Blood for oil: Libyan edition

"The British government decided it was 'in the overwhelming interests of the United Kingdom' to make Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi, the Lockerbie bomber, eligible for return to Libya, leaked ministerial letters reveal."

These letters were sent two years ago by minister Jack Straw to Kenny MacAskill, the man who made the decision this month to release the bomber. Originally, Straw opposed including the bomber in a prisoner-exchange deal (letting Libyan and British prisoners serve out their time in their home countries). But... "Straw then switched his position as Libya used its deal with BP as a bargaining chip to insist the Lockerbie bomber was included."

Huh.

Is the Lockerbie bomber really dying?

Real questions come up, noted here. The idea that his release was part of a deal to get the Libyans to make an oil deal with Britain is getting some documentary evidence now. I'll link to that story when I find it again.

bin Laden's driver found guilty

Not that I was biting my nails on this one or anything. But if we're going to have to run the whole war on terrorism this way?...it's going to be more of a Long War than anybody's been thinking. Didn't I hear some complaints the last few days that this guy wasn't properly Mirandized? Sheesh.

MIsusing the Red Cross symbol

Well, I can understand the Red Cross not wanting anybody to falsely identify as Red Cross, because if it became known that was happening, the real Red Cross guys would be under suspicion of being false, as well. Similar to how a journalists' organization demanded the CIA no longer have spies go undercover as reporters--because then real reporters could be suspected of being spies. (Of course, so can businessmen, scientists, and so on.)

So I can accept a bit of formalized (maybe ritualized?) apologies by President Uribe of Colombia, after it came out that one of the Colombian soldiers who rescued the FARC hostages improperly wore a Red Cross badge. The man said he got skittish after seeing how many terrorists they were up against, and he put it on in a fit of panic. Critics said that the fact that he had the badge to begin with showed they'd already considered this as a backup plan.

Yeah, that's probably true. And I don't blame them for it one bit. I'll let the Red Cross defend the purity of its symbols (it has good reasons), but I'll defend the Colombians for going in disguise. The terrorists don't play fair. You'll have to fight dirty and cheat. This isn't like shooting prisoners--it's simply deceiving them, which I have no problem with. So I roll my eyes a bit at the level of news coverage this generated. Not anything I'm going to get worked up over.

On the other hand, Instapundit links to this story about a drug plane flying with the Red Cross emblem painted on it. Yeah, that'll do wonders for the brand. Let's sit back and cup our ears to hear if we can pick up the howls of indignant outrage this time:

...zzz....what?...snort....zzz...

FARC and Columbian politics

The Wall Street Journal makes a good point about the apparent(!) ease with which FARC terrorists/guerillas were duped into getting into a helicopter flown by Columbian military pilots: just tell them it's a sympathetic NGO. And wear Che shirts. (Probably not these.) (But, maaaan, wouldn't that have been funny?!)

Meanwhile, the captured FARC documents, e-mails, and the like are turning up interesting names. The WSJ (referenced above) and this website say that a sympathetic Columbian senator, Piedad Cordoba, advised FARC not to release one particular hostage. Amazing. Have to see if those charges stick.

Captured laptop documents Venezuelan aid to FARC

Well, this has got to be embarassing. After killing the FARC leader Raul Reyes, the Colombians have captured a rebel laptop with all kinds of neat-o documents on it. Including discussion of what may be a $300 million gift from Chavez to the rebels: "Who, where, when and how will we receive the dollars and store them?" What to do, what to do?

It also reveals the US (who has some citizens being held hostage by FARC) has been making overtures to them in some odd way. I hope we're not really negotiating with this bunch, but I understand the motivation to do so. Weird is this passage, though:

Writing two days before his death, Reyes tells his secretariat comrades that "the gringos," working through Ecuador's government, are interested "in talking to us on various issues."

"They say the new president of their country will be (Barack) Obama," noting that Obama rejects both the Bush administration's free trade agreement with Colombia and the current military aid program.

Reyes said the response he relayed is that the United States would have to publicly express that desire.

Huh. Well, I'd like to see more about what that means!

Link for Pakistan post

I forgot to link below. Here's the BBC story on Bhutto calling for protests against Musharraf's emergency rule. I reckon the big news is her split from Musharraf, after their earlier negotiations for her return.

The trouble in Pakistan

Grrr. Musharraf is breaking promises again, or it sure seems like it. Is it a coincidence that his declaration of martial law occurs just as Bhutto has returned for a revived political career?

I don't know...maybe it is simply a result of the Islamist attacks recently; it's so hard to tell from the news reporting whether there's been a sharp increase in their number since Bhutto's return or not. Obviously there was the large attack on Bhutto's arrival itself, but I haven't been aware of what else is going on in the country, differently from before.

I would have to think that Musharraf knows his arrangements with Bhutto (to run together, as it seems, for elected office) put him in a very public commitment to going ahead with democracy. Is he really going to turn opinion that strongly against himself for this?

Of course, he'd promised to hold elections a few years ago, too, and look where they are now. I really hope he upholds the deal that Bhutto's return implied. Pakistan's going to need democracy, and it's going to need to marginalize the radical Islamist elements within the society. Maybe the Musharraf/Bhutto arrangement could do that.

There are no "coincidences" with Karl Rove

So, let me get this straight: Karl Rove resigns, and a week or so later, we have a new video from "Osama bin Laden"?! I don't think so! If there's one thing we have learned from our experiences with Mr. Rove, it's that there are no coincidences. There are, instead, grand schemes being played out on the political stage that lesser minds see as unconnected, unrelated.

Notice that Rove didn't get fired or asked to resign. He parted on good terms with Bush. Why is that? It's because he's still working for him! After his evil masterpiece in planting the false Texas Air National Guard memos on Dan Rather and getting Rather to broadcast it, after running it past his fact-checkers and totally ignoring their warnings about them looking fake, Rove is ready for anything. Now he's made a "bin Laden" video in which the guy totally sounds like a mainstream Democrat, just in time for the primary debates. Qui bono? You know who.

Eric, over at Classical Values, sees a political opportunity in all this (for a Noam Chomsky/bin Laden no-tax ticket). I see conspiracy.

Terrorist Logos

An excellent idea: putting together a collection of terrorist logos for easy identification. They're grouped by common symbols for easy reference.