Merged [Ed] Convicted Lockerbie bomber released

[scissorhands]

And then will yourself to get terminal cancer

Kill 270 people in cold blood and you will get to spend your dying days with your family giving you big hugs.
Many other countries would have simply executed you.
Scotland is a good choice for terrorist activities.

 

[Rolfe]

You get a life sentence with a minumum term. That is not life without parole.

Since there's no such sentence in Scotland as "life without parole", that's a bit of a pointless argument.

Rolfe.

 

[ddt]

My take on this is that the release is actually in the US best interest. Considering all the effort that the US has put in towards getting Libya on friendly terms dating all the way back to the Clinton administration, it is preposterous to assume that our current Secretary of State is unaware of the US interest in releasing this man.

I think Ms. Clinton's words were entirely for domestic consumption since back home she can't appear to show any weakness on terror in the current political environment. Also since the appeal seems to have been dropped as part of the deal for the compasionate release, effectively stifling future investigation in the man's actual guilt or innocence (something of more interest to the US than any other country if he actually is innocent) I would not be surprised if some folks from the US state dept actually helped put together this little deal.

So, in response to EJ's OP it does not appear to me as if Scotland is standing up to US bullying. They appear to both be working together to do the right thing (release a likely innocent man who is suffering from a painful disease) while also allowing both nations to spin rhetoric for home consumption (US takes a stand against to appear tough on terror, Scotland grants relase appearing to stand up to US bullying)

Everybody wins, especially Magrahi, who gets to spend his final days with his family, rather than in a foreign prison.

Said fine. I'd like to add though: everybody wins, but truth and justice lose. It's quite obvious that Megrahi dropping his appeal was part of a political deal and meant to stifle further investigations into who really planted the bomb. It's further worth noting that this appeal had been proceeding at glacial speeds. Megrahi had filed his request for the Review Board in 2003; they had granted him an appeal in 2007, but the first session still had to take place.

I'm intrigued by the politicking going on though. I strongly suspect that the US outrage, from Obama down, is crocodile tears. Everything that's happened over the past 20 years indicates that the one thing the US government wants is to have further investigation into the affair shut down. However, with so many of the US relatives opposing release, they had to say something.

Another interesting point is that the behaviour of the politicos doesn't change no matter what party is in power. In particular, McAskill had no influence at all in this issue until just over two years ago, nevertheless (to my mind) he has promptly taken up the coverup agenda. It could simply be that after all this time, the extensive ramifications of the truth coming out are simply too much to contemplate for whatever minimal benefits it might bring.

This is foreign politics. They are determined by international relations, and those change little, whatever party is in charge. A government inherits the legacy of its predecessors and has more or less to act accordingly, or lose face. So, in general, you'll see very little change in foreign politics.

 

[Fiona]

So, if you are doing something wrong you should continue to do it for fear of discriminating against someone?

I do not believe we are doing anything wrong

That doesn't seem a good argument on a skeptic's forum. "That is the way we've always done it and we aren't changing now."

Nobody is making that argument, so far as I can see.

 

[funk de fino]

I'm not sure, I barely know the guy, but some bells are ringing. The bit of the speech they keep broadcasting makes him sound like Rev. I. M. Jolly on Mogadon though.

I'm intrigued by the politicking going on though. I strongly suspect that the US outrage, from Obama down, is crocodile tears. Everything that's happened over the past 20 years indicates that the one thing the US government wants is to have further investigation into the affair shut down. However, with so many of the US relatives opposing release, they had to say something.

Another interesting point is that the behaviour of the politicos doesn't change no matter what party is in power. In particular, McAskill had no influence at all in this issue until just over two years ago, nevertheless (to my mind) he has promptly taken up the coverup agenda. It could simply be that after all this time, the extensive ramifications of the truth coming out are simply too much to contemplate for whatever minimal benefits it might bring.

Rolfe.

I have no idea on whether he is guilty or not. I see the same reporting as you but I have yet to see facts that would convince me he was innocent. This has no impact on whether I think justice has been done with his release. I feel like I may have preferred to have him prisoner transferred but the SNP were never going to do that and open themselves up to the Blair criticism thing.

Putting my cynical head on - being from Abeerdeen and working in the oil and gas industry based in Abeerdeen - Do not underestimate the benefits of being "in" with Libya. I have been there on business in the last few years and will be back again.

Like it or not Gadaffi is a friend now.

 

[Policenaut]

CNN is all over this story. Wolf was grilling MacAskill.

 

[funk de fino]

Kill 270 people in cold blood and you will get to spend your dying days with your family giving you big hugs.
Many other countries would have simply executed you.
Scotland is a good choice for terrorist activities.

Because we do not stoop to the terrorists level. At least they get a trial.

 

[Rolfe]

It's a pity so few forumites are in a position to watch Newsnicht. After Newsnight having a go at Kenny McAskill, once it switched to the Scottish programme, it spent about ten minutes solid going through the points of doubt about the case, and making a fascinating outline case for Megrahi having been framed. And suggesting that US outrage at the release is phoney. This is still the BBC, remember.

OK, Gordon Brewer is now back to grilling Kenny, and since Kenny is obliged to take the view the Megrahi is guilty, he's a bit of a sitting duck, but he's also homing in on the meeting with Megrahi and just where the idea of abandoning the appeal came from, which is what we'd all like to know....

Rolfe.

 

[scissorhands]

Because we do not stoop to the terrorists level. At least they get a trial.

He had a trial and was found guilty of killing 270 people in cold blood.
My point is that many countries would have executed him for that.
Hes lucky that he blew up that airliner over Scotland, because not only did he avoid execution, he also gets to spend his dying days at home surrounded by his family getting quality time.
If only his victims had got some quality time with their families before they died.
Oh well.
As I said if any budding terrorists fancy a bit of "compassion" after a mass murder spree, then make sure you commit your terrorist activities in Scotland.
And preferably when the SNP are in power too.
That helps when murdering Americans.

 

[funk de fino]

So, if you are doing something wrong you should continue to do it for fear of discriminating against someone?

Who says it is wrong? It is our system. You think we care what you think? At least he got a trial. I guess you could ask a few at Gitmo if the american justice system is fair.

How many died in prison of natural causes?

I have no idea and why would I? Remember natural causes is an open book. How may have died of terminaal cacer? Why dont you try and find out? You seem to have a bee in your bonnet about it.

And I acknowledged and respect that. The trick is this is a discussion on a message board and I'd like to learn more and offer an opinion. Don't like it? That, as many people say, is tough tits.

Except you have been told stuff in posts and still did not learn from them and repeated basic errors.

That doesn't seem a good argument on a skeptic's forum. "That is the way we've always done it and we aren't changing now."

It is our law. Do you think we should change because you do not like it or a few of your countrymen? You get to say it is wrong? You were the one who brought "favouritism" into it. Who is getting this favouritism? Who is being singled out and by who?

And stop making like I'm trying to single out Megrahi. That is just plain dishonest.

See above. Any justice system that has parole, has favouritism built into it.

 

[funk de fino]

He had a trial and was found guilty of killing 270 people in cold blood.
My point is that many countries would have executed him for that.
Hes lucky that he blew up that airliner over Scotland, because not only did he avoid execution, he also gets to spend his dying days at home surrounded by his family getting quality time.
If only his victims had got some quality time with their families before they died.
Oh well.
As I said if any budding terrorists fancy a bit of "compassion" after a mass murder spree, then make sure commit your terrorist activities in Scotland.
And preferably when the SNP are in power too.
That helps when murdering Americans.

And Scots. And it took place in our country, not yours.

Like I said at least he was tried and served time for a crime he "did" commit.

 

[Minadin]

Zacarias Moussaoui was convicted in the USA (where we're known for barbaristic practices like executing criminals, right?) of conspiring to murder nearly 3,000 innocent people (not all Americans) in a terrorist plot, but he also received a life sentence.

 

[scissorhands]

And Scots. And it took place in our country, not yours.

Im American now am I?

 

[Alt+F4]

I do not believe we are doing anything wrong

Fine that you personally think that, but have you ever been personally damaged by the actions of a terrorist?

 

[scissorhands]

Zacarias Moussaoui was convicted in the USA (where we're known for barbaristic practices like executing criminals, right?) of conspiring to murder nearly 3,000 innocent people (not all Americans) in a terrorist plot, but he also received a life sentence.

Lucky Zacarias.

 

[Fiona]

@ Alt+F4. I do not see the relevance of that question.

Perhaps you seek to establish that a victim is better placed to judge how the law should react than someone not directly affected? If that is your point I could not disagree more strongly. Our whole legal system is based on the fact that victims are the last people we can rely on.

That is not true in sharia law, as I understand. But that whole legal tradition is different.

 

[scissorhands]

Our whole legal system is based on the fact that victims are the last people we can rely on.

You had better explain what you mean by that.
It doesnt sound very well thought out.

 

[Fiona]

What puzzles you about it?

 

[funk de fino]

Im American now am I?

Is Scotland your country?

 

[Alt+F4]

@ Alt+F4. I do not see the relevance of that question.

Thanks, you have answered my question.