Saturday, September 05, 2009

Admissions from the Brits come out,

a little at a time.
LONDON — Trade and oil considerations played a big part in the decision to include the Lockerbie bomber in a prisoner transfer agreement between Britain and Libya, a senior British official said in an interview published Saturday.

Justice Secretary Jack Straw said trade, particularly a deal for oil company BP PLC, was "a very big part" of the 2007 negotiations that led to the prisoner deal. The agreement was part of a wider warming of relations between London and Tripoli
This is after
On Wednesday, Prime Minister Gordon Brown insisted there was "no conspiracy, no cover up, no double dealing, no deal on oil" over the bomber's release.
Miserable, lying two-faced little socialist bastards.
With the very best of reasons, of course:
But officials admit the prisoner transfer agreement was part of a wider set of negotiations aimed at bringing Libya in from the international cold(awww, isn't that so progressive of them?), and improving British trade prospects with the oil-rich nation.(the truth, or some of it, outs)

Documents released by the government show Straw had originally tried to ensure that al-Megrahi was exempted from any prisoner deal with Libya, but in December 2007 he changed his mind. He wrote in a letter to his Scottish counterpart that "wider negotiations with the Libyans are reaching a critical stage" and a blanket agreement was in "the overwhelming interests for the United Kingdom."

I repeat, miserable little etc.

Pay very close attention to this last bit:
Straw said Brown had not been involved in negotiations over the prisoner agreement.

"I certainly didn't talk to the PM," he was quoted as saying. "There is no paper trail to suggest he was involved at all."
Translation: "You can't prove a thing! You can't prove he was in on it!"

Nice lawyerly piece of bullshit, isn't it? I repeat: screw the British government, and every moron over there who put these people in office.

1 comment:

Roger said...

Lawyerly bullshit??? Hmmmm I wonder what is thought of the obama administration demanding that NONE of their communications with the british govt. about the impending oil / terrorist deal be released to the public. What possible reason could they have for demanding that???