Patterico's Pontifications

9/6/2009

Obama: Rebuilding Alliances?

Filed under: International,Obama — DRJ @ 8:57 pm

[Guest post by DRJ]

As a Presidential candidate and as President-elect, Barack Obama promised to “rebuild alliances” in Europe and “restore America’s standing in the world.” How’s that rebuilding going? Let’s hear from the British at No. 10 Downing Street:

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 say the Obama Administration was fully informed about al-Megrahi and is upset at the unexpected public reaction:

“The officials say the Americans spoke out because they were taken aback by the row over Megrahi’s release, not because they did not know it was about to happen.”

‘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.’”

First Obama sent the Uighars to Bermuda with minimal notice to the UK, and now this. If he’s not careful, President Obama isn’t going to have an alliance to rebuild.

– DRJ

69 Responses to “Obama: Rebuilding Alliances?”

  1. It’s the experience, Patterico.

    Good thing that this administration isn’t full of thumb fingered tone deaf types, huh?

    [It’s my post, Eric, not Patterico’s. I know I’ve been around too long when P and I start to look alike. — DRJ]

    Eric Blair (721b15)

  2. So the public statements from the Barcky Admin were pure hogwash. SHOCKA

    JD (285452)

  3. SHUT. UP.

    I Did Not Know This.

    Who would have suspected?

    daleyrocks (718861)

  4. Our Moron POTUS is a genius don’t you know.

    I have always believed only the mediocre could be liberal. It is the only explanation.

    The question is I have is — do you think it is also the truly evil?

    HeavenSent (01a566)

  5. At least the current occupant of the White House would never be guilty of a faux pas like, say, bowing before the king of Saudi Arabia or giving schlocko gifts to Britain’s prime minister.

    Oops.

    Mark (411533)

  6. I hate to say this, but I’m really beginning to believe that the President doesn’t care too much about the people he represents.

    Or the allies we have cultivated since, well, the Revolution.

    But, I hear things are going well in Honduras and Venezuela.

    Ag80 (b272f0)

  7. #6, You have to understand EVERYTHING the USA has done since 1976 is wrong. POTUS is here to redeem our souls and eliminate our original sin. Hallejuha!

    HeavenSent (01a566)

  8. It would be enlightening to hear former Vice President Cheney’s position on the Libya/Lockerbee release and the involvement of BP/Libya and subcontractor Halliburton. Chris Wallace tactfully avoided bringing it up in his interview days ago. This all but sinks Gordon Brown and a conservative will replace him. But if a paper trail shows the Obama Administration, (or any U.S. administration in the past) be it the President or another official, directly or indirectly gave the nod for the release of a convicted PanAm 103 terrorist by Scotland through any intermediaries, for an oil deal no less, then, to paraphrase Charlton Heston, ‘Damn them all to hell.’ And every American, regardless of your POV, should work to assure Obama is defeated in 2012.

    DCSCA (9d1bb3)

  9. DCSCA, what about Obama would make you doubt he wanted the terrorist released?

    He is already on record trying to reach out to his Arab brothers in search of a open-hand dialogue.

    HeavenSent (01a566)

  10. OBTW, Cheney has not been in Halliburton for like 10 years.

    And when he was in Halliburton, it was Clinton who signed the checks.

    Let it go. It makes you look unhinged.

    HeavenSent (01a566)

  11. DCSCA said:

    And every American, regardless of your POV, should work to assure Obama is defeated in 2012.

    OK.

    Ag80 (b272f0)

  12. It will be interesting to see the backpedal start on Tuesday. Goodness, but our President will be very busy this week. He doesn’t even have time to catch his breath between crisis…

    Dana (863a65)

  13. Lockerbie Bomber Release: What Did Obama Approve, and When Did He Approve It?…

    Blogger DRJ on powerhouse blogsite Patterico’s Pontifications links to an important article; but I think she missed one of its major implications. She linked to an article in the UK Daily Mail, “No.10 turns on Obama and Clinton for criticising……

    Big Lizards (5ca406)

  14. [...] Blogger DRJ on powerhouse blogsite Patterico’s Pontifications links to an important article; but I think she missed one of its major implications. [...]

    The Greenroom » Forum Archive » Lockerbie Bomber Release: What Did Obama Approve, and When Did He Approve It? (e2f069)

  15. [...] 0 Comments Blogger DRJ on powerhouse blogsite Patterico’s Pontifications links to an important article; but I think she missed one of its major implications. [...]

    Lockerbie Bomber Release: What Did Obama Approve, and When Did He Approve It? | America Watches Obama (4ab9a2)

  16. Dafyyd,

    Good post. Like you, I’d like to know what Obama knew and when he knew it. While I didn’t miss the implications of what the Downing Street source(s) have to say — that’s why I bolded the parts I did — like Allahpundit I assumed the Obama Administration knew. Still, for now it’s a “he said, she said” story and my guess is it will stay that way until the British or American media pushes the Obama Administration to respond.

    DRJ (3f5471)

  17. Comment by DCSCA — 9/6/2009 @ 9:56 pm

    Looks like The One just jumped the shark troll.

    M. Scott Eiland (5ccff0)

  18. Heavan sent: Our President is a weak idealogue that others will use and abuse like a blonde in a porno movie. He’s got no balls when it comes to actually standing up for our country and the entire world knows it. The Russians are licking their chops. God Help US!

    Dave B (7c95d5)

  19. So, Team Obie knew about it all along, allowed it to proceed, and when the public gets spitting mad about it, they try to deflect the criticism by pointing a finger somewhere else?

    How nice.

    Blacque Jacques Shellacque (76097c)

  20. It has been as obvious as it has illogical that our current administration has done it’s level best to ruin a very long, very strong alliance between the US and UK.
    Could the reason really be something as trivial as our leaders (personally) feeling the need for retribution over the UK’s long past colonial days?

    Why are our leaders going out of their way to blatantly destroy this friendship and how on Earth is this in our National interest?

    Drider (4a2bd6)

  21. Who is “Patterico”?

    Val (4dc61b)

  22. Dave B – ck. your Bible if you have one…

    There’s no reference to porn movies or balls “for heaven’s sake”.

    Val (4dc61b)

  23. I’ve been hearing rumbles that Libya paid off doctors to say that the killer/terrorist was much more sick than he really is.

    Obama knew that the UK was releasing the killer. He doesn’t care.

    Vivian Louise (e35449)

  24. This post has been linked for the HOT5 Daily 9/7/2009, at The Unreligious Right

    UNRR (9e1528)

  25. Hey, what’s a few hundred innocent lives when there’s an entire world to remake in your own image? Pish posh, those bereaved relatives should stop whining and embrace the new regime…and shut up! SHUT UP!

    Dmac (a93b13)

  26. And, we won’t hear a damn thing about this from the MSM.

    dianne (3670e4)

  27. Isn’t Halliburton an Abu Dhabi corporation?

    AD - RtR/OS! (fad78f)

  28. Another example of the incompetence of Obama’s foreign policy. Actually, just plain ordinary incompetence. Obama and his syncophants weirdly think that people won’t call them on their whoppers.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  29. 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.’
    Those folks should quit whining and take ownership of their mess. Their mess. Their problem. It was entirely their decision. Not the US government’s.

    The Emperor (0c8c2c)

  30. “…It was entirely their decision. Not the US government’s.”

    I think the facts are still not completely known on this matter; so, it would appear that you are arguing facts not in evidence.

    AD - RtR/OS! (fad78f)

  31. Comment by AD – RtR/OS! — 9/7/2009 @ 9:45 am

    Wouldn’t I be a lot like you folks here if that were so? I mean in the habit of jumping to negative conclusions on all things Obama. Besides, why are you more prone to side with the British govt on this issue rather than your own country? Would you take this position if this was a Republican administration? (Guess I already know the answer to that.)

    The Emperor (0c8c2c)

  32. I didn’t take any side, just pointed out that we do not know the degree, if any, of collusion between 10 Downing Steet, and 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, on this matter.
    Quite frankly, I don’t trust any of them (including the Scots, too).

    AD - RtR/OS! (fad78f)

  33. The Emperor, your #31 is incoherent. Strawmen, putting words in AD’s mouth, etc. Attacking AD for a position that you invented for him. Just incoherent.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  34. Perhaps I should have left in the “Dan Aykroyd” rejoinder that I deleted?

    AD - RtR/OS! (fad78f)

  35. From Big Lizards, quoting the Daily Mail:
    “…British officials claim Mr Obama and Mrs Clinton were kept informed at all stages of discussions concerning Megrahi’s return…”

    And a big shout-out to DRJ for her appearance (through proxy) at Big Lizards.

    AD - RtR/OS! (fad78f)

  36. ‘They knew about our prisoner transfer agreement with Libya and they knew that the Scots were considering Megrahi’s case.’
    I am so amused at these folks. How is knowing you are going to do something you have decided to do equals to agreeing and supporting it? No where in the link does it suggest that the Obama administration were in support.

    The Emperor (0c8c2c)

  37. I haven’t seen this much tap-dancing since George Murphy and Shirley Temple.

    AD - RtR/OS! (fad78f)

  38. #36- If American officials, in current or previous administrations, were aware and didn’t try to stop it, did ground work or made moves to make it easier for Scotland to release Megrahi, for an oil deal no less, they should be publicly held to account. All UK/U.S./Libyan business and government contact with the Qadhafi regime must be opened to review and examination. For instance, in 1996, Cheney, then with Halliburton, (a BP/Libya subcontractor,) wanted to increase oil interests in Libya and opposed the Iran and Libya Sanctions Act that was passed in that year during the Clinton Administration. One of the provisions of the act Cheney opposed: ‘put pressure on Libya to comply with U.N. resolutions that, among other things, call for Libya to extradite for trial the accused perpetrators of the Pan Am 103 bombing.’ – per the NYT, 7/27/00. But it is the current administration in power that must first be held to account.

    The Obama Administration could have used significant fiscal and political pressure to stall or stop the release. For God’s sake, they very idea of releasing Megrahi ‘on humanitarian grounds’ in the first place is idiotic. But then there’s all that light sweet Libyan crude to consider. The bastard deserves to die in a Scotish prison under medical care which is a signficantly more humanitarian end than the one dealt to the passengers of PanAm 103- being blown out of the sky and plummeting 40,000 feet to their deaths, raining carnage and still more death on to Lockerbee. In the U.S., Manson family member and convicted killer Susan Atkins has terminal brain cancer and was denied parole on humanitarian grounds and will die in prison. But when it comes to oil, as the Godfather’s Michael Correlone might muse, “It’s not personal. It’s business.”

    DCSCA (9d1bb3)

  39. DCSCA, your repetition of irrelevant nonsense about Cheney is showing that you are quite the silly clown.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  40. The Livingston Group, led by Former Republican Senator Robert Livingston, lobbied for Quadaffi until three days ago. He made MILLIONS for himself personally working for Quadaffi. Follow the money…

    Proud Lib (b2eab0)

  41. Proud Lib, and how much did Jimmy Carter’s brother get from Libya? All of which is utterly irrelevant to this post. Just nothing but smoke screens from the Obama cult.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  42. Comment by SPQR — 9/7/2009 @ 12:26 pm
    I think you must have been “hired” to the job of debunking and dismissing comments that don’t flow in the general direction of this blog. All you do is to offer one-liners, debunking comments even when there might be some legitimacy to some of them. That is not intellectual work. Try making your own points and in them show concrete evidence why the other comments are wrong or misleading. Not these usual, lazy one-liners. It’s becoming a boring pattern. Predictable is boring.

    The Emperor who feels marmosets need respect too. (1b037c)

  43. The Emperor, are you making an accusation that you can back up? Or are you full of shit as usual?

    SPQR (26be8b)

  44. Huh? People love predictable. They love patterns. They love repetition. Here is a song for you about how teh peoples love the repetition.

    happyfeet (6b707a)

  45. Now he wants me to back it up. How laughable. Just read your comments on each thread. It’s hardly ever an original thought. Mostly targeted at comments you don’t like. Just admit it, you are a paid Debunker! Not that it’s wrong. Just that I would love to see agree with people sometimes. In the spirit of bipartisanship.

    The Emperor who feels marmosets need respect too. (1b037c)

  46. The Emperor, you have made an accusation that I’m paid to comment here. Back it up or withdraw it like the sack of crap that you are.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  47. Obama does not care about the UK or Europe. The only relevance the UK has is a philosophy that Barry, unlike most Americans, does not share.

    IMHO he is forming an alliance of leftists in this hemisphere. Loans to Lula, support to Zelaya, love for Fidel, it’s all pointing to a new alignment, along his own leftist lines.

    Patricia (7aaa75)

  48. Still waiting to see The Emperor back up his accusation.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  49. Still awaiting the gutless Emperor backing up the slander.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  50. Lovie – You got called out. It is not surprising that after having been called out, you chose to slink away, to crawl back under your rock.

    JD (725e5a)

  51. i am still in shock that we elected this man to the highest office. no experience and no talent go hand in hand! you got what you paid for America, and while the anonymous organ grinder’s crank out the tunes just sit back and watch our monkey dance for another two and a half years!

    tj (d062f4)

  52. Nah, lovie doesn’t need to back anything up. Lovie is a paid attack ad, after all.

    John Hitchcock (3fd153)

  53. Comment by JD — 9/8/2009 @ 6:37 am
    Why are you always in a hurry to say that someone has run away? Maybe I have other things doing. Ever considered that?
    SPQR. I simply made an observation. It’s interesting to see you all worked up about something. For once.

    The Emperor who prefers to see himself as "blog-czar"! (1b037c)

  54. I simply made an observation. It’s interesting to see you all worked up about something. For once.
    Comment by The Emperor who prefers to see himself as “blog-czar”! — 9/8/2009 @ 9:38 am

    lovie, it wasn’t an observation, it was an accusation. You should retract or substantiate… but I think you won’t. Yet.

    Stashiu3 (ed6467)

  55. Nah, The Emperor doesn’t need to back anything up
    Comment by John Hitchcock — 9/8/2009 @ 9:22 am
    Thanks John. You keep telling them that.

    The Emperor who prefers to see himself as "blog-czar"! (1b037c)

  56. Lovie, do not change my words and turn your changed version of my words into a quote of mine. Not only is that a form of plagiarism, that is also libel.

    John Hitchcock (3fd153)

  57. John Hitchcock,

    IIRC, lovey has been scolded for that before.

    Stashiu3 (ed6467)

  58. Yet.
    Comment by Stashiu3 — 9/8/2009 @ 9:45 am

    Yet? Interesting.

    The Emperor who prefers to see himself as "blog-czar"! (1b037c)

  59. Just means that I still have some small shred of hope that there is a smidge of decency in you that will eventually come out.

    Stashiu3 (ed6467)

  60. But even if it does, you neither retracted nor substantiated, so I was correct.

    Stashiu3 (ed6467)

  61. Nah, The Emperor doesn’t need to back anything up
    Comment by John Hitchcock — 9/8/2009 @ 9:22 am

    FTFY.
    Thanks John. You keep telling them that. (Happy now?) It is also offensive and libelous to keep calling someone a different name than the one he/she prefers to be addressed by.

    The Emperor who prefers to see himself as "blog-czar"! (1b037c)

  62. Lovie, how about I call you by a more accurate name instead? How does “specific body fluid recepticle” sound? More accurate, anyway.

    John Hitchcock (3fd153)

  63. Might be offensive, but it’s not libel.

    Stashiu3 (ed6467)

  64. Opinion is not libel. “Disgusting, lying, passive-aggresive, filthy douchebag of a spammer” is perfectly fine.

    nk (df76d4)

  65. Comment by John Hitchcock — 9/8/2009 @ 10:06 am

    Call me what you like John. As long as it helps you get it up. I am all for sacrificing for the common good. ;)

    The Emperor who prefers to see himself as "blog-czar"! (1b037c)

  66. I am all for sacrificing for the common good. ;)
    Comment by The Emperor who prefers to see himself as “blog-czar”! — 9/8/2009 @ 10:17 am

    Then you should leave and not come back. Sacrifice for the common good lovey.

    Stashiu3 (ed6467)

  67. Comment by Stashiu3 — 9/8/2009 @ 10:20 am

    If I thought that it would be the best for you, I would. But I think you need me here to put you in check. Keeping it real. Making sure that both sides of the debate are heard. You need me. You just don’t know it yet. :)

    The Emperor who prefers to see himself as "blog-czar"! (1b037c)

  68. And you do this by making baseless accusations.

    Which you cannot backup and are without the integrity to retract.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  69. Baseless accusation still not withdrawn. I think we can agree that The Emperor is without any integrity.

    SPQR (26be8b)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.3245 secs.