takes aim at the claim that Secretary Clinton and President Obama were/are somehow complicit in all of this and I encourage anyone interested to go take a look at the whole article. Here’s an excerpt:

The British Mail on Sunday meanwhile queried America’s outrage over Megrahi’s release as being “disingenuous,” suggesting that of course Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had known all along what was cooking – as had the Department of Justice and President Obama. The paper quoted Whitehall sources as being annoyed at what they perceive as the faux reaction this side of the Atlantic. They thought it was being overdone.
My column endorsed Tory Leader David Cameron’s call for an investigation into what smells like a pyramid of intricate double-dealing, with the defiant British Prime Minister Gordon Brown on its top.

Every day that passes, with Brown refusing to acknowledge that Britain’s interests in Libya’s oil had anything to do with Megrahi’s release – while his aides leak otherwise – the more tenuous his position atop Britain looks.

[snip]

First, to deal with the Mail: According to MacAskill’s parliamentary office, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton spoke to Scottish Justice Minister Kenny MacAskill on the phone a week before he made his decision about Megrahi on August 20th. MacAskill told Sec. Clinton he had not yet made up his mind what to do. She reiterated to him that the American position was clear. Megrahi must not be released. He had American blood on his hands. Enough to drown in. He must serve his sentence in a Scottish jail.

The two had no further contact until the day of Megrahi’s release., says MacAskill’s office. (It being a holiday here, the State department said they’d have to call back tomorrow to confirm this). MacAskill’s office says on August 20th he called the US embassy in London to say he’d be speaking in ten minutes and what he would say. Secretary Clinton publicly and privately expressed her outrage. So too did President Obama.

[snip]

Finally, to all those who would love to think that the Americans are secretly endorsing the British on this: I refer you to the spokesman in the US Justice Department this morning. “We most certainly did not know what they’d decided,” he said. He told me of a female FBI officer who had “worked very closely with the victims families and still does… when she found out, as MacAskill was speaking, that Megrahi was being released, what she had to say was unprintable.”

…

Vicky Ward doesn’t claim to have all the information to draw conclusions about exactly who knew what, when because obviously, not all the facts have yet come to light which is why in both articles she urges an investigation into what seems to be some double-dealing on the part of the UK. What is clear, however, is that current claims of US involvement in the underlying decision, are unfounded and I would add, politically motivated.