Here we go again!

Everyone is piling on BP again. Maybe they deserve it... but that is not the point. My problem is that BP is accused of looking after their own interests (and the interests of thousands of people who have invested in BP stock) as opposed to appeasing Americans.

This time it is over the release, by a Scottish judge, of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, the guy convicted of planting a bomb on Pan Am Flight 103, causing it to crash at Lockerbie, Scotland.

The complainers think the guy should not have been released. I agree. Why show humanitarian kindness to a person who inhumanely murdered so many innocent people over a perverted ideology?

They say BP petitioned for his release to help them secure an oil deal with Libya. I say, (if the charge is true) "Why shouldn't they have done that?" Our own Constitution (not applicable in this Scotland case in spite of the loss of American lives and property) grants the right to petition the government to redress a grievance.

You may argue the use of the word grievance, but the oil deal was certainly in the best interest of BP stockholders, while continued confinement of al-Megrahi provided no direct benefit. Letting him go will not bring back any lost lives - nor will it cause further losses. Apparently the only result is to anger a bunch of Americans.

BP is charged with acting in their own best interest. That, in itself, is not a crime.

Now.... if the Scottish judge winked at the law to do a favor for BP, that would be a crime. Then the judge should be punished, not BP.