‘The US was kept fully in touch about everything that was going on with regard to Britain’s discussions with Libya in recent years and about Megrahi,’ said the Whitehall aide.
‘We would never do anything about Lockerbie without discussing it with the US. It is disingenuous of them to act as though Megrahi’s return was out of the blue.
'They knew about our prisoner transfer agreement with Libya and they knew that the Scots were considering Megrahi’s case.’
At home, of course, we heard Obama say Megrahi's release was "a mistake," Eric Holder called it "regrettable," and Hillary Clinton called it "absolutely wrong."
The fine point is did he sign off on it? Obama defenders will say that maybe Obama did in fact know about the negotiations and release, but that doesn't mean he signed off on it. So as David Frum asked last week, how vocally did Team Obama protest?"Exactly how vigorously did the Obama administration protest? Why did those protests produce so little result? Do British/Scots feel so little regard for the new Obama administration that they ignore its strong complaints? Or were complaints possibly less than strong? After all, a complaint in the form, “We don’t want you to do X, but if you must do X, we prefer that you do it in the following way…” does not constitute a very resounding warning."
No matter what the answer it is yet another sign that Obama is soft of terrorists. At least, terrorists will see it that way. And that's what really matters.
(H/T: Memeorandum and Hot Air)