-
Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
Scottish Parliament e-Petition 417
- Thread starter Rolfe
- Start date
Perhaps someone else might figure out the difference between time zones. But then again...maybe not.
Matthew Best
Penultimate Amazing
Sorry, Bunntamas. For some reason I thought you were Scottish.
Matthew Best
Penultimate Amazing
So I need to come up with a reason for your posting what read very much like drunken ramblings that doesn't involve staying up late and drinking.
OK, you'll have to give me a few minutes.
OK, you'll have to give me a few minutes.
funk de fino
Dreaming of unicorns
Feel like translating your gibberish then?
Rolfe
Adult human female
Speaking for myself, I have a life, just like other people. I've taken a break from Lockerbie for a couple of weeks, otherwise no Christmas cards would have been written or posted, no presents bought or wrapped or delivered, the tree wouldn't have been bought or erected or decorated, and the house decorations would have stayed in their boxes in the cupboard.
And I'm going off on holiday for a couple of weeks in January.
I saw that first message, but like others, I had (and still have) no clue what point Bunntamas was trying to make. So what to respond? Nothing, really. And she herself has deserted many discussions in mid-flow due to time constraints.
So far as I know, the main mod actions in this debate have been taken against Bunntamas. Certainly, the only thing I've heard from them about recently is my slagging off of xjx388 in the healthcare thread, and I'm not terribly repentant I have to say and I'm still having a go in that direction, both barrels. I can't see any reason why anyone would be avoiding this thread because of any moderator action.
So maybe if Bunntamas says something comprehensible, we can move on.
So far, she's failed to provide any evidence that there was any unaccompanied luggage on KM180. She has failed to show that Megrahi bought the clothes from Tony Gauci, or even that the clothes were bought on 7th December. She has failed to show that Megrahi did anything at all on 20th/21st December that might have been related to smuggling a (non-existent) unaccompanied suitcase on to KM180.
Which means that she has absolutely zero evidence to connect Megrahi to the bombing of PA103. I think if she had any, she'd have told us about it by now.
Rolfe.
Rolfe
Adult human female
Bunntamas is American. She lost her father 22 years ago on PA103.
I'm sure you understand that in view of that, we must treat her with kid gloves, and walk on eggshells round her, no matter what sort of tone she chooses to address us in.
Matt Berkley, another JREF forum member, lost his brother on the same flight, by the way.
I just wish Bunntamas would make a substantial point sometime, rather than hit-and-run impenetrable innuendo.
Rolfe.
Last edited:
Not sure where that idea ever came from, but whatever.
I've tried .... seems like if my comments don't to fit into the CT agenda here, they are hand waved. I've noted many times that I have no interest in re-hashing points that have been commented on over and over here for years. My point in the post I made a couple of days ago, and relevent to this topic, (as opposed to once again banging on Bunntamas, and violating JREF rules, that MODs seem to ignore, if one is "in" with said mods) was that it appears the Epetition, and following Parliament Committee hearing seems to have (as expected) gone nowhere. Wonder why? Guess it's all that fabulous "evidence" you all keep re-hashing, and PR. Black's outstanding statement of (non factual) rain drenched purpose of umbrella purchase.
~B.
Best of luck to you in the new year, in spite of (my) continued doubts.
LOL!
Sorry, but as I've said in the past, comments on JREF and other online sources does not evidence make.
EVIDENCE is only true evidence when it makes it into the court and is considered evidence. The true evidence against Megrahi, lead in court still stands with a verdict of guilty. I'll keep yawning, content with the guilty verdict, as you keep typing about what you think is alleged evidence.
EPetition and alleged "evidence" by CTs on JREF is (as Rolfe likes to say) an EPIC FAIL.
Maybe the new year will bring you some new material. But I'm not holding my breath.
Last edited:
With respect, Bunntamas, I've been (largely lurking) on this thread and its sisters for some considerable time. You have yet to present any susbtantive argument beyond the fact that the court found him guilty. Rolfe and others have pointed to some very serious questions regarding the quality of the evidence and integrity of the wtinesses. You have been pointed in the direction of compelling comments made by senior legal figures and onservers. All you've done is hand-wave them away.
I'm very sorry for your loss, really. To lose a parent is a terrible thing, and in circumstances such as Lockerbie it must be about as bad as these things can get. But if you're just looking to keey shouting about what was, on any fair reading, a flawed verdict then you're in the wrong place.
I'm very sorry for your loss, really. To lose a parent is a terrible thing, and in circumstances such as Lockerbie it must be about as bad as these things can get. But if you're just looking to keey shouting about what was, on any fair reading, a flawed verdict then you're in the wrong place.
Thanks Architect. Appreciate the thoughts. And by the way, I never asked anyone to treat me with "kid gloves" as a result of being a PA103 family member.
Well, you have your opinion, I have mine. When I joined JREF, I was told by Rolfe that this was an amicable place to discuss the issues. Sometimes I've been "aimicable", sometimes (when berated) not so much. So far what I've seen is anyone who opposes the views of folks who are on the not guilty side get hand waved with comments with statements like "give me evidence" when the real evidence has already been produced in court and ruled upon. Opposers to the verdict, try as they might have not been able to move said verdict even a milimetre. Yet they drone on for years on end here on JREF, and attempt to divert the topic and bash on a personal level with stupid innuendo like "kid gloves". And the mods tag me, yet ignore rule violations by others.
Had things actually been "amicable" as Rolfe first told me, I might have been more apt to dig deeper into the issues. But then again, I think it may have been futile, considering you all think you have it all figured out. Again, doubtful, considering the state of the results of the Epetition and the following results of the parliment hearing having gone nowhere.
SO, I guess you're right. I'm in the wrong place.
Thanks for the nudge. I'm hopping off the JREF hamster wheel.
Last edited:
Rolfe
Adult human female
It's a funny thing. Bunntamas, you have emerged in several places with very very inflammatory posts against people who believe the cops got the wrong man for that crime. Now it seems to me that your motivation for that must be to try to persuade these people that they are mistaken, and that the guilty verdict was indeed justified.
This is a perfectly reasonable position to be coming from. I suggested JREF for two reasons. One because you yourself said you'd prefer to discuss in a forum format rather than on blog comments, and I agreed with you on that. The other was that I knew on this forum that conspiracy theorists are the Enemy, that many posters like nothing better than debunking conspiracy theorists (have you looked in the 9/11 section at all?), and that there had been a substantial number of posters on the Lockerbie threads who appeared extremely keen to support the guilty verdict, even if they didn't have much detailed knowledge of the case.
I thought there was every prospect of your not only getting a fair hearing here, but of finding like-minded people who would support your point of view. I thought we could discuss your reasons for believing the verdict was sound, and come to a better understanding of the issues.
However, it hasn't worked out. All you seem to be saying is that it is impossible for a court to convict the wrong person. Just on basic reality, we know that is not true. Many, many people who were convicted of crimes including murder have been shown to be innocent, many after even more than 10 years (the time since the Zeist verdict).
You know you are debating with people who believe the evidence presented at Zeist should never have led to a guilty verdict. That there is no evidence the bomb was ever within 1,000 miles of the island of Malta, and that there is no credible evidence that Megrahi was the man who bought the clothes from Tony Gauci. We are just as aware as you are that three judges decided that evidence was in fact there. So simply repeating that these three judges came to that conclusion therefore it cannot be questioned isn't much of a basis for coming into the argument.
It's unfortunate that none of the people who are expert in debunking conspiracy theories has come to support you. It's unfortunate that none of the people who had earlier supported the position that Megrahi did indeed carry out the bombing has come to support you. But I'm afraid that's what happens when you have no substantive arguments.
I said in a different thread that if you could persuade me that Megrahi was even likely to have been the purchaser, on the balance of probability (none of this "beyond reasonable doubt" stuff necessary), I'd agree that he was mixed up in the plot to bomb Pan Am 103. Several of us have gone over the identification evidence in excruciating detail, and have become even more convinced than we were before that is definitely wasn't him. You have barely participated in that discussion, and then only to make disconnected and often erroneous points.
You haven't been able to come up with a single shred of evidence suggesting the bomb travelled on KM180 from Malta, or that Megrahi had a hand in putting it there that morning - which is hardly surprising, because the court couldn't find a shred of evidence either. It was simply decided that since he'd bought the clothes, and he'd been at the airport when KM180 departed, somehow that must have been what happened.
But he didn't buy the clothes.
Now you can come back to the thread where we were discussing the clothes purchase and say something sensible. Or you can take us through the evidence regarding the Malta-Frankfurt-Heathrow route and show us something we've missed. Or you can go away and cling to your belief that court verdicts are never wrong.
But there's no point in coming here, stamping your foot, and expecting anyone on a sceptical forum just to agree with you that court verdicts are never wrong and can never be questioned.
Rolfe.
This is a perfectly reasonable position to be coming from. I suggested JREF for two reasons. One because you yourself said you'd prefer to discuss in a forum format rather than on blog comments, and I agreed with you on that. The other was that I knew on this forum that conspiracy theorists are the Enemy, that many posters like nothing better than debunking conspiracy theorists (have you looked in the 9/11 section at all?), and that there had been a substantial number of posters on the Lockerbie threads who appeared extremely keen to support the guilty verdict, even if they didn't have much detailed knowledge of the case.
I thought there was every prospect of your not only getting a fair hearing here, but of finding like-minded people who would support your point of view. I thought we could discuss your reasons for believing the verdict was sound, and come to a better understanding of the issues.
However, it hasn't worked out. All you seem to be saying is that it is impossible for a court to convict the wrong person. Just on basic reality, we know that is not true. Many, many people who were convicted of crimes including murder have been shown to be innocent, many after even more than 10 years (the time since the Zeist verdict).
You know you are debating with people who believe the evidence presented at Zeist should never have led to a guilty verdict. That there is no evidence the bomb was ever within 1,000 miles of the island of Malta, and that there is no credible evidence that Megrahi was the man who bought the clothes from Tony Gauci. We are just as aware as you are that three judges decided that evidence was in fact there. So simply repeating that these three judges came to that conclusion therefore it cannot be questioned isn't much of a basis for coming into the argument.
It's unfortunate that none of the people who are expert in debunking conspiracy theories has come to support you. It's unfortunate that none of the people who had earlier supported the position that Megrahi did indeed carry out the bombing has come to support you. But I'm afraid that's what happens when you have no substantive arguments.
I said in a different thread that if you could persuade me that Megrahi was even likely to have been the purchaser, on the balance of probability (none of this "beyond reasonable doubt" stuff necessary), I'd agree that he was mixed up in the plot to bomb Pan Am 103. Several of us have gone over the identification evidence in excruciating detail, and have become even more convinced than we were before that is definitely wasn't him. You have barely participated in that discussion, and then only to make disconnected and often erroneous points.
You haven't been able to come up with a single shred of evidence suggesting the bomb travelled on KM180 from Malta, or that Megrahi had a hand in putting it there that morning - which is hardly surprising, because the court couldn't find a shred of evidence either. It was simply decided that since he'd bought the clothes, and he'd been at the airport when KM180 departed, somehow that must have been what happened.
But he didn't buy the clothes.
Now you can come back to the thread where we were discussing the clothes purchase and say something sensible. Or you can take us through the evidence regarding the Malta-Frankfurt-Heathrow route and show us something we've missed. Or you can go away and cling to your belief that court verdicts are never wrong.
But there's no point in coming here, stamping your foot, and expecting anyone on a sceptical forum just to agree with you that court verdicts are never wrong and can never be questioned.
Rolfe.
Last edited:
I see another "wall of text" post coming. Please. Let's not.
Thanks for everything. Wishing you all the best in the new year, Rolfe.
~B.
Last edited:
Rolfe
Adult human female
And the same to you, and many of them.
Just bear in mind, you chose to enter the discussion. Nobody put a gun to your head. Nobody here has any reason at all to defend Megrahi, if he actually did bomb that plane. Personally, I find the Zeist verdict an acute embarrassment to my country's justice system that I could well do without. So, any reasonable explanations about what we're all missing when we simply can't see any rational case against the man would be eagerly considered.
You just don't seem to have any.
Rolfe.
Just bear in mind, you chose to enter the discussion. Nobody put a gun to your head. Nobody here has any reason at all to defend Megrahi, if he actually did bomb that plane. Personally, I find the Zeist verdict an acute embarrassment to my country's justice system that I could well do without. So, any reasonable explanations about what we're all missing when we simply can't see any rational case against the man would be eagerly considered.
You just don't seem to have any.
Rolfe.
Rolfe
Adult human female
Bunntamas, I really don't know what to make of you. If you perceive those who believe Megrahi to be innocent not to be doing anything, you rant and sneer at them for this, pointing out your own concerted activism when you petitioned to get the US law changed so that you could sue the state of Libya to make them pay you millions of dollars each.
Then, when some initiative is taken, you rant and sneer at the initiative.
Male up your mind.
Actually, though, this was the on-topic part, and even if Bunntamas has gone away again, it's useful to pick it up.
The JFM committee was told that the parliament had been given a deadline of 10th December to respond to the petition. The committee had some idea what it thought the response might be, and had the response to the response already drafted.
Shortly after the deadline, the information they were given was something to the effect that the response was just being typed up.
So far as I am aware, as of today, no response has yet been forthcoming.
Make of that what you like.
Rolfe.
funk de fino
Dreaming of unicorns
No, you are not. You are typing gibberish.
And you are redundant. As is all of the other gibberish here.
Rolfe
Adult human female
If your goal is to persuade us, with evidence, that Megrahi bombed that plane, I don't think you're going about it the right way.
If it isn't, why did you enter the debate?
You explicitly requested a discussion about the clothes purchase, and a thread on that was bumped for that purpose, but still you didn't proffer a single useful point. Au contraire, the re-opening of the subject led the rest of us to figure out more about Tony Gauci's so-called identification of Megrahi, demonstrating that it was even more flawed than we had originally thought.
What's the point of jumping in sporadically with sneering, dismissive, almost nonsensical posts? What's the point of continually repeating that the Zeist court returned a guilty verdict, as if that was something we didn't know?
Why not engage with the debate and use logic and reason to show us we're wrong?
Rolfe.