President Obama, Gordon Brown, Deaths in Afghanistan and More British Deception Over Lockerbie

Earlier today the White House put out a press release noting that President Obama spoke with British Prime Minister Gordon Brown and expressed his "disappointment" over the Lockerbie affair. (In case anyone has been under a rock these past few weeks, Brown has been at the center of a controversy over allegations that the Scottish government's decision to release convicted Lockerbie bomber, the Libyan Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi, 57, on compassionate grounds, was linked to Britain's fears that not releasing him would block oil deals with Libya worth hundreds of billions of dollars).

Brown has consistently denied the charges -- only to have members of his own government -- and Libya's -- contradict him. As I blogged last week, the British media then reported that the American's professed outrage on the affair was "disingenuous."

Well, speaking of disingenuous, Brown did not mention the fact that the American President had expressed his disapproval to the British press, who first learned of the conversation with Brown thanks to a White House briefing.

Further, the London press -- both left and right -- are reporting of great anger in the British army about Brown's personal order to send in British commandos for a pre-dawn raid to rescue the British New York Times journalist, Stephen Farrell, who had been captured in Afghanistan.

Unfortunately for Brown, as we know, the rescue did not go smoothly. Both a British paratrooper and Farrell's interpreter, Sultan Munadi, were killed. Top hostage negotiators have told the London Times they are furious -- that they were days away from securing Farrell's release. Even the Queen, it's been reported, has recently read Brown the riot act over lack of equipment in Afghanistan.

The Guardian's Robert Fox writes:

Was the daring rescue of the New York Times journalist Stephen Farrell a risk too far, for all concerned?

Today we are hearing that the brass in the British Army are angry that valuable special forces troops had to be tasked to rescue the reporter from the Taliban in Kunduz, and that one of their own troopers died in the operation as well as the reporter's colleague and two Afghans.

Questions are now being raised whether Farrell should have heeded warnings not to go to northern Kunduz. Since he dared to do so, shouldn't he have been left to reap the consequences? Furthermore, wasn't Gordon Brown, who took the ultimate decision to send the special forces in, too trigger-happy -- in the clear hope that by daring to order such a bold move, he would win much-needed public applause?

Well, if applause is what Gordon Brown wants, he's not getting it. What he's got, instead, is blood on his hands and the stink of corruption all around him. One hopes there will be investigative reporting into what happened and why in Afghanistan -- and if necessary, accountability for several tragic deaths.

The attempted cover-up over Brown's less-than-cordial conversation with Obama is just one more signal that the truth is considered an inconvenience for this British premier. When, for the sake of his country, is he going to do the decent thing -- and resign?

 

Follow Vicky Ward on Twitter: www.twitter.com/VickyPJWard

Comments

[Krissolaris]

Part 4.
America and its allies in its legitimate pursuit of the perpetrators of 9/11 have left a trail of bodies that would stretch half way around the globe in their pursuit of Messer’s bin Laden, al-Zawahiri and their associates. I have believed that the pursuit of these men is legitimate, but the trail of blood and tears leaves one in doubt as to any justice being had after so many have been killed in its pursuit.

At the end of the day the victims’ families end up the losers all round when confronted by the shenanigans of Politicians and the intelligence community, as they scramble to find the culprits.
Cases such as Lockerbie will inevitably fall victim over time to changing political landscapes. Ms Ward’s complaints maybe justified, but as Mr. A Greenspan said recently in an interview about the 2008 financial crash: ‘We will be back here again in another seventy years.”

[Krissolaris]

Part 3..cont
This of course makes the whole issue far more complex: an imprisoned man suffering from terminal cancer, in the process of lodging an appeal against his conviction; a conviction that has very serious questions mark, and a monumental oil deal in the offing for the UK. This is not a pretty picture for either of the Scottish or British administrations. Given this, we should consider the following: it was in the UK in 1991 that the Birmingham six's conviction was reversed for their alleged role in the Birmingham pub bombings of Nov 1974 in which 21 people were killed. W can add to this shameful episode the Guildford four, convicted for the Oct 1974 killing of five people in a Guildford pub frequented by British troops. In this case the father of one of those convicted of the offenses was himself imprisoned as a member of a co-conspirator group “The Maguire seven” and died in prison from an ongoing pulmonary condition. These events were immortalized in the award winning movie 'In the name of the Father.' All these people were in the end cleared, and their convictions quashed.

[Krissolaris]

Part2.. Cont
What is actually more important about this issue than the demise of Mr. Brown is the smoldering evidence hovering in the wings about the Megrahi conviction. A recent article by John Pilger in the British New Statesman Magazine adds credibility to the claims that this man was convicted on the most fragile evidence. There is, according to Mr. Pilger’s article, an Iranian footprint here that leads us all the way back to the shooting down by an American warship of an Iranian Commercial Airline, in 1988 in which 290 innocent people were killed, and that in fact, Iran engaged Palestinians to commit this crime in revenge; something we know that government is quite capable of. (This was in fact the original premise at the time of the incident; then the focus was shifted elsewhere.) I have personally listened to a number of the parents/Family of the British/Scottish victims raise their own concerns about the guilt of this Libyan man, based upon their own reading of this same evidence

[Krissolaris]

Part 1
Vicky Ward is correct in her assertion that Mr. Brown should go, though i don't think this issue will be the final lever for his eviction from office. I do think that trying to call him out over the Afghanistan hostage situation sounds like jumping the gun. They have been dumping the bodies of a number of British hostages at the morgue in Iraq over the last few months; this says it all. Do we really want any chance at all, that another NY based journalist has his head cut off in a back yard in Pakistan? Are we really to trust for one minute a hostage negotiation with the Taliban! And as to Ms Wards disingenuous claim: I am sure the British press feel that America would have done the same to protect its interests in a similar situation, even though they have a growing disgust for Mr. Brown for many good reasons.

[eclub]

The better question should be, when will the Brits be allowed to elect their own head of state by democratic means, and merit, and do away with the monarchy??

[temenos]

Considering that a significant majority of Brits approve of the monarchy, such a situation is not in the cards. When one considers the global perception of the US over the last few years, the American model of a republic with an elected head of state is no longer the shining ideal it once was.
The Brits have a parliamentary system of government, steeped in tradition, which is democratic and stable because it has evolved with its own set of checks and balances. Why would they change it?

[askryan]

It's a shame that with all the coverage of the health care squabbles, this important story is being overlooked. Good to know that Obama - and reporters like you - are coming down hard on Brown & Co. like they should be.

[ArmandAllegro]

Everyone with a brain and access to the news outside of the U.S. knows this guy was framed. The witnesses against him are living high of the hog at the American taxpayers expense. For those who still believe Al Magrahi guilty consider the treatment granted to Lt Kiley after his murder of countless Viet Namese. Good old fashioned double standard hard at work.

[ObamaSheeple]

What evidence do you have that he was framed? (links please, I will read them) There have been/are others in jail with terminal illnesses, why weren't/aren't they released?

[ArmandAllegro]

I must apologise I can not find the link to the story. I don't remember where I read it. I can tell you it was an article by Gwynn Dyer. The jist of it was that Iran had the motive, the downing of their airliner by the U.S. . The other thing pointed out was that no one in Britain believed Al Magrahi did it and that witnesses had recanted and one was found to have been paid $4 million by the U.S. .

[zanzig]

BTW, Biggs, the Great Train Robber was just released in the UK on compassionate grounds because of his terminal illness.

[zanzig]

Let me try posting these links again; for some reason HuffPo doesn't seem to want me to. They are for Gwynne Dwyer's investigative pieces about the guilt/innocence of al Megrahi. Not definitive by any means but certainly though provoking, and they make Ms Ward's articles read like so much hysteria.

http://www.straight.com/article-248956/gwynne-dyer-almegrahi-free-because-case-was-so-weak

http://www.thespec.com/article/624048

[noneIn2008]

Eisenhower - "Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed."