SEC Says New Financial Regulation Law Exempts it From Public Disclosure

So much for transparency.

Under a little-noticed provision of the recently passed financial-reform legislation, the Securities and Exchange Commission no longer has to comply with virtually all requests for information releases from the public, including those filed under the Freedom of Information Act.

The law, signed last week by President Obama, exempts the SEC from disclosing records or information derived from "surveillance, risk assessments, or other regulatory and oversight activities." Given that the SEC is a regulatory body, the provision covers almost every action by the agency, lawyers say. Congress and federal agencies can request information, but the public cannot.

That argument comes despite the President saying that one of the cornerstones of the sweeping new legislation was more transparent financial markets. Indeed, in touting the new law, Obama specifically said it would “increase transparency in financial dealings."

The SEC cited the new law Tuesday in a FOIA action brought by FOX Business Network. Steven Mintz, founding partner of law firm Mintz & Gold LLC in New York, lamented what he described as “the backroom deal that was cut between Congress and the SEC to keep the  SEC’s failures secret. The only losers here are the American public.”

If the SEC’s interpretation stands, Mintz, who represents FOX Business Network, predicted “the next time there is a Bernie Madoff failure the American public will not be able to obtain the SEC documents that describe the failure,” referring to the shamed broker whose Ponzi scheme cost investors billions.

"The new provision applies to information obtained through examinations or derived from that information," said SEC spokesman John Nester. "We are expanding our examination program's surveillance and risk assessment efforts in order to provide more sophisticated and effective Wall Street oversight. The success of these efforts depends on our ability to obtain documents and other information from brokers, investment advisers and other registrants. The new legislation makes certain that we can obtain documents from registrants for risk assessment and surveillance under similar conditions that already exist by law for our examinations. Because registrants insist on confidential treatment of their documents, this new provision also removes an opportunity for brokers, investment advisers and other registrants to refuse to cooperate with our examination document requests."

Criticism of the provision has been swift. “It allows the SEC to block the public’s access to virtually all SEC records,” said Gary Aguirre, a former SEC staff attorney-turned-whistleblower who had accused the agency of thwarting an investigation into hedge fund Pequot Asset Management in 2005. “It permits the SEC to promulgate its own rules and regulations regarding the disclosure of records without getting the approval of the Office of Management and Budget, which typically applies to all federal agencies.”

Aguirre used FOIA requests in his own lawsuit against the SEC, which the SEC settled this year by paying him $755,000. Aguirre, who was fired in September 2005, argued that supervisors at the SEC stymied an investigation of Pequot – a charge that prompted an investigation by the Senate Judiciary and Finance committees.

The SEC closed the case in 2006, but would re-open it three years later. This year, Pequot and its founder, Arthur Samberg, were forced to pay $28 million to settle insider-trading charges related to shares of Microsoft (MSFT: 25.95 ,0.00 ,0.00%). The settlement with Aguirre came shortly later.

“From November 2008 through January 2009, I relied heavily on records obtained from the SEC through FOIA in communications to the FBI, Senate investigators, and the SEC in arguing the SEC had botched its initial investigation of Pequot’s trading in Microsoft securities and thus the SEC should reopen it, which it did,” Aguirre said. “The new legislation closes access to such records, even when the investigation is closed.

“It is hard to imagine how the bill could be more counterproductive,” Aguirre added.

FOX Business Network sued the SEC in March 2009 over its failure to produce documents related to its failed investigations into alleged investment frauds being perpetrated by Madoff and R. Allen Stanford. Following the Madoff and Stanford arrests it, was revealed that the SEC conducted investigations into both men prior to their arrests but failed to uncover their alleged frauds.

FOX Business made its initial request to the SEC in February 2009 seeking any information related to the agency’s response to complaints, tips and inquiries or any potential violations of the securities law or wrongdoing by Stanford.

FOX Business has also filed lawsuits against the Treasury Department and Federal Reserve over their failure to respond to FOIA requests regarding use of the bailout funds and the Fed’s extended loan facilities. In February, the Federal Court in New York sided with FOX Business and ordered the Treasury to comply with its requests.

Last year, the network won a legal victory to force the release of documents related to New York University’s lawsuit against Madoff feeder Ezra Merkin.

FOX Business’ FOIA requests have so far led the SEC to release several important and damaging documents:

•FOX Business used the FOIA to obtain a 2005 survey that the SEC in Fort Worth was sending to Stanford investors. The survey showed that the SEC had suspicions about Stanford several years prior to the collapse of his $7 billion empire.

•FOX Business used the FOIA to obtain copies of emails between Federal Reserve lawyers, AIG and staff at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York in which it was revealed the Fed staffers knew that bailing out AIG would result in bonuses being paid.

Recently, TARP Congressional Oversight Panel chair Elizabeth Warren told FOX Business that the network’s Freedom of Information Act efforts played a “very important part” of the panel’s investigation into AIG.

Warren told the network the government “crossed a line” with the AIG bailout.

“FOX News and the congressional oversight panel has pushed, pushed, pushed, for transparency, give us the documents, let us look at everything. Your Freedom of Information Act suit, which ultimately produced 250,000 pages of documentation, was a very important part of our report. We were able to rely on the documents that you pried out for a significant part of our being able to put this report together,” Warren said.

The SEC first made its intention to block further FOIA requests known on Tuesday. FOX Business was preparing for another round of “skirmishes” with the SEC, according to Mintz, when the agency called and said it intended to use Section 929I of the 2000-page legislation to refuse FBN’s ongoing requests for information.

Mintz said the network will challenge the SEC’s interpretation of the law.

“I believe this is subject to challenge,” he said. “The contours will have to be figured out by a court.”

Fox Business News

BP Accused of 'Buying Academic Silence'

The head of the American Association of Professors has accused BP of trying to "buy" the best scientists and academics to help its defence against litigation after the Gulf of Mexico oil spill.  

"This is really one huge corporation trying to buy faculty silence in a comprehensive way," said Cary Nelson. 

BP faces more than 300 lawsuits so far. 

In a statement, BP says it has hired more than a dozen national and local scientists "with expertise in the resources of the Gulf of Mexico".  

The BBC has obtained a copy of a contract offered to scientists by BP. It says that scientists cannot publish the research they do for BP or speak about the data for at least three years, or until the government gives the final approval to the company's restoration plan for the whole of the Gulf. 

It also states scientists may perform research for other agencies as long as it does not conflict with the work they are doing for BP.  

And it adds that scientists must take instructions from lawyers offering the contracts and other in-house counsel at BP.

Bob Shipp said BP wanted to hire his entire marine science department

Bob Shipp, the head of marine sciences at the University of South Alabama, was one of the scientists approached by BP's lawyers.  

They didn't just want him, they wanted his whole department. 

"They contacted me and said we would like to have your department interact to develop the best restoration plan possible after this oil spill," he said. 

Russ Lea from the University of South Alabama: Some clauses in the contract "were very disturbing". 

"We laid the ground rules - that any research we did, we would have to take total control of the data, transparency and the freedom to make those data available to other scientists and subject to peer review. They left and we never heard back from them." 

What Mr Nelson is concerned about is BP's control over scientific research.  

"Our ability to evaluate the disaster and write public policy and make decisions about it as a country can be impacted by the silence of the research scientists who are looking at conditions," he said. 

"It's hugely destructive. I mean at some level, this is really BP versus the people of the United States." 

In its statement, BP says it "does not place restrictions on academics speaking about scientific data". 

'Powerful Economic Interests' 

But New Orleans environmental lawyer Joel Waltzer looked over the contract and said BP's statement did not match up. 

“Start Quote 

Good scientists, they're going to be giving their opinions based on the facts and they are not going to bias their opinions” 

End Quote Professor Irv Mendelssohn Louisiana State University  

"They're the ones who control the process. They're depriving the public of the data and the transparency that we all deserve." 

But some scientists who have been approached by lawyers acting on behalf of BP are willing to sign up. 

Irv Mendelssohn is a professor in the Department of Oceanography and Coastal Sciences at Louisiana State University.  

"What I'm doing wouldn't be any different than if I was consulting with one of the natural resource trustees. I am giving my objective opinion about recovery."  

Some scientists approached by BP lawyers have been offered as much as $250 an hour.  

Prof Mendelssohn says he would negotiate his normal consulting fee, which is between $150 and $300 an hour. But he says that is not why he is doing it.  

"Good scientists, they're going to be giving their opinions based on the facts and they are not going to bias their opinions. What's most important is credibility." 

But Cary Nelson is concerned about the relationship between corporations and academia. 

"There is a problem for a faculty member who becomes closely associated with a corporation with such powerful financial interests. 

"My advice would be: think twice before you sign a contract with a corporation that has such powerful economic interests at stake." 

Article By Robyn Bresnahan BBC News

Top County Pensioners Include The Disgraced And The Fired. More California Corruption..Will It Ever End?

The good news: The Watchdog has got the Orange County Employees Retirement System database of pensioners collecting $100,000 or more annually.

But there’s a caveat: As the Orange County Register told the court, we will use the information for research and analysis and not just post the raw data.
So stay tuned, we are furiously crunching the data and getting it into shape for a meaningful searchable database.

Meanwhile, here’s a couple of tidbits, to whet your appetites:

Robert Citron, the disgraced treasurer whose risky investments led Orange County into the largest municipal bankruptcy of its time, is collecting around $148, 327 a year.  That’s an increase of more than 50 percent above the $92,904 a year pension that he made when he retired in 1994 – thanks to cost of living raises.

Citron, now 85, earned $104,354 a year in salary when he left office and pleaded guilty to six felonies. He had hidden his risky investments by diverting $89 million of  hard-to-explain interest away from schools and other agencies, and into county coffers.

Another notable retiree is former sheriff Michael S. Carona, who left in 2008 after being indicted on felony corruption charges.

Carona is receiving about $217,457 a year and is number seven on the list of county retirees earning $100,000 or more annually. Yet he couldn’t afford to pay his own legal fees, and received free representation. Convicted on one federal charge of witness tampering, he is out on appeal.

The fourth highest  paid pensioner in the county is former Orange County Sanitation District general manager Blake Anderson, who was forced to resign in 2005 after hiring a leadership guru at $180,000 to help the sewer agency find its corporate soul. Dharma Consulting was hired by Anderson on a no-bid contract at $15,000 a month. Anderson, who was criticized in a later audit for exceeding his authority, now lives on about $228,025 a year.

Article by Tony Saavedra, Orange County Register

           

California City Officials Resign in Salary Scandal - More Proof of California's Insanity

BELL, Calif.-- Three administrators whose huge salaries sparked outrage in this small blue-collar suburb of Los Angeles have agreed to resign, the City Council said Friday.

Council members emerged from an hours-long closed session at midnight Friday and announced that they'd accepted the resignations of Chief Administrative Officer Robert Rizzo, Assistant City Manager Angela Spaccia and Police Chief Randy Adams.

Rizzo was the highest paid at $787,637 a year -- nearly twice the pay of President Barack Obama -- for overseeing one of the poorest towns in Los Angeles County.

Spaccia makes $376,288 a year and Adams earns $457,000, 50 percent more than Los Angeles Police Chief Charlie Beck.

The three will not receive severance packages, the Los Angeles Times reported Friday. Rizzo will step down at the end of August and Spaccia will leave at the end of September. Adams will also leave at the end of August, after completing an evaluation of the police department, the Times said.

Claudia Cowan reports "I'm happy that they resigned but I'm disappointed at the pension that they're going to receive," said Ali Saleh, a member of the Bell Association to Stop the Abuse or BASTA.

Rizzo would be entitled to a state pension of more than $650,000 a year for life, according to calculations made by the Times. That would make Rizzo, 56, the highest-paid retiree in the state pension system.

Adams could get more than $411,000 a year.

Spaccia, 51, could be eligible for as much as $250,000 a year when she reaches 55, though the figure is less precise than for the other two officials, the Times said.

Saleh said the crowd applauded after the announcement but immediately yelled out questions about what would happen to the council members. Four of the five of them are paid close to $100,000 annually for part-time work. When the crowd's questions were not answered, they shouted, "Recall!, Recall!"

Revelations about the pay in Bell has sparked anger in the city of fewer than 40,000 residents. Census figures from 2008 show 17 percent of the population lives in poverty.

Enraged residents have staged protests demanding the firings and started a recall campaign against some council members.

"Woo-hoo, the salaries. Wow. What can I say? I think that's unbelievable," Christina Caldera, a 20-year resident of the city, said as she stood in line at a food bank.

Caldera, who is struggling after recently losing her job as a drug and alcohol counselor, said she generally was satisfied with the way the city was being run but felt high-paid officials should take a pay cut.

"What are they doing with all that money?" she asked. "Maybe they could put it into more jobs for other people."

Attempts to leave messages seeking comment from Rizzo and Spaccia failed because their voicemails were full. A message left for Adams was not immediately returned.

The county district attorney's office is investigating to determine if the high salaries for the council members violate any state laws. The City Council also intends to review city salaries, including those of its own members, according to Councilman Luis Artiga and Mayor Oscar Hernandez.

"We are going to analyze all the city payrolls and possibly will revise all the salaries of the city," Artiga said.

However, both men said they considered the City Council pay to be justified.

"We work a lot. I work with my community every day," the mayor said, as he shook hands with and embraced people leaving the food bank Thursday.

Council members are on call around the clock, and it is not uncommon for them to take calls in the middle of the night from people reporting problems with city services, Artiga said.

Though many residents are poor, Hernandez said they live in a city they can be proud of, one with a $22.7 million budget surplus, clean streets, refurbished parks and numerous programs for people of all ages. He pointed proudly down a street to a park filled with new exercise equipment.

When Rizzo arrived 17 years ago, Hernandez said, the city was $13 million in debt and on the verge of bankruptcy. Rizzo obtained government grants to aid the city, the mayor said.

Rizzo was arrested near his home in Huntington Beach in March and charged with misdemeanor drunken driving. He pleaded not guilty and is due back in court for an Aug. 5 hearing, said Farrah Emami, a spokeswoman for the Orange County district attorney's office.

The Los Angeles Times reported the salaries last week, prompting a large protest Monday at City Hall in which residents shouted and demanded that Rizzo be fired.

California Attorney General Jerry Brown said his office has launched an investigation in conjunction with the state's public employee retirement agency into pension and related benefits for Bell's civic leaders..

Courtesy of Fox News

 

Obama Wants to Jail Americans with New Law

Foreign Ministry reports circulating in the Kremlin today are warning that an already explosive situation in the United States is about to get a whole lot worse as a new law put forth by President Obama is said capable of seeing up to 500,000 American citizens jailed for the crime of opposing their government.

Sparking the concern of Russian diplomats over the growing totalitarian bent of the Obama government is the planned reintroduction of what these reports call one of the most draconian laws ever introduced in a free society that is titled “The Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act”.

First introduced in the US Congress in 2007 by Democratic Representative Jane Harmon, this new law passed the US House of Representatives by a secretive voice vote, but failed to pass the US Senate, after which it was believed dead until this past week when it was embraced by Obama who became the first American President to name his own citizens as a threat to his Nations security.

In what is called the National Security Strategy document, that is required of US Presidents by their Congress, that embraces the dictatorial ideals of the “Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act”, Obama has ordered his Federal police and intelligence forces to begin targeting Americans opposed to him and his radical socialist polices.

Obama’s top counter-terrorism advisor, John Brennan, in speaking to reporters about this new “strategy” says it makes the problem of home-grown terrorists a top priority because an increasing number of individuals in the US have become “captivated by extremist ideology or causes.”

The Times of London is further reporting that Obama’s new National Security Strategy “officially”“War on Terror” in what they call “a sweeping repudiation of the Bush doctrine of pre-emptive military strikes.” ends America’s

And as Obama begins re-focusing his forces from fighting America’s foreign enemies, to those opposed to him in his own country, it is important to remember the warning about this new law given by the former CIA official, Philip Giraldi, who had previously warned of the Bush-Cheney plan to attack Iran with nuclear weapons, and who said:

“The mainstream media has made no effort to inform the public of the impending Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act. The Act, which was sponsored by Congresswoman Jane Harman of California, was passed in the House by an overwhelming 405 to 6 vote on October 24th and is now awaiting approval by the Senate Homeland Security Committee, which is headed by Senator Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut.

Harman’s bill contends that the United States will soon have to deal with home grown terrorists and that something must be done to anticipate and neutralize the problem. The act deals with the issue through the creation of a congressional commission that will be empowered to hold hearings, conduct investigations, and designate various groups as “homegrown terrorists.”

The commission will be tasked to propose new legislation that will enable the government to take punitive action against both the groups and the individuals who are affiliated with them. Like Joe McCarthy and HUAC in the past, the commission will travel around the United States and hold hearings to find the terrorists and root them out.

Unlike inquiries in the past where the activity was carried out collectively, the act establishing the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Commission will empower all the members on the commission to arrange hearings, obtain testimony, and even to administer oaths to witnesses, meaning that multiple hearings could be running simultaneously in various parts of the country.

The ten commission members will be selected for their “expertise,” though most will be appointed by Congress itself and will reflect the usual political interests. They will be paid for their duties at the senior executive pay scale level and will have staffs and consultants to assist them.

Harman’s bill does not spell out terrorist behavior and leaves it up to the Commission itself to identify what is terrorism and what isn’t.

Language inserted in the act does partially define “homegrown terrorism” as “planning” or “threatening” to use force to promote a political objective, meaning that just thinking about doing something could be enough to merit the terrorist label.

The act also describes “violent radicalization” as the promotion of an “extremist belief system” without attempting to define “extremist.”

As an example of those American’s Obama will be targeting, Giraldi further writes that The Simon Wiesenthal Center, in testifying before the US Congress in support of this new law, swore that an organization called “Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth” was an example of a homegrown terrorist organization, leading one Russian diplomat in this report to state:

“If 1,200 of America’s top architectural and engineering professionals are deemed terrorists simply because they question their governments propaganda than truly no one is safe in the United States anymore”.

As another example of how dictatorial the Obama regime has become, and as the Gulf of Mexico oil debacle has now become the worst ecological disaster our World has ever seen, the White House press secretary, Robert Gibbs, this past week slammed American reporters for “asking too many questions about BP”.

Leading one to ask that if Obama’s regime can’t be asked about this disaster, what can they be asked about?

The answer is apparently none, as Obama himself, just this past week, in announcing his signing of a new law called the Press Freedom Act refused to answer any reporters’ questions and abruptly left them standing in stupefaction over the irony an ordeal that shows how far America has fallen.

Another irony apparently lost upon the American people is that their President Obama, who has been dubbed “The Great Communicator”, now holds the dubious distinction of having held fewer press conferences than any American President in modern history.

And if yesterday’s press conference, his first in nearly a year, was any example one can see why as incredulous press corps was left astounded that Obama had no knowledge of the firing/resignation of one of his top officials.

In all of these events one fact, beyond all others, stands out….in what was once called “The Land of the Free, And the Home of the Brave”…..the United States today has become “The Land Of Slave, And the Home of the Coward”….and these Americans have only themselves to blame.

By Europe Union Times June 15, 2010

3 officers plead not guilty in Katrina shootings

NEW ORLEANS – Three police officers charged in the killing of two unarmed residents on a New Orleans bridge after Hurricane Katrina and a cover-up that followed pleaded not guilty on Wednesday.

Sgts. Robert Gisevius and Kenneth Bowen and Officer Anthony Villavaso stood before a federal magistrate in green prison garb, shackled at the waist and ankles. They will remain jailed at least until a hearing Friday. A tentative trial date is set for Sept. 13.

Magistrate Louis Moore Jr. read the counts — 13 against Bowen, 11 against Gisevius and 10 against Villavaso. Former officer Robert Faulcon made his initial court appearance Tuesday in Texas, where he was arrested, but has not entered a plea.

The charges against the four carry a maximum sentence of life in prison or the death penalty, although U.S. Attorney Jim Letten said the Justice Department hasn't decided whether to seek the latter punishment.

The family of two victims — Ronald Madison, who was killed, and his brother, Lance, who survived — sat in the front row of the packed courtroom. Gisevius cried quietly as he stood with his lawyer.

"We'll be able to pick this indictment apart," said Frank DeSalvo, Bowen's lawyer. "There is a lot of fantasy there."

Bowen, Gisevius and Villavaso were suspended without pay after the indictments were released Tuesday, NOPD spokesman Bob Young said on Wednesday.

Five former officers already have pleaded guilty to charges they helped cover up the shootings. Prosecutors have said police fabricated witnesses, falsified reports and plotted to plant a gun to make it appear that the shootings were justified.

The shootings at the Danziger Bridge happened Sept. 4, 2005, six days after Hurricane Katrina smashed levees and left the city flooded and in chaos. Bodies floated in filthy flood waters. There were reports of looting and gunshots rang out throughout the blacked-out city.

It was in this backdrop that police, desperate to regain control, were called about 9 a.m. that morning after reports of gunfire at the bridge.

Seven heavily armed New Orleans police officers stormed the bridge. Prosecutors said they shot at the first people they saw, people they say were crossing the bridge to find food.

When it was over, two men were dead and four others lay wounded on the hot concrete.

The indictment claims Faulcon shot mentally disabled Ronald Madison, 40, in the back as he ran away on the west side of the bridge. Bowen is charged with stomping and kicking Madison while he was lying on the ground, wounded but still alive.

Madison's brother, Lance, was arrested and charged with trying to kill police officers. He was jailed for three weeks before being released without indictment.

Bowen, Gisevius, Faulcon and Villavaso also are accused of shooting at an unarmed family on the east side of the bridge, killing 17-year-old James Brissette and wounding four others.

Sgt. Arthur Kaufman and retired Sgt. Gerard Dugue, who helped investigate the shootings, were charged with participating in the alleged cover-up. Charges against them include obstruction of justice.

Kaufman and Bowen "specifically discussed using Hurricane Katrina to excuse failures in the investigation, and thereby to help make any inquiry into the shooting go away," the indictment states.

Kaufman allegedly took a gun from his home and claimed to have found it at the crime scene a day after the shootings, then lied about that gun under oath and in reports, prosecutors said.

Dugue is accused of lying to a federal agent when he said he had no concerns about the truth of the officers' statements.

"In fact, he had many 'red flags' and 'question marks' about the officers' stories, but he reported the questionable information as fact and relied upon it without qualification," the indictment says.

The charges, unsealed Tuesday, are the culmination of a two-year probe by the federal government. An internal police investigation found no wrongdoing by officers. A state grand jury convened to look into the matter charged seven officers with murder or attempted murder, but a state judge threw out all the charges in 2008.

By MARY FOSTER, Associated Press Writer Mary Foster, Associated Press Writer – Wed Jul 14, 6:25 pm ET

Shame on Scotland!

Add Scotland to my s*%t list. For most of my life I have admired those skirt wearing laddies and more than admired those skirt wearing lasses from the bonnie Isle of Scotland. As a matter of fact, one particular Scottish lass I knew as a young lad had the most beautiful and pleasant temperament I have ever come across. To this day even!

But by releasing Abdel Baset al-Megrahi, an intelligence officer for Libya (who by the way, just so happened to have been the key player in blasting a jet full of innocent people out of the sky) Scotland has shamed themselves and in turn shown us just exactly what they are hiding under those kilts – and it doesn’t rhyme with ‘walls.’ Note: there are a few Scots who are as outraged as I at the decision to let Abdel loose after serving only 8 years of a life sentence, and for them I am issuing a pass on this one.

Apparently it did not matter to Scottish Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill that the falling plane also happened to kill a few more innocents on the ground, fellow countrymen mind you. To add insult to injury, al-Megrahi was given a hero’s welcome upon his arrival in Tripoli.

Supposedly, al-Megrahi has only a few months to live because of terminal prostate cancer. Therefore MacAskill decided (to the consternation of almost every citizen of every Western nation) to release the Libyan terrorist on “compassionate grounds” saying “..he is going home to die.” Hey Kenny, just who appointed you the angel of mercy?

And when questioned by CNN’s Wolf Blitzer if there had ever been a precedent for releasing a murderer in Scotland on the same grounds, MacKaskill danced around the question like a river dancer with his kilt on fire. Eventually he admitted there hadn’t been one. Yes, I know, river dancers are from Ireland. Then, when Wolfy asked if he had been pressured from higher ups, the merciful Secretary replied that the decision was all his. Sure! Bet ya me bottom farthing, he’s MacFudging on that one!

Now, let’s imagine for just a moment that the terrorist bomber was from another friendly nation, say…. North Korea - which has about as much to offer the Scottish government as, say…..me. Do you think the Scottish parliament would give one banger of a hoot if a Korean had prostate cancer? I think not! Now let’s imagine for a moment that Libya had no oil. In that scenario, I think that Adbel Baset al-Megrahi would still be sitting in his cell praying he wasn’t going to be served haggis for supper.

So, what is the moral to this story, you ask? If you are going to blow up a plane, better make sure your ass is covered. Preferably with oil.