So what is going on here? This is not a case where a bank robber gets immunity from prosecution for testifying against his buddies. Koussa is not a bank robber. He works for Qaddafi (the Times' spelling) at the highest level of government. Perhaps he's dangling information about Qaddafi's authorization of the bombing? Maybe, but does Koussa deserve a free ride because of it? What do you think? Read the full report from the New York Times: Sanctions Are Dropped Against Libyan Defector
The Obama administration dropped financial sanctions on Monday against the top Libyan official who fled to Britain last week, saying it hoped the move would encourage other senior aides to abandon Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi, the country’s embattled leader.
But the decision to unfreeze bank accounts and permit business dealings with the official, Moussa Koussa, underscored the predicament his defection poses for American and British authorities, who said on Tuesday that Scottish police and prosecutors planned to interview Mr. Koussa about the 1988 Lockerbie bombing and other issues “in the next few days.”
Tuesday, April 5, 2011
This is the kind of news that no one should have to read in the New York Times- a man who may be responsible for the terror bombing of PanAm 103 is standing in good stead with the Obama administration.