This article provides the background on the US outrage over Britain's release of the Lockerbie bomber. Even more so now it has been learned for oil deals are involved. Unlike the rumored blood for oil this is actually the willingness to ignore the blood of the murdered for oil. But then from Gordon Brown's perspective and duty it is in the best interest of the nation he is charged to represent.
It has been said that nations do not have 'friends' but only national interests. However, being only human, the personal world views of anyone representing a nation can't help but enter into their decisions. Obama's narcissism along with his belief in black liberation theology could very well have entered into Britain's calculus.
The British Empire is still viewed in its former colonies as the perpetrator of the 'white man's greed' running 'a world' in need. People retaining this grudge are the kind that would be found attending a Rev. Wright servant. To them it is not sufficient to simply be free of the yoke of oppression, they call for social justice to mask the intent of revenge.
Obama comes from this line of thinking. It would be my hope that there is a protocol office in the West Wing, maybe not. The tradition between heads of state is to exchange gifts as a representative of the nation. In Obama's case, a nation where the distinct majority of citizen's grudges were settled so long ago that we now have an affinity with our former oppressors. There is no reason the Presidency should be used to get one in on Britain. The White House surely has intelligence on Gordon Brown down the hairs on this toes. So the protocol was followed but the gift of DVD's, that an aid could just grabbed at Wal Mart, to a man with degenerative eye disease is pettiness so twelve per cent of our populations could have a momentary feeling of 'social justice'. It appears Obama may have a lot more in common with Gaddafi than with Gordon Brown.
Obama's subtle sleight to 'dis' both Britain and Gordon Brown personally may have influenced the British decision. On one hand, there is British national interests like petroleum profits, good-paying jobs and growing commerce. On the other hand, there is knowing that releasing a dying mass murderer to a hero's welcome back home will enrage your most important ally. An ally whose President gave a momentary feeling of 'social justice' for ten percent of the population over national prestige. Unfortunately many people with personal interest for justice will have to take the hit. How many are hurt, how many are help?
I have a feeling that Gordon Brown knows how to respond to a 'dis' the British way: