http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/news/489993/CIA-freeze-intel-over-Libya-deal-CIA-withhold-intelligence.html

<quotes>

CIA FREEZE INTEL OVER LIBYA 'DEAL'

BRITAIN was facing the likelihood of an increased terror threat last night - 
after America's CIA chiefs threatened to stop sharing vital intelligence 
with us following the Lockerbie bomber's release.

They have also warned they may not pass on vital information picked up by 
their sophisticated eavesdropping satellites.

</quotes>

A rather spiteful, petty and immature response if true. Some would say it 
was typical of American arrogance, threat and blackmail used to get others 
to comply with American wishes, but fair enough, if they want to stop 
sharing intelligence there's no reason for the UK share ours with the US, 
perhaps no reason to maintain the so-called special relationship at all, it 
all seems one way anyway.

At least the US Intelligence services are only throwing a tantrum, when the 
US is really upset it seems they frequently come to bomb or invade to force 
compliance; some people believe the US has the god given right to impose 
their will, ideology and values on the rest of the world. If 'do as we say 
or we won't care if harm comes to you', are such values, they're not the 
ones I'd like to see gaining widespread appeal. They're not values I'd 
expect anyone I called 'friend' to hold.

On Sun, 13 Sep 2009 14:55:01 +0100, The Happy Hippy  
 wrote:

> http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/news/489993/CIA-freeze-intel-over-Libya-deal-CIA-withhold-intelligence.html
>
> <quotes>
>
> CIA FREEZE INTEL OVER LIBYA 'DEAL'
>
> BRITAIN was facing the likelihood of an increased terror threat last  
> night -
> after America's CIA chiefs threatened to stop sharing vital intelligence
> with us following the Lockerbie bomber's release.
>
> They have also warned they may not pass on vital information picked up by
> their sophisticated eavesdropping satellites.
>
> </quotes>
>
> A rather spiteful, petty and immature response if true. Some would say it
> was typical of American arrogance, threat and blackmail used to get  
> others
> to comply with American wishes, but fair enough, if they want to stop
> sharing intelligence there's no reason for the UK share ours with the US,
> perhaps no reason to maintain the so-called special relationship at all,  
> it
> all seems one way anyway.
>
> At least the US Intelligence services are only throwing a tantrum, when  
> the
> US is really upset it seems they frequently come to bomb or invade to  
> force
> compliance; some people believe the US has the god given right to impose
> their will, ideology and values on the rest of the world. If 'do as we  
> say
> or we won't care if harm comes to you', are such values, they're not the
> ones I'd like to see gaining widespread appeal. They're not values I'd
> expect anyone I called 'friend' to hold.
>
>

I don't think for a minute that Washington will take its bat home,  
although there may be some throwing of toys out of the pram for a while,  
just to please the extreme right who have difficulty getting up to date.

Should there be any substance in the story, however, it might be a good  
thing, in that too often in the recent past - not least owing to the dodgy  
and unreliable methods the CIA have been using - the 'intelligence' that  
has been shared has been downright misleading and unreliable, wasting much  
valuable time, money and cost in human lives, and obstructing our efforts  
to bring terrorists to justice. The prime example being the whole  
justification for the Iraq invasion, and the half-baked crap about WMD.

-- 
Facts are sacred ... but comment is free.

In message <op.uz7bx6c0fergpa@debian>, Robin T Cox 
writes
>On Sun, 13 Sep 2009 14:55:01 +0100, The Happy Hippy  <the.happy.hippy.n
>ntp@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
>> http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/news/489993/CIA-freeze-intel-over-
>>Libya-deal-CIA-withhold-intelligence.html
>>
>> <quotes>
>>
>> CIA FREEZE INTEL OVER LIBYA 'DEAL'
>>
>> BRITAIN was facing the likelihood of an increased terror threat last
>>night -
>> after America's CIA chiefs threatened to stop sharing vital intelligence
>> with us following the Lockerbie bomber's release.
>>
>> They have also warned they may not pass on vital information picked up by
>> their sophisticated eavesdropping satellites.
>>
>> </quotes>
>>
>> A rather spiteful, petty and immature response if true. Some would say it
>> was typical of American arrogance, threat and blackmail used to get
>>others
>> to comply with American wishes, but fair enough, if they want to stop
>> sharing intelligence there's no reason for the UK share ours with the US,
>> perhaps no reason to maintain the so-called special relationship at
>>all,   it
>> all seems one way anyway.
>>
>> At least the US Intelligence services are only throwing a tantrum,
>>when   the
>> US is really upset it seems they frequently come to bomb or invade to
>>force
>> compliance; some people believe the US has the god given right to impose
>> their will, ideology and values on the rest of the world. If 'do as
>>we   say
>> or we won't care if harm comes to you', are such values, they're not the
>> ones I'd like to see gaining widespread appeal. They're not values I'd
>> expect anyone I called 'friend' to hold.
>>
>>
>
>I don't think for a minute that Washington will take its bat home,
>although there may be some throwing of toys out of the pram for a
>while,  just to please the extreme right who have difficulty getting up
>to date.
>

Since the UK is in a military operation with the US I would take *ANY*
threat of stopping intelligence sharing seriously and pull out ALL
troops from Afghanistan and Iraq. Let the US fight it's own battles.



-- 
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills  Staffs  England     /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

"Chris H"  wrote ...

> In message <op.uz7bx6c0fergpa@debian>, Robin T Cox 
> writes
>>On Sun, 13 Sep 2009 14:55:01 +0100, The Happy Hippy  <the.happy.hippy.n
>>ntp@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>>
>>> http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/news/489993/CIA-freeze-intel-over-
>>>Libya-deal-CIA-withhold-intelligence.html
>>>
>>> <quotes>
>>>
>>> CIA FREEZE INTEL OVER LIBYA 'DEAL'
>>>
>>> BRITAIN was facing the likelihood of an increased terror threat last
>>>night -
>>> after America's CIA chiefs threatened to stop sharing vital intelligence
>>> with us following the Lockerbie bomber's release.
>>>
>>> They have also warned they may not pass on vital information picked up 
>>> by
>>> their sophisticated eavesdropping satellites.
>>>
>>> </quotes>
>>>
>>> A rather spiteful, petty and immature response if true. Some would say 
>>> it
>>> was typical of American arrogance, threat and blackmail used to get
>>>others
>>> to comply with American wishes, but fair enough, if they want to stop
>>> sharing intelligence there's no reason for the UK share ours with the 
>>> US,
>>> perhaps no reason to maintain the so-called special relationship at
>>>all,   it
>>> all seems one way anyway.
>>>
>>> At least the US Intelligence services are only throwing a tantrum,
>>>when   the
>>> US is really upset it seems they frequently come to bomb or invade to
>>>force
>>> compliance; some people believe the US has the god given right to impose
>>> their will, ideology and values on the rest of the world. If 'do as
>>>we   say
>>> or we won't care if harm comes to you', are such values, they're not the
>>> ones I'd like to see gaining widespread appeal. They're not values I'd
>>> expect anyone I called 'friend' to hold.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>I don't think for a minute that Washington will take its bat home,
>>although there may be some throwing of toys out of the pram for a
>>while,  just to please the extreme right who have difficulty getting up
>>to date.
>>
>
> Since the UK is in a military operation with the US I would take *ANY*
> threat of stopping intelligence sharing seriously and pull out ALL
> troops from Afghanistan and Iraq. Let the US fight it's own battles.

I think that shows the entirely silly nature of the CIA / FBI tantrum. I 
agree with Robin, nothing's likely to come of this, it is just playing to a 
certain section of the domestic audience, but it's a dangerous game to play. 
Were we not "America's ally" [sic], I could see far more serious threats 
being issued, that's the nature of rattling America's cage and America's 
sabre rattling.

When America was perceived as Top Dog, such threats would be worrisome, and 
the threat of US Military action against anyone ( including the UK if the US 
were riled enough ) is still so, but most threats are rather hollow these 
days with demonstrably poor performance in Iraq and Afghanistan, while it's 
back to a tradition of 'bombing from 30,000 feet' over Pakistan's border; 
the world has a different view of America these days. The world's changed 
and is re-aligning with new geo-political balances. America could very 
easily fid herself isolated and universally condemned as a rogue state if it 
oversteps the mark. They cannot expect "friends" like the UK to stand by 
America when having abuse and criticism very publicly heaped on them.

The US is in danger of losing the few friends it has left. America is near 
as damn it shouting "game over" for the relationship, and maybe it is. Many 
of the public have seen through the "special relationship", see it as all 
one way ( dragged into two American-led wars through loyalty to that 
relationship, giving hundreds of lives and then criticised for not doing 
enough, having our soldiers killed by US forces and then having America 
refuse to co-operate in coroner's inquests ), and the vitriolic attacks upon 
Brown, government and UK won't be forgotten in the corridors of Whitehall, 
even if relationships are restored in public. It could be enough to break 
the diplomatic camel's back. There are a lot of people who favour putting 
distance between the US and UK and establishing closer ties with Europe, the 
Far East, and an emergent Russia and Middle East.

And let's hope no one in Whitehall is revengeful, vindictive and spiteful 
enough to not tip the US the nod when something's about to go down 
state-side, simply to remind them why we're a useful ally. Or that we do 
decide to leave the US to it, fighting their own wars, be more prepared to 
speak out against America's policy and act as we would with other countries 
doing as America does.

It is indeed a dangerous game America is playing. Sooner or later the US is 
going to wake up and realise that. All empires are one day humbled. The US 
maybe hasn't been around long enough to realise that but her time will come.

"The Happy Hippy"  wrote in
news:VQ6rm.78733$OO7.20128@text.news.virginmedia.com: 

> http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/news/489993/CIA-freeze-intel-over-Libya-d
> eal-CIA-withhold-intelligence.html 
> 
> <quotes>
> 
> CIA FREEZE INTEL OVER LIBYA 'DEAL'
> 
> BRITAIN was facing the likelihood of an increased terror threat last
> night - after America's CIA chiefs threatened to stop sharing vital
> intelligence with us following the Lockerbie bomber's release.
> 
> They have also warned they may not pass on vital information picked up
> by their sophisticated eavesdropping satellites.
> 
> </quotes>
> 
> A rather spiteful, petty and immature response if true. Some would say
> it was typical of American arrogance, threat and blackmail used to get
> others to comply with American wishes, but fair enough, if they want to
> stop sharing intelligence there's no reason for the UK share ours with
> the US, perhaps no reason to maintain the so-called special relationship
> at all, it all seems one way anyway.
> 
> At least the US Intelligence services are only throwing a tantrum, when
> the US is really upset it seems they frequently come to bomb or invade
> to force compliance; some people believe the US has the god given right
> to impose their will, ideology and values on the rest of the world. If
> 'do as we say or we won't care if harm comes to you', are such values,
> they're not the ones I'd like to see gaining widespread appeal. They're
> not values I'd expect anyone I called 'friend' to hold. 

What seems to be the problem ?
Can't find your own intelligence ?

"The Happy Hippy"  wrote in message 
news:VQ6rm.78733$OO7.20128@text.news.virginmedia.com...
> http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/news/489993/CIA-freeze-intel-over-Libya-deal-CIA-withhold-intelligence.html
>
> <quotes>
>
> CIA FREEZE INTEL OVER LIBYA 'DEAL'
>
> BRITAIN was facing the likelihood of an increased terror threat last 
> night - after America's CIA chiefs threatened to stop sharing vital 
> intelligence with us following the Lockerbie bomber's release.
>
> They have also warned they may not pass on vital information picked up by 
> their sophisticated eavesdropping satellites.
>
> </quotes>
>
> A rather spiteful, petty and immature response if true. Some would say it 
> was typical of American arrogance, threat and blackmail used to get others 
> to comply with American wishes, but fair enough, if they want to stop 
> sharing intelligence there's no reason for the UK share ours with the US, 
> perhaps no reason to maintain the so-called special relationship at all, 
> it all seems one way anyway.
>
> At least the US Intelligence services are only throwing a tantrum, when 
> the US is really upset it seems they frequently come to bomb or invade to 
> force compliance; some people believe the US has the god given right to 
> impose their will, ideology and values on the rest of the world. If 'do as 
> we say or we won't care if harm comes to you', are such values, they're 
> not the ones I'd like to see gaining widespread appeal. They're not values 
> I'd expect anyone I called 'friend' to hold.
>

That's kind of irrational isn't it?  Especially as the US is most likely to 
be the target of the attacks that we're all gathering intelligence on - or 
is the idea that they share information that prevents attacks on America, 
but keep quiet about attacks on us?  I don't believe they'd really do it. 
We back up the US in many ways.  Megrahi is a dead man walking by all 
accounts.  Really he's done about all the time he has to give.  I can 
understand angry words being spoken, but why would they damage our alliance 
just for this?

What's more likely to happen is in future the US will see to it that they 
have custody of any future high-level prisoners.


TWP

"TWP"  wrote in message 
news:qMudnZA2SoBLDzDXnZ2dnUVZ8hSdnZ2d@eclipse.net.uk...
>
> "The Happy Hippy"  wrote in message 
> news:VQ6rm.78733$OO7.20128@text.news.virginmedia.com...
>> http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/news/489993/CIA-freeze-intel-over-Libya-deal-CIA-withhold-intelligence.html
>>
>> CIA FREEZE INTEL OVER LIBYA 'DEAL'
>>
>> BRITAIN was facing the likelihood of an increased terror threat last 
>> night - after America's CIA chiefs threatened to stop sharing vital 
>> intelligence with us following the Lockerbie bomber's release.

Makes perfect sense to me, but is there a better source for this claim than 
the wild tabloid "News of the World"?

I'm serious, kids. What other secret deals has London made with the 
abhorrent Gaddafi dictatorship? Gaddafi claims MI6 tried to kill him in the 
late 90's, and he wants some MI6 person to be fingered by London. Not what 
the British security service wants to hear, is it? Gaddafi enlisted two 
Saudi "political refugees" in the UK (both former underlings of Usama Bin 
Ladin, by the way) to try to kill King Abdullah of KSA around 2002 (google 
on "alamoudi"). Not good, England. You've been lying down with dogs for 
years, but this is a new low for you guys. When you lie down with dogs, you 
get fleas.

-- LH

P.S. The names of Gaddafi's agents in the al-Amoudi affair are Sa'ad 
al-Faqih and Mohammed al-Massari. Both are still free in the UK, and still 
under official British government protection.

In message <NHbrm.78852$OO7.47400@text.news.virginmedia.com>, The Happy
Hippy  writes
>
>"Chris H"  wrote ...
>
>> In message <op.uz7bx6c0fergpa@debian>, Robin T Cox 
>> writes
>>>On Sun, 13 Sep 2009 14:55:01 +0100, The Happy Hippy  <the.happy.hippy.n
>>>ntp@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/news/489993/CIA-freeze-intel-over-
>>>>Libya-deal-CIA-withhold-intelligence.html
>> Since the UK is in a military operation with the US I would take *ANY*
>> threat of stopping intelligence sharing seriously and pull out ALL
>> troops from Afghanistan and Iraq. Let the US fight it's own battles.
>
>I think that shows the entirely silly nature of the CIA / FBI tantrum.

Yepp.

>When America was perceived as Top Dog, such threats would be worrisome, and
>the threat of US Military action against anyone ( including the UK if the US
>were riled enough ) is still so,

Agreed.

> but most threats are rather hollow these
>days with demonstrably poor performance in Iraq and Afghanistan,

Yes.... However the American right is still in fantasy land and thinks
they are winning.

>while it's
>back to a tradition of 'bombing from 30,000 feet' over Pakistan's border;
>the world has a different view of America these days. The world's changed
>and is re-aligning with new geo-political balances.

That has already happened

>America could very
>easily fid herself isolated and universally condemned as a rogue state if it
>oversteps the mark.

They have... and the repercussions are starting to appear

>They cannot expect "friends" like the UK to stand by
>America when having abuse and criticism very publicly heaped on them.

I hope not. If our politicians have any balls we will be out of
Afghanistan by the end of 2010 at the latest.

>The US is in danger of losing the few friends it has left.

Not in danger but *has lost*

>refuse to co-operate in coroner's inquests ), and the vitriolic attacks upon
>Brown, government and UK won't be forgotten in the corridors of Whitehall,
>even if relationships are restored in public.

Unlikely in either case.

> It could be enough to break
>the diplomatic camel's back. There are a lot of people who favour putting
>distance between the US and UK and establishing closer ties with Europe, the
>Far East, and an emergent Russia and Middle East.

I think you will find that has happened. The UK has been running trad
emissions to Libya for the last 2 years. Also to Kurdestran, Iraq, Iran
and areas to the north.

>And let's hope no one in Whitehall is revengeful, vindictive and spiteful
>enough to not tip the US the nod when something's about to go down
>state-side, simply to remind them why we're a useful ally.

I would agree. They have screwed our intelligence and counter terrorist
people enough recently

> Or that we do
>decide to leave the US to it, fighting their own wars, be more prepared to
>speak out against America's policy and act as we would with other countries
>doing as America does.

I think the whole UK would vote for that!

>It is indeed a dangerous game America is playing. Sooner or later the US is
>going to wake up and realise that. All empires are one day humbled. The US
>maybe hasn't been around long enough to realise that but her time will come.

Not "her time will come" but "her time HAS come"

In recent business discussions I have had it was said that the USA is no
longer "top dog"  Others are. The US is still in the top 5 but others
are coming up and the US will be "top 10" (but not top 5)in a year or
so.

It will take time as people are re-alining and working out new deals
without dropping the old ones first because everything is so fluid.  The
US really has pissed off most of the world and is a spent force
militarily and economically (thanks to Bush).


It depends on how good Obama is on getting the USA out of the hole Bush
dropped it into. IT seems that most of Europe and the far east is coming
out of their recessions.

The US has a far bigger problem and far fewer friends.



-- 
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills  Staffs  England     /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

In message , Jesse
 writes
>"The Happy Hippy"  wrote in
>news:VQ6rm.78733$OO7.20128@text.news.virginmedia.com:
>
>> http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/news/489993/CIA-freeze-intel-over-Libya-d
>> eal-CIA-withhold-intelligence.html
>>
>> <quotes>
>>
>> CIA FREEZE INTEL OVER LIBYA 'DEAL'
>>
>> BRITAIN was facing the likelihood of an increased terror threat last
>> night - after America's CIA chiefs threatened to stop sharing vital
>> intelligence with us following the Lockerbie bomber's release.
>>
>> They have also warned they may not pass on vital information picked up
>> by their sophisticated eavesdropping satellites.
>>
>> </quotes>
>>
>> A rather spiteful, petty and immature response if true. Some would say
>> it was typical of American arrogance, threat and blackmail used to get
>> others to comply with American wishes, but fair enough, if they want to
>> stop sharing intelligence there's no reason for the UK share ours with
>> the US, perhaps no reason to maintain the so-called special relationship
>> at all, it all seems one way anyway.
>>
>> At least the US Intelligence services are only throwing a tantrum, when
>> the US is really upset it seems they frequently come to bomb or invade
>> to force compliance; some people believe the US has the god given right
>> to impose their will, ideology and values on the rest of the world. If
>> 'do as we say or we won't care if harm comes to you', are such values,
>> they're not the ones I'd like to see gaining widespread appeal. They're
>> not values I'd expect anyone I called 'friend' to hold.
>
>What seems to be the problem ?
>Can't find your own intelligence ?

We have very good intelligence.
In many areas much better than the US.


-- 
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills  Staffs  England     /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

In message , TWP
 writes
>
>"The Happy Hippy"  wrote in message
>news:VQ6rm.78733$OO7.20128@text.news.virginmedia.com...
>> http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/news/489993/CIA-freeze-intel-over-
>>Libya-deal-CIA-withhold-intelligence.html
>>
>> <quotes>
>>
>> CIA FREEZE INTEL OVER LIBYA 'DEAL'
>>
>> BRITAIN was facing the likelihood of an increased terror threat last
>> night - after America's CIA chiefs threatened to stop sharing vital
>> intelligence with us following the Lockerbie bomber's release.
>>
>> They have also warned they may not pass on vital information picked up by
>> their sophisticated eavesdropping satellites.
>>
>> </quotes>
>>
>> A rather spiteful, petty and immature response if true. Some would say it
>> was typical of American arrogance, threat and blackmail used to get others
>> to comply with American wishes, but fair enough, if they want to stop
>> sharing intelligence there's no reason for the UK share ours with the US,
>> perhaps no reason to maintain the so-called special relationship at all,
>> it all seems one way anyway.
>>
>> At least the US Intelligence services are only throwing a tantrum, when
>> the US is really upset it seems they frequently come to bomb or invade to
>> force compliance; some people believe the US has the god given right to
>> impose their will, ideology and values on the rest of the world. If 'do as
>> we say or we won't care if harm comes to you', are such values, they're
>> not the ones I'd like to see gaining widespread appeal. They're not values
>> I'd expect anyone I called 'friend' to hold.
>>
>
>That's kind of irrational isn't it?

Yes.

> Especially as the US is most likely to
>be the target of the attacks that we're all gathering intelligence on - or
>is the idea that they share information that prevents attacks on America,
>but keep quiet about attacks on us?

Yes that is EXACTLY what they mean

> I don't believe they'd really do it.

Of course they would

>We back up the US in many ways.

Too many.

>  Megrahi is a dead man walking by all
>accounts.  Really he's done about all the time he has to give.  I can
>understand angry words being spoken, but why would they damage our alliance
>just for this?

Ask Jesse then you will realise what sort of morons they are.

>What's more likely to happen is in future the US will see to it that they
>have custody of any future high-level prisoners.

What is more likely to happen in the future is the US will be more
isolated.

-- 
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills  Staffs  England     /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

TWP wrote:

> "The Happy Hippy"  wrote in message 
> news:VQ6rm.78733$OO7.20128@text.news.virginmedia.com...
>> http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/news/489993/CIA-freeze-intel-over-Libya-deal-CIA-withhold-intelligence.html
>>
>> <quotes>
>>
>> CIA FREEZE INTEL OVER LIBYA 'DEAL'
>>
>> BRITAIN was facing the likelihood of an increased terror threat last 
>> night - after America's CIA chiefs threatened to stop sharing vital 
>> intelligence with us following the Lockerbie bomber's release.
>>
>> They have also warned they may not pass on vital information picked up by 
>> their sophisticated eavesdropping satellites.
>>
>> </quotes>
>>
>> A rather spiteful, petty and immature response if true. Some would say it 
>> was typical of American arrogance, threat and blackmail used to get others 
>> to comply with American wishes, but fair enough, if they want to stop 
>> sharing intelligence there's no reason for the UK share ours with the US, 
>> perhaps no reason to maintain the so-called special relationship at all, 
>> it all seems one way anyway.
>>
>> At least the US Intelligence services are only throwing a tantrum, when 
>> the US is really upset it seems they frequently come to bomb or invade to 
>> force compliance; some people believe the US has the god given right to 
>> impose their will, ideology and values on the rest of the world. If 'do as 
>> we say or we won't care if harm comes to you', are such values, they're 
>> not the ones I'd like to see gaining widespread appeal. They're not values 
>> I'd expect anyone I called 'friend' to hold.
>>
> 
> That's kind of irrational isn't it?  

Totally irrational, foolish even, cutting ones nose of to spite the 
face, and hence pretty immature.

Were you expecting something else from America ? Many would say it was 
just America being true to form, which doesn't get seen when doing as 
America demands but the floodgates burst open when you don't.


> Especially as the US is most likely to 
> be the target of the attacks that we're all gathering intelligence on - or 
> is the idea that they share information that prevents attacks on America, 
> but keep quiet about attacks on us?  I don't believe they'd really do it.

I'd like to think not, but the US acts in what it thinks are its own 
interests even though its policies are often knee-jerk, short-sighted 
and turn out to be not in America's best interests.


> We back up the US in many ways.  Megrahi is a dead man walking by all 
> accounts.  Really he's done about all the time he has to give.  I can 
> understand angry words being spoken, but why would they damage our alliance 
> just for this?

A simple demonstration of the US's arrogance, aggressiveness, 
immaturity, tendency to tantrum, speaking without thinking and lack of 
diplomatic tact which leads to outbursts and ranting which are not in 
her best interests ?


> What's more likely to happen is in future the US will see to it that they 
> have custody of any future high-level prisoners.

The "only America does 'justice' properly" argument. The rest of the 
world cannot be trusted :-)