Responses to Megrahi release
There have been extraordinary images of Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi boarding the plane at Glasgow airport this afternoon.
And the decision by the Scottish Justice Secretary, Kenny MacAskill, to release him has provoked a very strong response from David Cameron. He said:
"I think this is wrong and it's the product of some completely nonsensical thinking in my view. If there's a view that the conviction is in some way unsafe, then the proper process is an appeal and the presentation of new evidence. But if this is about genuine release on compassionate grounds I think it is wrong. This man was convicted of murdering 270 people. He showed no compassion to them. They weren't allowed to go home and die with their relatives in their own bed and I think this is a very bad decision."
Of course it's easier to speak in such terms in opposition, but it's fascinating that he's chosen to intervene in such an impassioned and public way, rather than allowing the Conservative leader in Scotland, Annabel Goldie, to lead on the issue.
On top of what is no doubt a genuine anger, it may also suit him to be seen standing alongside the United States rather than the SNP.
It's certainly a sharp contrast to Alistair Darling, who, stepping in for Gordon Brown while he continues his holiday in Scotland, pointedly resisted an invitation to comment on the merits of the decision.
He told the BBC:
"[Y]ou either devolve responsibility for criminal justice or you don't. And I bet you if I'd been saying to you what Kenny McAskill ought to do many people would have cried foul and said, you've devolved...why are you interfering."
But that doesn't mean there is no Labour view on the decision - quite the contrary. The Labour leader in Scotland, Iain Gray, has said that if he had been leading the Scottish administration, Megrahi would not be going back to Libya.
That chimes with the view of the Scottish Liberal Democrat leader, Tavish Scott, who described the SNP verdict as "disappointing". The Lib Dem's Cowley Street operation in Westminster left it to him to give their view.
PS One or two people questioned my assertion yesterday that before devolution this decision would have been taken by the UK government because the Scottish legal system has always been separate. But my understanding is that ultimately the decision would have still fallen to a politician, which pre-devolution would have been someone who was part of the same administration as the occupant of No 10.
I'm 
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~50~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
To me this highlights why an MP representing a Scottish constituency should not be allowed any vote or to take executive decisions on devolved issues.
Complain about this comment
Still time for one more post today, Laura. What do you think about today's little punch-up over the NHS? Only a minor skirmish, but who scored more points, do you think?
Complain about this comment
This evil little devil should have been left to rot in the Scottish jail.He was handed over for trial by Qaddafi and was found guilty I'm fully aware we have just released Ronnie bigs on compassionate grounds but that swine killed Innocent's on an airliner and persons on the ground and was found guilty by jury If he wasn't the guilty party why was he handed over by Qaddafi in the first instance?And what about the family's of the deceased is there no justice for them?It seams if you are a terrorist you get vip treatment in a leer jet to your given destination.
Complain about this comment
A bold decision has been taken by the Scottish Justice Minister. He has balanced justice and compassion. I agree with his assertion that it is wrong to say that because Mr Megrahi showed no compassion he too should have no compassion shown him.
Sometimes you need to stand up for your principles and show the world that even though you have been harshly treated your response need not be harsh in return.
This is not (as it has been described) an act of weakness, but rather an act of courage!
Well done Mr McAskill. I am extremely proud today to be Scottish.
Complain about this comment
I'm really disappointed by David Cameron's comments. I've always felt he spoke a great deal of sense but his outburst today is almost as bad as Hillary Clinton's comments.
No matter what these people think, this has nothing to do with either of them. It was a crime over Scotland, investigated under Scottish Law, in a Scottish Court and sentenced by Scottish judges to serve time in a Scottish prison.
Surely this decision is ultimately, solely and totally down to the Scottish Justice Secretary and no-one else?
Complain about this comment
The decision is made and the Libyan has gone home.
All the right political noises are being made but they are all happy to see the back of it
Perhaps this news will be buried by tomorrow.
Complain about this comment
There is a wide school of thought that says Al-Megrahi was NOT guilty of the bombing. Was he? Wasn't he? He was probably set up by Gadaffi in exchange for the Libyan leader's 'respectabislisation' as Jim Swire has made clear. Today I think Kenny McAskill had a task he couldn't win, whatever he did, but I think he did absolutely the right thing and I am proud to be a Scot this day.
Complain about this comment
Your newsreader didn't help the controversy surrounding this whole episode when he claimed that PanAm 103 had "over 200,000 TONNES of fuel" on board when it blew up!!! 200,000 litres maybe but the other is so out of this world all it can can do is fuel the thoughts of people looking for reasons to disagree with the whole thing
Complain about this comment
#3 quietoldinthetooth
Accuracy is useful. There was no jury.
Complain about this comment
#3 i agree 100% this evil man was guilty ,the jury said so,where is the compassion for the 270 poor souls he murdered?,this country is a joke if your evil scum, you do all right, if your law abiding your treated like..... you know what..
Complain about this comment
#1 Phillip802
"To me this highlights why an MP representing a Scottish constituency should not be allowed any vote or to take executive decisions on devolved issues."
You seem a little confused. MPs from any part of the UK have no role in any devolved issues.
If you mean that Scots MPs shouldn't vote on issues affecting England only, when the UK Parliament acts as the English Parliament, then I agree.
Complain about this comment
When it comes to trying to score cheap political points look for Iain Gray.
The truth is that if, heaven forbid, Iain Gray was leading the Scottish Government he would do exactly what his masters in Westminster told him to do.
Look out for the following from Gray in the Glasgow by-election "the SNP is soft on crime" we would not have let Megrahi out. Labour will ignore the fact that it is a Westminster by-election and Scottish justice is quite separate from Westminster. Anything to deflect from their 12 wasted years in office.
Complain about this comment
#5 yes all scottish except for the fact that the rest of the uk pay taxes to keep scum like al-megrahi alive
Complain about this comment
Devolution is not relevant.
Before or after devolution decisions on individual legal cases were only be taken in accordance with official advice by individual ministers not governments. This is an important principal. The danger to an individual's freedom under the law is obvious if a government takes upon itself the right to determine their case.
Complain about this comment
At least the conspiracy theories will be buried with Megrahi , much to the annoyance of the " don't believe anything " brigade. I disagree with McKaskill's decision , but he may well be right and it took a degree of courage to make what appears to be an unpopular judgement.Hopefully the media can now give some attention to the desperate incompetence of the government's handling of the economy and the Afghan situation.
Complain about this comment
Laura:
I am on the side of David Cameron regarding his comments and attitude regarding the released of Megrahi, from Scottish Prison and sent home to Libya....
=Dennis Junior=
Complain about this comment
#4 so its compassion to lock someone up for life then?I mean doesnt it do everybody a favour to get rid of this scum,im sick of do gooders like you always defending evil people like this.These people deserve 1 fate ...taken out and shot,and for once in your life show some thought for the poor souls he murdered.
Complain about this comment
Laura:
In the PS section of the blog...I never said anything to you regarding the situation of the released before Devolution....
=Dennis Junior=
Complain about this comment
#9 old Nat please explain Is the Scottish legal system some what deferent from the English system then? trial with out jury? or is it the laird of the county the overseer on such occasions then? like it was in days gone by.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
What he did was wrong. Keeping a man with only 3 months to live in prison is wrong. Two wrongs don't make a right! Wasn’t it Gandi who said something like "an eye for an eye leaves everyone blind"?
Keeping him in prison would not of brought back all the innocent people from the Pan Am flight or Lockerbie, but it does show the world justice & compassion are more important than politics & revenge.
I’m not Scottish. And as an Englishman, the SNP’s “Scotland Scotland Scotland We are not English everything’s all the fault of the English” record gets a bit annoying… but, hats off the SNP. Kenny McAskill seems to of resisted great political pressure to do what he sees as the right thing morally. We moan a lot about our MP’s being shallow and just in it for the votes, but here’s a politician whose moral compass is not broken.
Then again, I didn't loose a loved one at the hands of this man, so it's easy for people like me to take a more objective view!
Complain about this comment
If nothing else I suppose that Cameron's stance on this issue just reinforces once again how out of touch he is with the way Scotland ticks.
As to Iain Gray saying that if he had been leading the Scottish administration, Megrahi would not be going back to Libya that of course sums up how he thinks... i.e. not very much!
Complain about this comment
Cameron has just proved he is Mr Soundbite,
Complain about this comment
#19 The Scottish legal system is different from the English one, thankfully, but in this particular case it was exercise in a unique way in that the trial brokered in part through the offices of Nelson Mandela was held before a tribunal of judges [ just like the Internationa War Crimes commision works].
Your cheap shot belies your ignorance... and a peculiarly offensive arrogance.
Complain about this comment
The decision to release this bloke will obviously upset the dozens of bereaved families, particularly in the US. And while we must rightly empathise and sympathise with their views and feelings of betrayal, that doesn't mean that we have to unconditionally take criticism on this side of the pond from Hillary Clinton. Before she gets too hot and bothered about the UK being soft on terror, she might care to remember her many photo opportunities with Gerry Adams when she and President Clinton were both in "be nice to terrorists" mode, not giving a second thought about British sensibilities, and reflect that "don't do as I do, do as I say" was never a very effective diplomacy tool. Caledonian Comment
Complain about this comment
I believe that the way people feel about his release depends on whether or not they think he was definitely guilty. I have no idea whether or not he was guily, and so have no objection to his release. If I really thought he was guilty I would be very strongly against it (as I was against Ronnie Biggs' release).
Why is there such a difference of opinion between American and British commentators? Is it that Americans are more likely to believe that all verdicts are correct? Are we British simply more cynical?
No disrespect intended here to those many Brits who believe he is guilty.
Complain about this comment
Let us remember that Megrahi was not the instigator of this outrage, merely his hireling. The real villain of the piece is President Gaddaffi who ordered the bombing. This is a man who has been responsible for causing murder and mayhem world-wide long before any of us even heard of Saddam Hussein.
We would do well to remember that this was not the the last bombing in Britain he was responsible for – remember the ship Eksund which was found loaded with arms for the IRA? Unfortunately earlier shipments got through and, as a result the Semtex plastic explosive he supplied helped prolong Ulster’s agony.
It is also worth remembering that,like Saddam Hussein he was making a determined effort to develop nuclear and chemical weapons; a fact which came to light at the time of the Iraq invasion. However,instead of being deposed he was offered a chance to come in from the cold and rehabilitate himself.
As a result, the man who’s weapons caused untold numbers of deaths in the west will now be sold western arms. His oil industry which helped fund his evil deeds will be rescued by western money and expertise. Unlike Saddam Hussein he will not die on one of his own gallows, he will, instead be treated as a faithful ally and be allowed to subject his own people to more years of oppression.
Megrahi will very soon end is days, either at home or in some corner of a Libyan hospital. The man who sent him on his murderous mission and gave him the means to carry it out will live on, more secure in power than he has ever been.
Complain about this comment
#19 quietoldinthetooth
sorry for the delay in replying - had to go and make dinner.
The Megrahi trial was unique. In order to get a trial at all, it had to be held outwith Scotland (in the Netherlands)and uniquely there was no jury, but a panel of 3 Scots judges.
Just shows the danger of posting on something you have little knowledge of!
Complain about this comment
#20 jon112uk
Initially I was horrified by your post.
Then I realised you didn't know what you were talking about.
Complain about this comment
Completely the wrong decision and I am afraid the Scottish Government have lost a great deal of credibility by coming to this conclusion. If as Cameron says this man is innocent it should have gone to appeal as with all cases. This sets a precedent that all prisoners, no matter what their crime should be released, if they are proven to be terminally ill. This is not in accordance with the mercy that this man showed to his victims.
I had hoped that if the Scottish Government had been in charge of this, they would have shown the courage of independence from the UK Government which was required. Instead we find they have carried out exactly the same decision that the UK Government would have done. There is no need for a Scottish Parliament if this is the degree of independence shown.
I also found listening to MacAskill it was similar to the lectures we have received from G. Brown on religious matters, this I am afraid is a complete turn off to the listener.
In truth the Scottish Government has done exactly what Brown wanted, and their justification is nothing less than religious nonsense to be honest.
Complain about this comment
I wonder if the commentator at post 20 above has ever been to Scotland. What a thoroughly ridiculous posting. The Scottish people had to deal with the PAN AM disaster and great friendships exist between relatives' families and people here. There is disagreement about the Megrahi issue but as the Justice Secretary for Scotland - a sovereign jurisdiction - said "however, a decision had to be made." The event was 21 years ago. Many wise and thoughtful observers and researchers do not believe that Megrahi was guilty. Of course, he was found guilty. The Justice Secretary did not question that verdict but demonstrated a wise and brave compassion to a man (not considered guilty by all) who will die soon. God forbid we have no mercy. Our hearts go out to the relatives and friends of those who died. Let us set up an enquiry - something that the UK and / or US Governments alone can do; and let's not allow the quest for truth to die with Megrahi.
Complain about this comment
#21 rispurr
Most of us would be less objective if we had lost a loved one through any crime. That's why the legal systems remove justice to the more anonymous level of the judicial system.
PS I suspect you haven't actually read any SNP literature, or statements. I challenge you to provide evidence of their saying "everything’s all the fault of the English”. The British are the problem (since they claim sovereignty over Scotland), but the English (with the probable exception of their sports commentators on TV) are not a problem.
Complain about this comment
Not sure if I agree whether he should be allowed to go back to Libya or not, but I do think that Cameron is wrong to say that he shouldn't have been released at all.
Yes, he didn't show compassion to those 270 people he killed. But that is what separates him from the rest of us. He showed no compassion. We do.
Complain about this comment
David Cameron's comments reflect so many of the knee-jerk remarks I've read today - "He showed no compassion or mercy so we should show him none". Really? We should set our standards for compassion and mercy at the same level as those of a mass murderer? Call me conceited if you like, but I like to think my nation shows standards of humanity rather higher than those of the Lockerbie Bomber. And praise be! Kenny MacAskill demonstrated those standards today.
Assuming he was guilty, Megrahi did not deserve release; but that's what mercy involves, isn't it? Giving people what they deserve scarcely qualifies as mercy, and probably doesn't qualify as compassion.
Complain about this comment
At least the release of Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi will effectively stop any embarrassment arising from any appeal casting doubt on his guilt.
What really worries me is that while this release was authorised on understandably compassionate grounds, Gary McKinnon's extradition appears set to continue although similar reasoning could be applied by the Home Secretary on the basis of his (McKinnon) having AS. And of course since the UK has defied America over al-Megrahi (has everyone forgotten that the whole ethos of the Pax Americana is that they do what America tells them to) it would not be beyond the bounds of possibility that McKinnon will now be treated even more harshly than he might otherwise have been.
It might be different if the McKinnon family had oil, or is that just a touch too cynical?
Complain about this comment
Perhaps if more people had followed civilised principles like Kenny MacAskill and not simply kowtowed to vindictive American politicians, as many have been doing in recent years, we wouldn't have become involved in an illegal war in Iraq or sanctioned the use of medieval torture. I do hope this is the beginning of a reassertion of the need to champion the rights of all human beings and not just the ones that the Americans like. Further, I would like to suggest that the fundamentalist eye for an eye mentality coming out from across the pond doesn't appear to differ much from that of the Taliban and their like.
Complain about this comment
Kindness, in the Arab world, is viewed as weakness.
Complain about this comment
#30 Susan-Croft
"Completely the wrong decision and I am afraid the Scottish Government have lost a great deal of credibility"
Maybe I've misunderstood you in the past, but I didn't think that you ever thought the Scottish Government had any credibility. It's a bit like my saying that Brown/Cameron have lost credibility.
Complain about this comment
At least he did spend some time in prison. Which is more than can be said for the killer of WPC Yvonne Fletcher.
Complain about this comment
it's ironic, isn't it? - just when the country is in the mood to be levelled with ... positively yearning for some "tough decisions from tough people" ... DC chooses to base his appeal on this sort of thing - what a mistake he's making, don't you think? - Cometh the Hour, Cometh the Cam (with some facile crowd pleasing)
Complain about this comment
#26 Its_an_Outrage
An interesting post, and you make a good point. I don't quite agree with you, though. I have qualms neither about Biggs' guilt nor his compassionate release.
IMO, compassionate release should be only about the individual's physical condition and the possibility of his or her committing further crimes. Absent the BBC-generated media storm, I suspect MacAskill would have waited another week or so before making the decision, which I would have preferred personally. In the event, he had to make it this week or face plausible accusations of dithering.
Post or reactive moderation for all except CBeebies, please!
Complain about this comment
"....Of course it's easier to speak in such terms in opposition, but it's fascinating that he's chosen to intervene in such an impassioned and public way, rather than allowing the Conservative leader in Scotland, Annabel Goldie, to lead on the issue."
Why would it be fascinating that a Westminster based politician, who presumably hopes to be responsible for the UK's Foreign and Defence policies, should choose to comment on the impact that Mr MacAskill's decisions could have?
As far as I'm aware, the Scottish Executive has some control over "justice" within it's physical jurisdiction, but no responsibility for foreign policy across the UK.
MacAskill made some excoriating comments about the Whitehall apparatchiks, especially in respect of the introduction of a UK/Libyan Prisoner Transfer scheme. Apparently, at the time, the Scots said there was only ONE Libyan prisoner held in Scotland (guess who). And he implied that the Whitehall group had assured the US government - and the families affected by the Lockerbie incident - that no early release would be contemplated.
So does that mean that some Whitehall politicians not only mislead us - the UK population - about the "threat" of Saddam (which the U.S. security "intelligence" services believed as well, God rest their poor souls!), but also misled the U.S. into believing that someone tried and found guilty of a crime would be held in a UK prison to serve the prescribed term?
I have no idea whether Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi was responsible for the Lockerbie disaster. I had reason to doubt every member of the Libyan Arab Airline staff scattered across the world at that time.
The guy was convicted. Other evidence could prove his innocence - or maybe just show him as a guy sharing responsibility with others un-named.
I still don't understand why Ronnie Biggs was allowed "compassionate" release. The guy came "home" because he was ill and assumed that UK tax-payers would look after him. Funny that Jack Straw suddenly had a change of heart about Biggs just before Megrahi was "sprung".
Funny, that. Wasn't Straw a member of the government that passed the UK/Libyan Prisoner Transfer arrangement?
It's getting too sick to understand.
I'd like every MP's detailed biometrics to be taken (forcibly if necessary) and every document, e-mail or text they are related to kept on the public record for at least 20 years.
Within that time-frame, maybe someone will come up with a truth serum that I'm sure they - "you've nothing to fear if you are innocent" - will willingly self-inject.
Complain about this comment
#28old Nat Thank for your reply the episode was that long ago i had completely forgotten the trial in its self And as you so rightly pointed out should have consulting brain before commenting as a few eagle eyes are always ready to jump down your throat. None of us are perfect and at times get our facts wrong, So once again thanks for your comment and good night.
Complain about this comment
Lots of emotive reaction here, and understandable I suppose.
Kenny MacAskill made a decision; and something that probably requires to be understood is the viewpoint that this was made from.
Scottish thought is quite simply different from that of other nations, and that needs to be respected. We probably see the world in a different light from that of other nations, but that isn't necessarily a bad thing. Compassion figures large. Fair play is up there. Doing the right thing is paramount. Petty political end games are not on the agenda where people's lives are concerned.
There will be political comment, a lot of it negative, over this decision, but I ask you to remember one thing. The Scottish people voted (VOTED!) the current SNP Government in. They have a mandate to make decisions. The decisions may be difficult, they may be unpopular with some, but they have to be made.
And they are being made; by a progressive and courageous Government. They are to be admired and applauded!
Complain about this comment
David Cameron can go and take a running jump.
That jumped up little cretin kept his gaping maw shut through-out the entire debacle with Labour negotiating a prisoner transfer agreement with Libya - but now that the Scottish Government has taken an avenue he disagrees with he speaks up?
What a hypcocrite he is.
Where was he when the families of Lockerbie wanted an inquiry into Lockerbie? Where was he when Tony Blair courted contoversy over the prisoner transfer agreement? This nescient moron has no right to speak for victims of the atrocity any more than he has the right to speak for the people of Scotland.
At the next election he will soon learn that distinction
Complain about this comment
#43 quietoldinthetooth
A civilized response - I was perhaps unnecessarily harsh.
Complain about this comment
Oldnut 38
To my knowledge I have always been fair on the subject of the Scottish Parliament. I always say what I believe. In my last post I stated that I thought it was right for the Government of Scotland to make the decision of whether Megrahi should be released or not. That is giving credibility to a Scottish Government. However I have to say I always thought that the Scottish Parliament would be much more forward thinking than that at Westminister, however todays decision proves this thought to be wrong. No matter what positive spin you put on it, MacAskill was a mirror image of Brown today.
As to Brown he lost credibility with me ages ago. Cameron I have no idea what he is about, though the signs are not good, I suppose we will find out. Nothing new there. In this particular instance however over Megrahi, I believe Cameron is right.
Complain about this comment
#47 Susan-Croft
Cameron is right is he?
Not 2 months ago he gave a "genuine" heartfelt speech about how if he becomes Prime Minister he would "respect the devolved government of Scotland"
Not more than 2 months ago.
Now tell me, where was his tuppence when this issue was being bandied about in the news months ago? Where was he to espouse his convictions on how to deal with al-Megrahi before the media turned this into a circus?
The man has done little more than rode in on the coat-tails of those who opposed al-Megrahi's release - myself included in that number.
Couldn't he have left it to Annabel Goldie to make a statement about the Scottish conservatives views on a wholey devolved matter? One he promised to respect less than two months ago.
No, because he wanted the soundbite - he wanted to come across as passionate about somthing he believes is wrong - instead - he's come off as a hypocritical mouthpiece with no respect for Scottish sovereign matters.
If you beleive what he said is commendable - that speaks volumes of the fibre of your own character.
Complain about this comment
Oldnat 47
Sorry that was a genuine slip in your name, I was not being rude, I only realised when it came up.
Complain about this comment
#47Susan-Croft
I was referring to what I saw as your view of the Scottish Government - not the Parliament.
Though not a Christian myself, I recognise the Kirk's view as representing the same moral strand that I am part of.
The Rev Ian Galloway, convener of the Kirk's Church and Society Council, commented: “This decision has sent a message to the world about what it is to be Scottish. We are defined as a nation by how we treat those who have chosen to hurt us. Do we choose mercy even when they did not chose mercy?"
"This was not about whether one man was guilty or innocent," he added. "Nor is it about whether he had a right to mercy but whether we as a nation, despite the continuing pain of many, are willing to be merciful."
Galloway went on: "I understand the deep anger and grief that still grips the souls of the victims’ families and I respect their views. But to them I would say justice is not lost in acting in mercy. Instead, our deepest humanity is expressed for the better. To choose mercy is the tough choice and today our nation met that challenge."
He concluded: "We have gained something significant as a nation by this decision. It is a defining moment for all of us.”
Complain about this comment
Just proves that David Cameron is an opportunist. I am certain he understands that it is the Scottish minister of justice who is responsible for jurisprudence in Scotland. He is a populist and throws his lot with the Americans to score political points. In siding with a country like America that is devoid of compassion and has the death penalty he is identifying himself with the inventors of Guantanamo. At least we in Europe are civilized enough not to have the death penalty and the incarceration of prisoners like in America, where revenge and retribution abounds in their penal code. What do you expect from a slick PR man?
Complain about this comment
#49 Susan-Croft
No problem. It's why I copy and paste user names - having made similar errors myself. I didn't assume any offence was meant and none was taken - actually I might adopt your variation :-)
Complain about this comment
GAAberdeen 48
I have no idea of Camerons motives, that is for him to answer. My only comment was that he is correct in this instance.
The blog is for people who think differently about subjects, that does not mean you can make judgements of a particular persons character simply because they disagree with you. That I am afraid says more about you than me.
Complain about this comment
oldnat 50
I have nothing against the Scottish Parlaiment, the Scottish Government or the Scottish people. Indeed I would like England to have its own Parliament. However I believe this was a bad decision, taken for the wrong reasons and will have the wrong result. I have already given my reasons why.
Complain about this comment
Can anyone tell me how they would feel as a jailed innocent?
Remember that this man has protested his innocence all along.
Can anyone hand on heart say that there have been no miscarriages of justice in the past?
There has been doubt over this conviction since it happened.
Its all very well for the Americans to conveniently sweep the Iranian plane shot down with great loss of life , under the carpet.
Its all very well for the Americans to ignore Guatanamo.
Its all very well for the Americans to ignore their own bad habits around the world while telling the rest of us what to do.
But you will have to forgive me when I say I really am sick and tired of the political interference/ criticism from the other side of the pond , the other side of the border and the smug UK media.
Mr Cameron would do well to remember that there is ONE Conservative MP North of the border, next time they might not have so many!
Complain about this comment
Obama is showing he is small after all
Complain about this comment
#53 Susan-Croft
I'm consistent with my opinions, but when I'm wrong - I apologise.
I didn't argue that Mr Cameron wasn't right or that you were wrong - I merely pointed out that by using his commentary in line with your own makes you look like you condone his hypocrisy.
Indeed, if you check my post again it details that I oppposed al-Megrahi's release - yet unlike Cameron I spoke up about it before the Justice Secretary made a decision and I certainly didn't make it to gain kudo's from anyone else.
If your going to chew me out for questioning why you would give deference to a charlatan's trite attempt at gaining political plaudits, I'm happy to take whatever ignoble punishment it suits.
Complain about this comment
#54 Susan-Croft
We can agree to disagree. In my view morality is more important than securing political advantage. I recognise that this may not fit with views further south.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
On Newsnight Gavin Essler is also very small
Complain about this comment
sc @ 49 regarding Old Nut ...
nice try, Susan, but the "u" is nowhere near the "a" on the keyboard (is it?) so we're not buying that mistake story, I'm afraid
Complain about this comment
America is being found wanting - I think they are on the decline - hurrah!
Complain about this comment
The world and his wife know that the destruction of the PAN-AM plane was almost certainly Tehran inspired revenge for the USS Vincennes having mistaken an Iranian airliner for an attacking military jet and, in consequence, shooting it down. Had the officers responsible been disciplined as they ought to have been, matters might have ended there. Instead, some clowns in Congress gave them medals. None of this excuses what followed, but it does help explain why some of the relatives take a more nuanced approach to today's release.
Complain about this comment
My attempt to 'complain' about post #45 and the use of certain words to describe David Cameron seems to have been rejected by the moderators.
I complained in the sense of making a new posting, not by clicking on the 'complain about this comment link'. I don't want post#45 censored because I don't believe in censorship. But I do want to say that at least two of the words used have no place in political argument.
Complain about this comment
I have to admit that I was holding my breath until the plane carrying Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi had landed in Libya - I was half expecting some illegal military action by the USA against the plane! But at least the new President has distanced himself from his predecessors in not approving any such action - there is hope for civilisation in the USA yet! (But not much hope I fear!)
In this country: Cameron should have kept his own council and his mouth shut! Mouthing off in this matter just shows how little genuine respect he has for the judicial process and bodes ill for a Cameron Prime Ministership. The arrogance of the Tories shines through!
Complain about this comment
66 @ 64
But I do want to say that at least two of the words used have no place in political argument
indeed John ... "David" and "Cameron"
Complain about this comment
#61 sagamix
Since Susan is not a Unionist, I have no reason to suspect that she is economical with the truth.
If I'm not offended, then your opinions are worth less than David Cameron's on anything.
Complain about this comment
#64
If you don't like it - vote with your feet.
I'm neither a politician nor a legal professional - I'm a voter with a mind, an opinon and a means to deliver both.
If you don't like the more acerbic aspects of my nomenclature you should reserve your attendance for a forum where opinion won't offend you.
Complain about this comment
old nat @ 67
your opinions are worth less than David Cameron's on anything
now thut's what I call a proper pat down!
Complain about this comment
Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi is released from prison on compassionate grounds; this is WRONG ! What compassion did HE show the victims of the worst act of terrorism to befall the UK? Megrahi was convicted of killing 270 people - 189 of them American - when a Pan Am plane was blown up over Lockerbie in December 1988; SHAME on the Scotland Government - this mass murderer should have remained in jail until the end of his life. He shows no remorse - and of course having dropped his appeals - and is treated as a hero in his return to Libya.
The question has not been asked; and cannot be reasonably answered - Why could al-Megrahi not spend his last few weeks or months in palliative custody in Scotland?
SHAME on the SNP; I will never again vote for the SNP; in fact I will actively disuade people from voting for your party ever again.
And the man who so actively seeks publicity - alex Salmond - has been conspiciuously silent and absent on the matter.
Kenny McAskill has shamed the Scottish people, brought the Scottish justice system into disrepute and embarrassed the country in the eyes of the world. Well done SNP (sic)...and shame on you.
Complain about this comment
#70 elginvoice
Let me guess. You live in a constituency with SNP MPs and MSPs. You didn't vote SNP previously and you are simply posturing.
Complain about this comment
#70
Alex Salmond's been quiet onthe matter because it has NOTHING TO DO WITH HIM
If you cannot grasp that this decision was taken in a judicial context - what hope do we have of educating the other nescient plebs who spew venomous bile at anything they cannot comprehend?
The SNP did not make this decision - you might like to believe things to the contrary - but when the dust settles and the facts are shown - Macaskil will be vindicated for following due process and the rule of law - not partisan one-upmanship like Tavish Scott and David Cameron have shown throughout.
If the speaker of the holyrood parliament rejected calls for the recall of parliament before a decision was made - then you can bet your bottom dollar that he knows politics cannot and should not interfere with a judicial decision - regardless of how much media, political or emotion pressure is added.
I don't believe he should have been released but it was not my or any other SNP member, supporter or politician who made the decision.
It was the justice secretary of scotland in his capacity as that person.
Until you grasp that notion, understand it and accept the truth - I fear you will never appreciate what constitutes law and what constitutes politics.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
when we in Scotland need to take advice on legal process and compassion from the USA I'll know it's time to leave the country.
70 elginvoice - lets suppose he did die in Greenock jail, what do you suppose would happen when his body was flown home? He would become the greatest Libyan martyr in modern history - see the bigger picture man!
It's not all bad news though, maybe now we won't be subjected to the appalling sight of Alex Salmond making puppy dog eyes at Sean Connery at the tartan day parade in New York. The film star who loves Scotland so much he doesn't even live here!
I do agree with you on one point though, I'll never vote SNP either!
Complain about this comment
Hi Laura
Coming back to your blog after midnight, I realise that there is another reason for you to keep your post-productivity rate up. If you don't keep things moving the "usual suspects" get into one of their clubby back-biting sessions. They seem to love exchanging minor insults, then sniping back and forth for the rest of the evening. If you kept changing subjects, maybe they would reset occasionally. Or remain behind while the rest of us move on. But I suppose it would extend your hours somewhat.
Failing that, perhaps we "outsiders" could be issued with a filtering tool that, for example, allowed us to filter all Saga contributions after the first three snappish outbursts. Or all Susan Crofts after the first two purse-lipped corrections. Or any Oldnat posts within 30 minutes of each other.
Still, must flit off to my perch for the night. Dawn is only a few hours away...
Complain about this comment
It makes you weep, sometimes.
A group of Scottish Judges were convened in a court in Holland (The Netherlands) to try a bloke who may have been - or possibly not have been - guilty as charged.
The Scottish judicial representatives believed the evidence. Then the convict was removed for incarceration in a Scottish managed judicial environment.
Separate from the "English" legal system. And not part of a "U.K." legal system. Because that doesn't exist.
So, a Scottish politician can decide on a certain approach. But the UK's foreign policy or defence issues are of no concern to them, since they have no jurisdiction and increasingly less influence.
(Sorry, I forgot, the MPs for Scottish constituencies - those in the Westminster place who can't actually have any effect on their own constituents, but happily vote on all the stuff that affects English, Welsh or N.I. voters. Of course, that's really democratic. Get elected, don't really have to worry about what you vote for as long as it is "out of here, so not really interesting".
It's funny. I liked the idea of a devloved Scottish Executive. But a Scot, who raised very difficult issues for the Westminster bucnh, quite rightly said that the "West Lothian" issue would need to be resolved.
Who, exactly, has tackled that issue since then?
I really don't mind the fact that Scottish Laws are different from "English" laws. Some seem to be much more practical. (And should probably be incorprated into a UK law environment.)
But I care a little bit that an MP elected to a Scottish constituency can have minimal influence over the real-life issues affecting his or her Scottish constituents (because so many matters have been "devolved"), but happily votes for matters that affect only the English or Welsh.
It still amazes me that Scot students could receive benefits to manage their way through higher education in their own "contry" - which are avaibable to students from the EU, but NOT to the English.
I always assumed that England - like Scotland - was part of the E.U.
So how does that work?
Gordon is having a happy holiday time doing good stuff in the community.(I'd guess ten years too late.) Maybe he could work out some sensible reason why the English aren't part of the EU, so totally rediculous Scots educational "grants" could be accessed by Spanish or Greek citizens, but not by the English? How does that link to the anti-discrimation matra we've heard for so long?
Just when was discrimination within a single Nation deemed acceptable?
Watch out. We helped to break up Yugoslavia. I just hope that nobody worries if a UN force comes in to break up the UK.
Complain about this comment
Sagamix, just what type of justice are you supporting, could it be the same one that convicted Gerry Conlon, Paul Hill and others, while hiding the truth, that those people were innocent?.
Complain about this comment
#76 fairlyopenmind
Dry your tears little man (or woman).
"But I care a little bit that an MP elected to a Scottish constituency can have minimal influence over the real-life issues affecting his or her Scottish constituents (because so many matters have been "devolved"), but happily votes for matters that affect only the English or Welsh."
Few Scots (other than Labour Party members who want to exercise control over England) would disagree that English affairs are a matter for the English alone.
A gentle reminder, however. If you guys had paid any attention to the devolution debate elsewhere in the UK, instead of assuming that "England Rules" then you could have secured symmetric devolution. That the English were too lazy and complacent to secure their own constitutional settlement is entirely their own fault. Do you expect the rest of us to be sorry for a people who simply assumed superiority?
Complain about this comment
Laura:
I am not very happy with the decision of Scottish Secretary of Law affairs...
Releasing the Lockerbie Bomber although, he has only (x) months of life left...
=Dennis Junior=
Complain about this comment
Merlin_18 #51: '"In siding with a country like America that is devoid of compassion and has the death penalty he (Cameron) is identifying himself with the inventors of Guantanamo. At least we in Europe are civilized enough not to have the death penalty and the incarceration of prisoners like in America, where revenge and retribution abounds in their penal code."
As one who is utterly ashamed of my nationality a good 70% of the time, and as one who is more so utterly disgusted with our tendency to sentence far too many people to prison terms for crimes that in my opinion don't really deserve them, not to mention the tendency to hand down some of the most extensive and harshest prison sentences for rape and murder of the developed world, I wholeheartedly sympathise with your rebuke of my nation's laws and judicial process. However, forgive me, but I think it purely immature and ignorant of you to dub its penal code as being one in which "revenge and retribution abounds," not to mention your outright assertion that we are a nation that is "devoid" of compassion!! "Devoid?" 300 million people? Every public servant? Really? Facts please?
Outlandish statements such as this denote the idea that there is no desire for justice in my nation, and soly a desire to cause as many people as much pain for as long as possible, and that's simply untrue.
Incidentally, while I yearn for the day when we can join the rest of the civilized world in the abolition of the death penalty in the 36 states in the union that still (in theory) have it, I would advise you not to build that pedestal too high, as it was only about a decade ago when Europe completed its abolishment of capital punishment, with the UK (I believe) being the last to ban it. You should also keep in mind, that while technically 36 states in our union still have capital punishment on the books, Texas is really the only one that employs it to any great extent.
And "America" didn't invent Guantanamo. George Bush did. A grave error which Obama is seaking to correct.
Complain about this comment
contrahegemony #62: '"America is being found wanting - I think they are on the decline - hurrah!"
Fine with me!! We can never seem to make anyone happy anyway.
Complain about this comment
contrahegemony #36: '"Further, I would like to suggest that the fundamentalist eye for an eye mentality coming out from across the pond doesn't appear to differ much from that of the Taliban and their like."
True, good point. There's just one miner flaw in this perspective, though. The Taliban don't usually tend to give their law breakers trials, much less fair ones.
Complain about this comment
ScorpioRicardo #74: '"when we in Scotland need to take advice on legal process and compassion from the USA I'll know it's time to leave the country."
As if I needed anymore reasons to loathe George Bush!! He really screwed things up for us!! Now thanks to him, it will be a long, long time, if at all, before anyone abroad sees anything good in the United States of America except perhaps for the odd Hollywood film. Which is a shame, because we really do have so much more to offer the world!
Thanks Duba!!
Complain about this comment
I must say that I find all these "proud Scots" to be very strange. They are like the Texan nationalists we have here - a bunch of fringe right-wing wackos. But apparently these SNPs pride themselves on their progressiveness and "compassion".
For a relative of one of the deceased to show mercy is admirable, but the people who lost nothing in the affair, and then feel it necessary to publicly applaud the decision...well I think that is deplorable. This hollier than thou attitude (that says "if you don't understand then it must be because you are not properly human or you do not come from a morally advanced society like Scotland") is rather sickening.
Complain about this comment
John_From_Hendon #65: '"I have to admit that I was holding my breath until the plane carrying Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi had landed in Libya - I was half expecting some illegal military action by the USA against the plane! But at least the new President has distanced himself from his predecessors in not approving any such action
- there is hope for civilisation in the USA yet! (But not much hope I fear!)"
As is dictated by our constitution, the president is the commander and chief of the armed forces. That means that the president, and the president alone, would give the order to shoot down the plane or what have you. So really you must be thankful that Obama hasn't the same digree of insanity as his predecessors.
Complain about this comment
77#
Derek Barker in deep, thoughtful, probing question mode, with no political baggage??
Nurse... the smelling salts, I've come over all unneccessary..... :-)
Well Saga, its a darned good question....... what say you???
Complain about this comment
fubar @ 86
what do I say? ...
well I'm not sure because I think Derek has me mixed up with somebody else!
Complain about this comment
Little known fact (it appears) to most Scots. Scotland and the U.S.A. have a Treaty to extradict to the US, all murderers of US citizens rather than returning them to their home countries. You have violated that treaty and our trust.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
"5. At 5:46pm on 20 Aug 2009, scorpioRicardo wrote:
I'm really disappointed by David Cameron's comments. I've always felt he spoke a great deal of sense but his outburst today is almost as bad as Hillary Clinton's comments.
No matter what these people think, this has nothing to do with either of them. It was a crime over Scotland, investigated under Scottish Law, in a Scottish Court and sentenced by Scottish judges to serve time in a Scottish prison.
Surely this decision is ultimately, solely and totally down to the Scottish Justice Secretary and no-one else?"
I agree but I just find it very odd that the decision was taken 2 weeks after a certian lord with a 37word job title during his holiday meats up with the son of the leader to discuss Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi release.
I would be shocked like so many other NuLabour U turns, if the all power full lord had nothing to do with this U Turn.
Complain about this comment
There are two reasons to be disgusted at this sham.
1. The blatant and cowardly action of releasing a murderer to a hero's welcome where he was greeted not just by waving Libyan flags but by proudly waving Scottish flags!
It is clear that this is a Libyan political coup over western supidity and mediocrity. The rest of the world is laughing at us. We are now without doubt to be considered the weakest nation of fools on the planet.
2. The sheer duplicity of this government that they would put us in this position, deliberately and without shame.
Fact: large tracts of Oil exist under the Libyan desert. Fact: BP Would like very much to get that oil. Fact: Peter Mandelson meets Gadaffi's son and within months, BP get a contract and a murderer is released to a hero's welcome.
Then our Foreign Secretary goes live on air to say 'it has nothing to do with us, honest guv.' Which In effect is saying, Scotland's devolution is so far advanced now that Scotland can take legal decisions that may or may not have foreign implications that could have the potential to lead the UK into war and the government will not intervene.
To all intents and purposes Scotland is now clearly independent, why not say so and then let the English, Welsh and Irish divorce themselves from this utter madness.
If it wasn't so scary it would be laughable.
Complain about this comment
If a decision is made that Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi is accountable for the bombing, and murdering 270 people, then it must be stuck to. If no other evidence emerges he is still guilty. Any divergence from this undermines and makes a mockery of the rule of law.
There seems to be a worrying underlying jurisprudence emerging that irrespective of the crime committed, in this case one of the most heinous, if the convicted falls ill they will be released! The decision was utterly wrong.
One can’t help but feel that the decision was not based on legal principle, or in fact compassion, but made to in order to save the money that would have been spent on healthcare in sustaining this barbaric criminal’s life.
Complain about this comment
91#
A teensy bit over the top in the analysis that it might lead to war, but the guts of what you're saying I'm afraid, I think is accurate.
Complain about this comment
Whatever decision MacAskill made was certain to upset someone. Personally I think it's probably the right decision but it's been handled in a very cack handed way. The rumours of oil deals will really stick in people's throats even if they aren't true.
I'm pretty sick of many of the statements coming from both sides, Megrahi is dying, there is no doubt about that or he wouldn't have been released. If there was a chance he could make a recovery then he wouldn't have been let out as the SNP would face electoral annihilation if he did and therefore there is a strong case for compassionate release.
Equally I'm disgusted at some of the "We showed the Yanks!" comments. That should not have been a factor in this decision. People show bear in mind the feelings of the relatives of the victims who have a real life sentence before making any comment on this affair.
Complain about this comment
Watching the development of this, two comments I made earlier (#20) now seem to be fully justified...
1) Reading the comments on here and the main 'Have Your Say' - socialists think mass murder is OK so long as it's Americans that are killed.
2) The special status of scotland as an oppressed colony of England is dead and buried in the US. Bit like American support for the IRA became unfashionable after 9-11. That's a very good result for England.
Originally I thought this was terrible, but in reality one bloke going back to Libya is not the big picture here.
A split between scotland and the US is much more important.
Complain about this comment
MajorGIJane, pity it does'nt work BOTH ways eh?
IRA collections in the US.
Iranian commercial aircraft?
Either of these make you blush?
Complain about this comment
Good Morning All
A difficult decision but one I think Kenny MacAskill got right. For making this courageous decision he should be applauded. We should value compassion even on those that have wronged us. Of course this is easy to do for those of us divorced from this terrible atrocity.
Was he guilty or not? Unfortunately I do not think we will ever know the truth. These answers lie in Libya where I suspect they have been buried deep.
I do not agree with Cameron's remarks and in my opinion he should have kept out of the debate. What were his motives? Nobody but him will know. Surely by now he would know that he would be branded an opportunist, so maybe they are honourable. But, he has every right to voice his opinion, as do all the bloggers here.
I have read many impassioned comments on this blog. The Scots and the English comes in all varieties and we should celebrate our differences. The issues on devolution that have arisen over this case (and others in the past) concern the system that is in place. There is no doubt that the system needs altering. Scottish independence would force this to occur.
Complain about this comment
#46 old Nat No of-fence taken at your reply what so-ever It was Aberdeen Angus that was in the pack.?So i take it then that the trial it self was in fact decided on the similarities of the last war crimes commission? that instead of a jury three top Scottish judges ruled over the case?If that is so it could be concluded that one judge would rule over the other two as they had to decide if the individual was guilty or not and then be asked to give guidance over the guilty party this in it self denotes a jury dose it not? But on a much reduced scale.Only asked.
Complain about this comment
The lack of guidance from Whitehall in this matter is utterly shocking, as per the Scottish Justice Minister's statement. It seems whenever a tough call is to be made Whitehall ministers do a "Macavity" and disappear. If a political party wants to be in power, you take the rough with the smooth.
Incidentally upon reading about the aftermath of Pan Am 103 I was struck by a sense of deja vu. Air accident investigators were initially prevented from examining the crash scene by FBI and CIA officers who also took away what could have been vital evidence.
The deja vu? Oh, after 9/11 at Ground Zero CIA officials also prevented access to the downed buildings especially at building 7, which was a 47 storey office block, was not struck by any planes, had a few small fires burning and suddenly collapsed like a house built of cards. The CIA took away several tons of building rubble. Plus ca change!!!!
The CIA were also forced to reluctantly concede (and I mean very) that they were tenants in all seven buildings.
Complain about this comment
A split with the US?
Most unlikely!Far too many friends and family for that and over a doubtful conviction? No.
Besides which it is not the American people that lead us into illegal wars.
It is not the American people who attempt to dictate to the rest of the world.
Hopefully, a new dawn arrived with your new President.
I'd like him to keep a tight rein on his Sec. of State though.
Complain about this comment
The great irony in this story (as mentioned in a piece in Private Eye) is that if Magrahi had been incarcerated in the US, his prostate cancer would have more than likely been cured. The US's far superior health system has a greater than 90% success rate in curing this type of cancer...which is a success rate of nearly twice that of the NHS's.
So if Magrahi had been banged up in the US, he would probably have continued to do time for many years to come!
I wonder if Mandy is aware of this fact given today's news of his prostate treatment?
Complain about this comment
From a detailed reading of the original judgement and a study of the potential evidence that was never placed before the court or has come to light since, I would argue that there are very strong reasons for believing that Megrahi would have been freed on appeal. Only the Independent of the major UK newspapers has dared to provide accurate, unbiased reports on this issue.
Complain about this comment
#98 quietoldinthetooth
If you want to play with words, then I suppose any decision by more than one person could be termed a jury - however, it wasn't a "jury" in terms of Scots Law, which is the relevant context and in which words have exact meanings.
Complain about this comment
My first reaction was “Jeez! Bomb 280 innocent people and after just 8-years in clink, you get flown home in a jet. But dare to mix up rubbish in your bin, or let your dog foul the pavement and the FULL weight of anti-terror legislation is applied”…
But, on reflection, I think it does more good than harm - and Kenny MacAskill is to be commended for a hugely courageous decision. Cameron just toed the populist line, and is diminished in doing so.
Galloway put it best: “…But to them I would say justice is not lost in acting in mercy. Instead, our deepest humanity is expressed for the better. To choose mercy is the tough choice and today our nation met that challenge."
He’s right! And perhaps some of those who hate the “Western World” so much will see this act and maybe, just maybe, begin to modify their views of us. Perhaps the cycle of hate and violence can begin to reverse. Allowing Megrahi to die in jail would only fuel those deeply-felt prejudices and ensure the cycle continues.
Complain about this comment
I had wondered where Gordon Brown was.
Apparently he is a benign condition.
Complain about this comment
#85. NoRashDecisions wrote:
In response to my suggestion that the USA may make an attempt of the life of Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi.
"As is dictated by our constitution, the president is the commander and chief of the armed forces. That means that the president, and the president alone, would give the order to shoot down the plane or what have you. So really you must be thankful that Obama hasn't the same digree of insanity as his predecessor"
Yes, but I fear that the CIA may go it alone (c.f Iran/Contra, 26 attempts on the life of Fidel Castro etc. etc.). I do not have much faith in your constitution restraining, how shall I put it, the less sane members of the administration or the executive! I don't have much faith in your constitution!
Complain about this comment
"oldnat wrote:
A gentle reminder, however. If you guys had paid any attention to the devolution debate elsewhere in the UK, instead of assuming that "England Rules" then you could have secured symmetric devolution. That the English were too lazy and complacent to secure their own constitutional settlement is entirely their own fault. Do you expect the rest of us to be sorry for a people who simply assumed superiority?"
Sorry I must have blinked and missed the vote the English were given to have devolved government. I believe an area in the north of England (not sure where) were given the chance to vote for devolved government (for their area) but the country as a whole never was.
Apart from Northern Ireland (which pretty much is a special case) the areas which had the chance to vote on devolution for their areas were also areas where Labour had a strong base.
At NO point at all were England given a say - it is not England being lazy or complacent (an accusation that I take some offense at - just as I assume you would take offense if I made accusations against Scots) but that we were basically sold out by New Labour. Labour obviously realised that there could be a time where they would be the majority party of Britain but not England and decided not to ban Welsh and Scottish MPs from voting on England only matters.
Personally I don't see why we need a Scottish executive. We have Scottish MPs wouldn't it be (much) cheaper if the Scottish MPs debated Scottish matters while the English MPs debated English matters?
Anything else is just a chance to get more snouts at the trough.
Complain about this comment
#old Nat 103 ah well you and i are both a little old in the tooth and are able to take life as it comes, Afew on these blogs care two fire a cannon ball but end up with grape shot,Playing with words are the responsibility of lawyers, remember the o j Simpson's case? miss justice on a grand scale ,Never the less there is or was a lot of controversy over this case that one will never really get to the truth, of guilty or not guilty as only the perpetrator's will ever know the exact truth And there are so many mine fields in the political spectrum that its a wonder we don't all get blown two smithereens.
Complain about this comment
I totally and utterly agree with what David Cameron has said in your quote above, Laura.
And anyway, Ronnie Biggs (yes, I know, totally different crime and not as serious but read on) Ronnie Biggs was apparently "close to death" when he dared to set foot back on our shores to avail himself of our free National Health to all. Er, is it not ten years or more that Biggs has languished here and I wonder whether now he is again "close to death" how long he will miraculously linger in freedom?
No, this Libyan scum should have lived out his sentence and died out his sentence in HM Prison - or in an American one which may have been worse.
Soft touch Britain.
Complain about this comment
Regarding message 107 we in Northern Ireland are a "special case". As part of the peace process the government released hundreds of convicted terrorists whose organisations had been responsible for over 2,500 deaths and none of them on compassionate grounds. I was particularly interested that Senator Edward Kennedy had argued that Megrahi should remain in prison and yet he was one of the major proponents of terrorist releases in Northern Ireland.
Complain about this comment
Clearly the US government has to align itself with US public opinion concerning the release, but I wonder if more than British economic interests benefit from what has happened. Pinning the whole thing on Lybia never did make sense. The most plausible senario sees them as sub-contractors to Iran. But, short of war, Iran is very hard to get back at. It is possible that a second appeal might have brought this can of worms back into the open. This way the US government gets the best of both worlds: the problem has gone away and they have somebody else to blame. All that said, by far the greater odium should be directed at those who ordered the murder of a plane-load of civilians in revenge for an egregious mistake.
Complain about this comment
#107 Mark_WE
You poor dear! No one came along and offered you something which you had never asked for.
What a shame! These nasty politicians! Maybe you should have done what the Scots did. Argued for Home Rule, organised for it, debated it, voted for it - and forced the politicians to take note.
If you are supine,don't complain when the politicians walk all over you.
Complain about this comment
#108 quietoldinthetooth
Agreed. "Justice" and truth are not the same thing, and when much of the evidence is concealed (which I suspect might have been the case here) then the court (however constituted) may come to a wrong conclusion.
Complain about this comment
99. At 09:01am on 21 Aug 2009, excellentcatblogger wrote:
The lack of guidance from Whitehall in this matter is utterly shocking....
==============================
Guidance from Whitehall?
The London government has shown excellent judgement in staying out of this. Hopefully English politicians will continue to publicly distance England from the decision.
The scots have made the decision, let them take responsibility.
Complain about this comment
#113 old Nat i rest my case my lord.
Have a peek at the Annie Whitcomb one on the other side it might turn out interesting. At least you will get a few home truths from her.
See you all later as the garden needs attention.
Complain about this comment
I just noticed Laura's update.
She is quite right. Prior to devolution, this decision would have been taken by the Secretary of State for Scotland.
For those who disliked McAskill's statement - it would have been unbelievably bad if delivered by Jim Murphy.
Complain about this comment
"oldnat wrote:
#107 Mark_WE
You poor dear! No one came along and offered you something which you had never asked for.
What a shame! These nasty politicians! Maybe you should have done what the Scots did. Argued for Home Rule, organised for it, debated it, voted for it - and forced the politicians to take note.
If you are supine,don't complain when the politicians walk all over you."
Why would the English ask for a split executive for England - it would be (massively) expensive and would bring little improvement to the way things are run and would probably make things worse!
I don't have a problem with the concept of Devolution, the problem is how it was done, and it wasn't as if the Government didn't know that there would be a problem as the West Lothian Question was raised two decades before New Labour were even elected. However, Labour walked blindly into devolution without properly thinking things through.
Basically devolution was a mess and hopefully the next government will fix it - it would certainly be in the Tories interest to if they are elected.
Complain about this comment
88. At 08:03am on 21 Aug 2009, MajorGIJane wrote:
Little known fact (it appears) to most Scots. Scotland and the U.S.A. have a Treaty to extradict to the US, all murderers of US citizens rather than returning them to their home countries. You have violated that treaty and our trust.
I think it's likely that most Scots are aware of the extradition agreement with the US. I also think it likely that they would have agreed at all if they knew that the arrangement would not be reciprocal.
Complain about this comment
A big up for the Scottish justice system.
This prisoner was old and terminal with less than 3 months to live, any other prisoner in his condition would be released, well done to Kenny MacAskill for upholding Scottish tradition and fair play.
To probably misquote someone famous, 'you can tell a lot about a civilisation by the way it treats its prisoners' Scotland has just shown that it is a very civilised place indeed.
Complain about this comment
41. At 9:07pm on 20 Aug 2009, Brownedov wrote:
#26 Its_an_Outrage
...I don't quite agree with you, though. I have qualms neither about Biggs' guilt nor his compassionate release.
IMO, compassionate release should be only about the individual's physical condition and the possibility of his or her committing further crimes. Absent the BBC-generated media storm, I suspect MacAskill would have waited another week or so before making the decision, which I would have preferred personally. In the event, he had to make it this week or face plausible accusations of dithering.
Thanks for your reply.
In principle, I have no problem with compassionate release. However, I believe that the deterrent aspect of imprisonment is at least as, if not more important than punishment and retribution. There are some crimes that time will not heal.
Having said that, I believe the real issue here is that we can't be absolutely sure of his guilt. I agree with others that he might have been released on appeal. That, along with some rather clumsy jostling for political advantage, might have influenced the stance taken by some parties. Or in some cases, the posture.
Complain about this comment
88#
Lawks-a-mercy, lots of chest-beating going on from our closest allies....
You got the Natwest 3 on a plate, you're getting McKinnon on a plate... yet with the likes of Martin Galvin, all those years ago, not to mention other PIRA types who were hiding in the US... nothing. And with the USANG pilots who shot up our APC's in Iraq in 2003 - you tried every trick in the book to avoid handing them over to even give an account at the inquest.
Just what kind of iniquitous relationship with you do you think that we are going to continue to tolerate?
Listen up Jane. Bush has gone. No more lapdogging, OK?
Complain about this comment
Here's another idea for you...
People keep talking about this in terms of politicians. But what about the civil servants? Anyone see 'yes minister'? These politicians who used to be a bin man but now they're the secretary of state come and go; civil servants remain and build up the experience.
Did this obscure scottish politician consult with his foreign office before he decided? Oops - he hasn't got one.
I notice the US media are correctly reporting this as a scottish (not UK) decision. I'm sure the British embassy in Washington is briefing hard to reinforce that message. I wonder what the scottish embassy is doing? Oops - they don't have one.
I understand that BP is waiting for clearance for big money oil work in Libya. I'm sure the British embassy will be singing a different tune (off record) in Tripoli. I expect BP will be getting the clearance any time soon. I wonder what the scottish embassy in Tripoli is doing? Oops - they haven't got one.
I used to think this was a disaster, but not any more.
Complain about this comment
#120 Its_an_Outrage
'I believe that the deterrent aspect of imprisonment is at least as, if not more important than punishment and retribution'
To quote Albert Pierrepoint, the UKs last hangman, when asked about the deterrent effect of capital punishment. 'It never deterred anyone that I hanged'
Sentencing is, as far as I'm aware, composed of 3 parts.
1. punishment for the offence
2. protection of the public
3. rehabilitation of the offender
Time and circumstance have preempted this sequence
Retribution doesn't come into it
Complain about this comment
#122 jon112uk
"this obscure scottish politician"
Now what point are you trying to make? Without using the internet, can you tell me the names of the equivalent to the Justice Secretary in France, Germany, Canada etc etc?
Or are politicians in other countries to yours simply "obscure" because you don't know them?
Complain about this comment
Scottish pathological buckpassers are already trying to blame the English for yet another Scottish bad decision.
If Scots had any guts they would be independent now and taking the wrap for devastating the banking industry and for this al-Megrahi release.
However, Scots have no guts which is why the SNP changed policy to delay the Scottish independence referendum until 2010, as soon as it had a whiff of victory in the Scottish Parliament. It has been delayed even further, to 2011, to give the English even more time to bail Scotland out.
England's largesse will not prevent the Scots making sure the English get all the blame for Scottish crassness, however.
Complain about this comment
Disgrace. Just like Iraq It is all about oil, money and politics, not Law and justice. But I suppose there are worse, much worse cases where those allowing many innocent people to be killed for self interests and vainglory.
Complain about this comment
Islam is such a different religion and as practised by so many of its followers appears frighteningly primitive. I don't think that the release of Megrahi will be interpreted by them as an act of compassion.
They will see it as a victory.
Complain about this comment
What was Gavin Essler playing at last night?
Kenny MacAskill had to repeat the reasons for his decision several times, Essler ignored his answer and repeated same question again and again.
Is this the Beeb showing solidarity with our 'Special Friend"?
And do we need lectures on morality from the US government?
Complain about this comment
Although I shake my head at this decision made by the scots on my own "moral compass of life". I find the typical American whinging even more shocking, and far more annoying. Wasnt it during the evil years of the IRA killing our citizens, murdering innocent people for decades.
With the fact of that the Americans themselves were funding the terrorist organisation from American fundraising, and putting presure on our Government at that time to release the IRA terrorists our nation had arrested.
Sorry America you reap what you sow.
Whats goes around comes round, this is life.
Complain about this comment
#117 Mark_WE
Apologies. I was confusing you with these "whinging Poms" (if you'll excuse an Australian expression during the Ashes) that cry foul because they didn't get a Parliament they hadn't asked for.
Complain about this comment
A murderer goes free so the Government can get it`s hands on a load of oil .
Complain about this comment
I personally think David Cameron was right. If there was any question about his trial or gilt he should have appealed. If they wanted to show compassion then they had the power to 'bump' him up the list so his appeal could have been heard earlier. The desision to release him was imo the wrong one as i think he will now be seen as a martyr to other terrorists you only need to see the news this morning to see his heros welcome. I am well aware that this was a decition for the Scottish Goverment but as Scottalnd is not an inderpendant country this is a decition that will effect the entire union. To overseas contries we are still classed as the UK if you like it or not. DC was well within his rights to express his opinion as every one else is and not everyone will like it.
Complain about this comment
It was the wrong decision and as poster 127 said this will be taken as yet more weakness on the part of the west.
If he is as ill as he claims then a few more months would have sorted the problem out. I'd much rather the Libyans were receiving a coffin than celebrating a mass murderer.
A pity the plane taking him home didn't have a bomb on board, then he would have had a few seconds to reflect on his crime before he got what he deserved.
Complain about this comment
#133 Breakfast-Maker
"A pity the plane taking him home didn't have a bomb on board"
And what of the crew? Your wish that innocents be massacred says much about you.
Complain about this comment
124. At 12:05pm on 21 Aug 2009, oldnat wrote:
"...Now what point are you trying to make? Without using the internet, can you tell me the names of the equivalent to the Justice Secretary in France, Germany, Canada etc etc?..."
========================================
I have no idea who the interior minister (or whatever the title) is in all these foreign countries. Including the one in scotland. It's a matter for the people in those countries, not me. Of course all those other countries have competent people in their foreign office, diplomatic service etc - very unlike the scots.
I'd love to know what this scottish bloke's track record on international affairs is. Years of experience has he?
How did the conversation go? ....
"Right lets tell the Libyans we're releasing him."
"How do we do that?"
"Through the embassy"
"We haven't got one."
"Er...Er...Somebody google - Libyan government - and find a phone number."
I started by thinking this was dreadful - like if Thomas Hamilton had survived Dunblane and an English politician let him go just to hack off the scots.
But the more I think about the better this whole scottish fiasco sounds. I just hope our people keep on distancing us from it.
Complain about this comment
#135 jon112uk
You seem to have little understanding of anything about this. But if posting insulting comments keeps you happy, then enjoy.
Complain about this comment
136. At 2:08pm on 21 Aug 2009, oldnat wrote:
#135 jon112uk
You seem to have little understanding of anything about this.
============================
Sorry, which bit do you think I don't understand???
Do you think the scottish government has an experienced foreign office to advise their politicians?
Do you think the scottish government has a diplomatic service to pass messages to foreign governments?
Do you think whatever he is called that made the decision has years of experience in international relations?
This whole episode is exposing a micky-mouse set up.
Complain about this comment
"Scottish Law is different than UK/English Law" - Indeed it is, and one of the main differences is that under Scottish Law, a verdict of Not Proven can be returned. If there were any doubts about Megrahi's guilt(based on the evidence presented) that is the verdict that would have been returned.
Both the US and the SNP have been guilty of showing great political naivete in this. The US in failing to understand the "Scottish" psyche (especially a Nationalist one), by applying "pressure" to influence the decision, has successfully managed to produce a "negative outcome", the entirely predictable (& naive) reaction of the SNP to perceived "Meddling in oor affairs".
Of course the Libyan reaction to all of this was the most predictable of all.
Democracy will always be perceived as 'weak' by oppressive regimes, because they have to give fair voice to all opinions and then decide on the "right" course. Dictators just make the decisions for you and shoot you if you disagree.
Complain about this comment
I'm really getting fed up with the people who say that they think that the decision was the right one because the UK (Or the Scots) which ever way one wishes to look at it, finally stood up to the bully boy tactics of the US and that Americans have absolutely no right to complain because the CIA shot down an Iranian comercial airliner, or we had set up Guantanamo Bay, or practiced extraordinary rendition, or some greedy church groups cleverly disguised as charities funded the IRA and the US government was too oblivious, stupid, naive, or selfish to try to stop it.
These comments really are the pinical of incompassion and immaturity, not to mention display a staggering lack of empathy toward our fellow man.
Is the USA flawed? Without a doubt!! Did it have any right whatsoever to engage in the self serving, greedy behaviors of the past that it shamefully decided to engage in? Of course not! But does that justify the bombing? Hell no!! Does that make it unacceptable for the fellow citizens of the nationality of the majority of the victums on that flight to express their opinions? Definitly not!! Americans are human just like the rest of the world, and if one wants to give their opinion of the incident on a foreign blog or message board I think they should be able to do so without a barrage of insults such as '"Oh yeah? Well your country's foreign policy is the cause of all this, so you have no right to comment."
That seems fair. Does it not?
Now. If you have become disgusted with the way in which your government has handled itself on the international stage and especially in its relationship with my government (of which I wholeheartedly sympathise with and agree with you,) then express glee upon the incidents when it really counts; when the UK really stands up to the US. Like before we decide to wage another illegal war for oil, or before we decide to deliberately alter our treaties with you in our favor. Not when (according to many) the man responsible for the murder of 189 innocent American citizens goes free after one third of his sentence served behind bars.
Complain about this comment
I listened to the Scottish justice minister say that he alone made the decision to free al megrahi, a decision only taken at the weekend....However Gordon Brown wrote to ghadaffi last week asking him to ensure there were no celebrations at the homecoming (a request that was ignored!) If the decision was only taken at the weekend and was "mine alone" how come GB knew the result before it was taken?........ Still think there was no pressure from the UK government? It is obvious a deal was done to prevent a miscarriage of justice coming to light...why else would megrahi stop his appeal when he has always protested his innocence?
Complain about this comment
#140 jolo13
You are mistaken. The letter was sent yesterday.
Complain about this comment
john112uk #95: '"The special status of scotland as an oppressed colony of England is dead and buried in the US. Bit like American support for the IRA became unfashionable after 9-11. That's a very good result for England."
You very well may be right, but I wouldn't base 300 million people's views of Scotland, much less Yale and Harvard educated foreign policy experts at the State department and various think tanks around DC on a couple of Hollywood movies.
"Originally I thought this was terrible, but in reality one bloke going back to Libya is not the big picture here.
A split between scotland and the US is much more important."
Why? Do you think that we want to sever our ties with Scotland? That we now see them as an enamy? We definitly do not!! And why would that be a good thing anyway? Isn't it good for nations of a similar mindset to get along with one another?
I'm venturing into some very dangerous waters here, because the last time I gave my opinion on this I had my head nearly chewed off. But for what its worth I don't think it would benifit you to split up into four separate nations, or to let Scotland go, or what have you. I think a massive root and branch overhall of your treaties/constituton/agreements is desperately needed to make things more fair and equal, but take it from one who's nation went through a brutal and devastating civil war not too long ago, the impacts of which are still being felt today, a break-up of your union would in my opinion leave you less powerful and more vulnerable in the world.
Apologies to those I've offended, and that is all I will say on the matter.
Complain about this comment
The decision to send this man home was a brave one, especially in the light of hostile comments made by our cousins across the pond. The families on both sides who have suffered will never receive the real truth as to what happened. I think for all the trumpet blowing, there are those in power who are glad he has gone, and once he has passed on, then the truth will die with him. Remember Diogenes the cynic " truth is a three edged sword"
Complain about this comment
#142 NoRashDecisions
No head chewing!
Personally, though I want to restructure the relationship with England, I have no wish to break the Union with England, France and all the other members of the EU.
Complain about this comment
If any of the posters had read Paul Foot's investigation into the case in Private Eye they might see this as the overdue releasing of an innocent man.
In my mind there was reasonable grounds for a not proven judgement at the very least.
I am convinced that the appeal drop was part of a trade off to ensure his release. Both the UK (not Scottish by the way) and American governments didn't want all of the facts to come out in a full appeal.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/south_of_scotland/7414359.stm
I remain convinced he was a suitable scapegoat as suggested elsewhere on this site, for both the British and American governments.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/8211596.stm
Complain about this comment
139. NoRashDecisions
I've no problem with the US administration expressing their opinion on the decision but their tone is a bit galling when you consider things like the detention without trial or public hearing of British subjects in Guantanamo Bay for several years, with the possibility of a death sentence over their heads. Is that your country's idea of justice?
Complain about this comment
mmm just a thought but just before lockerbie the US navy mistackingly shot down a civilian jumbo over the golf killing hundreds.
It was suggested at the time that Lockerbie attack was a response to that event.
Can the Amarican bloggers please remind every one what happed to the navy officer that fired that missile and his commanding offices. Because if my memory is correct they got off scott free!
Of course we will now have to invent another phrase than "Scott Free" like their renamied "fredom fries" after France failed to support the dodgy dossier and the war to over throw sadam.
For the record i dont think he should have been freed and i thinkl his freedom was political and not compasion
Complain about this comment
"I listened to the Scottish justice minister say that he alone made the decision to free al megrahi, a decision only taken at the weekend....However Gordon Brown wrote to ghadaffi last week asking him to ensure there were no celebrations at the homecoming (a request that was ignored!) If the decision was only taken at the weekend and was "mine alone" how come GB knew the result before it was taken?"
Because Lord Mandy told him last week that he would be freed!
Complain about this comment
123. At 11:59am on 21 Aug 2009, BobRocket wrote:
#120 Its_an_Outrage
'I believe that the deterrent aspect of imprisonment is at least as, if not more important than punishment and retribution'
To quote Albert Pierrepoint, the UKs last hangman, when asked about the deterrent effect of capital punishment. 'It never deterred anyone that I hanged'
Sentencing is, as far as I'm aware, composed of 3 parts.
1. punishment for the offence
2. protection of the public
3. rehabilitation of the offender
Time and circumstance have preempted this sequence
Retribution doesn't come into it
I think Pierrepoint was stating the blindingly obvious. I'm against the death penalty for that and many other reasons.
And if you read the thread that I was addressing you would see that retribution did, in fact, come into it.
Complain about this comment
#120 Its_an_Outrage
And thanks for yours.
I certainly accept your: "I believe that the deterrent aspect of imprisonment is at least as, if not more important than punishment and retribution."
Point taken. Though happy with the decision made, I think it a pity that the UK government couldn't negotiate the transfer treaty properly and get the US onside over it.
Transfer of custody would or at least should have prevented the arrival ceremony and delayed the release decision while local doctors saw how he responded to his native, warmer climate.
Post or reactive moderation for all except CBeebies, please!
Complain about this comment
#142. NoRashDecisions
Hi - feel free to comment: these guys are happy to comment on the US and in much less polite/educated terms than you are using. Personally I don't see a need for a civil war with the very few scots left in scotland. I would just like England to be independent of them.
To put it in perspective for you - how would you like a situation where the Canadians supplied your president without a single American ever getting to vote on him? 62 million Americans voted for Obama. 26 THOUSAND people in scotland voted for Gordon Brown: not a single person in England has ever voted for him.
I have no doubt the US state department is pretty sophisticated in their views but in #95 I was thinking more about general public opinion.
I certainly saw a change in US public opinion and fashion regarding the IRA after 9-11. Politicians had no option but to follow. For example Edward Kennedy changed his behaviour markedly. Bush shunned them until they towed the line on the peace process.
I will wait and see if the quaint and outdated view (some) Americans have of scotland survives this insult. Certainly it will be difficult for them to carry on thinking scotland is still under the yoke of English opression when the scots are making decisions like this.
The main thing for me is that we keep distancing ourselves from it.
Complain about this comment
#141 olnat
no you are mistaken.........
It was revealed today that, in a letter delivered by Sir Vincent Fean, Britain's ambassador in Tripoli, BEFORE Megrahi's release, the Prime Minister had urged the Libyan leader to act sensitively.
And what happens if "miraculously" he does not die within three months??
And if he is going to die then imagine what damage a terrorist with nothing to lose could do....!
Complain about this comment
#152 jolo13
Quote your source please.
Every report I have seen say that the Ambassador delivered the letter yesterday.
Complain about this comment
It has emerged that UK Chancellor Gordon Brown wrote to Col Gaddafi on Thursday, asking for Libya to "act with sensitivity" in handling Megrahi's return.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/8214708.stm
Complain about this comment
I'm not sure I recall Cameron having anything to say about the release of Biggs recently to join his family for his final months of illness.
I do regard the stance that Scotland has taken in releasing Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi on compassionate grounds to have been a brave one and I applaud the fact that the stance of the USA did not overrule them. The notion that Megrahi should have died a lingering death away from his family seems to me to be a "punishment too far". I have great sympathy for those who have been bereaved by the Lockerbie bombing, but even so I see little benefit in forcing someone to finish a sentence in prison when his life is already practically over.
I feel there is a place for compassion to be shown and this has been done in this case - otherwise I feel the continued incarceration of this man would have seemed more like revenge. Whatever we see and whatever we hear, we must also bear in mind that when a politician speaks, it is to an audience and so their words will have been chosen carefully - whether it is Obama or Qaddafi.
It is true that the hands of the Americans are red with the blood shed during the troubles in Ireland. It is true they could not continue their support of the IRA when 9/11 happened. Perhaps the Americans might try what the Scottish have been able to do as a fellow Christian country and also begin to practice a little humility and show a trace of compassion. Perhaps there are no "absolutes" in terms of right and wrong. Americans have made their fair share of mistakes by thinking there are absolutes.
Complain about this comment
#154 jolo13
So where is your justification that "letter [was] delivered by Sir Vincent Fean, Britain's ambassador in Tripoli, BEFORE Megrahi's release"?
Complain about this comment
#156 oldnat
i have just justified by the BBC, not enough? ok here is the original source
http://tinyurl.com/ngx7fm now what part of before dont you understand? it is obvious to anyone a deal has been done and the UK government is hiding behind the skirts of the scots.... mandelson meets gadaffi's son....megarhi is released , BP sign huge contract.....Uk government say "not me guv"...
Complain about this comment
TheBlameGame #146: '"I've no problem with the US administration expressing their opinion on the decision but their tone is a bit galling when you consider things like the detention without trial or public hearing of British subjects in Guantanamo Bay for several years, with the possibility of a death sentence over their heads. Is that your country's idea of justice?"
I understand. Really I do!! But again I reiterate
the point I made in post 139. I know we have commited all these atrocities. I know we have utterly and irreversably destroyed the lives of countless innocent world citizens all for our own selfish gain. But in my opinion you can throw every single mistake, every slip up, every sin we have commited over our 233 year existance in the face of one who has the courage to publicly express their opinion to many of your countrymen who disagree, and it will still not render their objections baseless, rash, or unsound. Some people believe that the guy murdered their rellitave and think that as a result he should pay for it by serving out his entire prison sentence. Guantanamo Bay, IRA funding, Iranian airliner shoot downs shouldn't, and for those people don't, come into it. I would even go so far as to suggest that a few British rellitaves of the bombing feel that way. I'm sorry, but that's just my opinion.
Now I deplore George W. Bush. I deplore what he stands for. I deplore what he has done to our constitution and our international reputation. And believe me, holding someone indeffinitly without a fair trial with the potencial of the death penalty is certainly not my idea of justice!! Which is why Obama, along with the support of many Americans, is working fevorishly to have the place shut down by early next year.
But in looking at the definition of "fairness," how "fair" do you think it is when someone objects to a decision made by someone else, and the person making the decision can only bring themselves to rebut with '"Yeah? Well you did X, Y, and Z. So its OK for me to do this!!" Its like if your government objected to my government waging war on Iraq in 2003 and refused to send troops or publicly virbally back it, and when they tryed to explain why it might be a bad idea, my government responded with something along the lines of '"Well you pressured us into overthrowing the democraticly elected government of Iran in 1953, so its OK for us to go into Iraq in 2003." Two wrongs don't make a right!!
That is the point I was trying to make with my opinion on the short sighted and ignorant reaction of a surprisingly large number of Britains to Americans, and yes the American government as a reflection of the American victums, daring to express their opinions on a tragic event that assasonated 189 of their fellow citizens. I can't explain it any better than that.
Complain about this comment
#157 jolo13
The Beeb report does nothing to justify your claim. Indeed you have demonstrated clearly that your original claim "Gordon Brown wrote to ghadaffi last week" was nonsense.
That a journalist on the Mail says that the letter was delivered before Magrahi's release may, I suppose, be true as the letter may have been delivered before Magrahi actually left Greenock Prison - but from that possibility you construct an elaborate conspiracy theory.
Complain about this comment
#158 NoRashDecisions
I agree with you. The US Government is perfectly entitled to make representations on behalf of it's citizens. Indeed it should. McAskill deliberately asked the US for their views and agreed with them, consequently denying the Libyan request for a prisoner transfer.
It is unfortunate that the UK Government doesn't take similar care for it's citizens but that isn't the fault of the USA.
Complain about this comment
#159 oldnat
i am not sure why you insist on continuing this, are you part of the labour party rebuttal unit.....the letter was written and delivered BEFORE the release, end of story...
i suppose mandelson, gadaffi's son, bp contract are just coincidences...ok so be it but if you really think the UK government was not involved in such a high profile case then you are not facing reality, there is no way that such a high level diplomatic affair would have been left alone by Gordon Brown & mandelson, they are control freaks of the highest order.....
Complain about this comment
john112UK #151. . .
Thanks for the kind compliments. Its nice to know that the UK (or England rather) isn't entirely devoid of rational, empathetic, and respectful people.
As regards devolution, thanks for your annalogy. It really helped to put things into perspective for me. No I would not like a situation like that, and if that is what you must endure in England then I agree, it is unfair, and must be rectifyed immediately.
Regarding the IRA, I think it despicable that our politicions willingly went along with the public's view of it in the 70s and 80s. They knew better and should have acted on it!!
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
#161 jolo13
"i am not sure why you insist on continuing this, are you part of the labour party rebuttal unit.....the letter was written and delivered BEFORE the release"
I continue because you posted a clear untruth - that Brown wrote to Gadaffi last week. From an error on your part, you then constructed an elaborate theory that my government was complicit in a conspiracy with the UK government.
I presume that you are an English Tory since you see the Daily Mail as an authoritative source, and you suggest I have any connection with Labour!
Complain about this comment
#162 NoRashDecisions
OK Now I get mad!
"Its nice to know that the UK (or England rather) isn't entirely devoid of rational, empathetic, and respectful people."
So Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are devoid of such people?
john112UK gave you a distorted picture. Under current constitutional arrangements within the UK, a better comparison would be that you elect a President who comes from one of your smaller states (kind of normal). Your biggest state then complains that they don't get a President from their state. Simultaneously, the US Congress and Administration sit in Sacramento and double up as the US Government and the California Executive and Legislature. Also you would need to picture California having 80% of the US population.
Sound good to you?
Complain about this comment
hay oldnat,you get wound up to easily mate,calm down theres more to life than silly political arguments that lead nowhere, you need a good holiday in england get some fresh air down you.
Complain about this comment
#161 jolo13
The Mail may well have being telling the truth. As oldnat says, the departure of the convoy from the jail did not physically happen for more than an hour after MacAskill finished his statement, which itself took about 30 minutes.
As MacAskill told us, the prisoner and other interested parties were told as he stood up. No.10 presumably then 'phoned the ambassador in Tripoli and told him to press the print button on the letter previously prepared for that eventuality.
OTOH, your original statement in #140 re last week was clearly in error. The $64000 question now becomes: so what?
If you are unaware of the reciprocal hatred of the "London Labour unionists" and the "SNP separatists", you know nothing of Scottish Politics.
Post or reactive moderation for all except CBeebies, please!
Complain about this comment
To NoDashDecision,
I believe John112UK, concerning their comment on #151 has not gave a fair and honest perception on the political system within the United Kingdom.
Gordon Brown, our Prime Minister was elected by a Scottish constinuency but after Tony Blair stepped down, was supported by English and Welsh Labour Members of Parliament and become Prime Minister (in our system, leaders are not elected into power, the Parliament chooses the leader which means the person leading the biggest party becomes Prime Minister).
I'd point out Tony Blair represented an English constinuency and was elected Prime Minister without Scottish votes. Although Scotland returned much Labour Party MP's, in our system the group to return the largest political party wins (which can't be down without English support).
I hope you understand. If not, ask :D
Tom.
Complain about this comment
#164 oldnat
deciding on my political proclivities because i happen to quote from the daily mail is crass beyond belief, i also read today, the Times, the new statesman, les echos, le figaro, the FT and the wall street journal...I am neither English nor Tory...........
there would be no point sending a letter asking for no celebrations AFTER he was released as the arrangements were already made with supporters bussed in and scottish flags supplied..... for your information Skynews has reported "that the fact GB sent the letter BEFORE the release, increased speculation that the UK government was involved".... that's all it is at this point in time, speculation, but you conveniently forget to address my other points about mandelson, gadaffi's son and BP which are all on record...oh and whilst writing this BBC radio4 9pm news just had the fact that GB sent a letter before release as its leading piece.....now move on oldnat, try to accept defeat gracefully and find something of value to blog about instead of just nitpicking......
Complain about this comment
165. At 8:24pm on 21 Aug 2009, oldnat
I might not be fully getting your jist but I think the difference with the England/Scotland situation is the non-reciprocal nature of it.
Taking your example, what we have in the UK is equivalent to...
Nebraska imposes a US president who was voted in by 26,000 people, only in Nebraska. No other state is allowed to vote on the new president. Nebraska can also have their own president, no other American is allowed to vote on that either. In Congress and the house of representatives, Nebraska controls many of the votes, but those votes only apply to the rest of the US, not to Nebraska. Nebraska refuses to contribute anything much to the US, they say they hate the US, but demand 1.3X their fair share of all federal money. Surprise, surprise - big states that contribute loads, like california, but have no say in any of this, are a bit unhappy. They would be very happy if they could gain some sort of independence from Nebraska.
Now the Nebraska president has made a really dumb decision and the Californians are laughing their pants off, just so long as no one associates California with the dumb decision. Even though he comes from Nebraska, the US president is wisely keeping his mouth shut and laughing in private at the dumb decision.
Anyone (other than the Nebraskans) who thinks this is a good constitutional set up needs their head examining.
(No disrespect to Nebraska in any of this)
And with regard to the comment at #162 - have a look at some of the comments in this blog or on the HYS debate. Basically people are saying mass murder is OK so long as it's Americans that are killed. I would never dream of saying (example) the Dunblane massacre was OK because it was only scots. That's clearly offensive. If people want to engage in a quasi racist anti-American rhetoric then they can't complain when Americans respond (in quite a restrained way).
Complain about this comment
158. NoRashDecisions
OK NRD, agree tit-for-tat politics gets us nowhere. What really sticks in the craw is not the reaction which is understandable, more the hypocrisy. A trait which many of our politicians have in common.
Complain about this comment
#169 jolo13
"deciding on my political proclivities" - Your doing that caused some hilarity on the Scottish BBC blog!
You still don't understand.
If your claim that Brown wrote the letter "last week" had been true, then that would be good evidence that some form of inter-governmental fix had been arranged.
That the letter was written/delivered on Thursday prior to Megrahi being released from Greenock Prison isn't.
Stop trying to persuade people that your claim of conspiracy between the Scottish and UK Governments has been substantiated in any way.
Complain about this comment
#170 jon112uk
On one level we are probably in agreement. The Acts of Union 1707 should be repealed.
However, your representation of the current UK constitution is nonsense.
Nebraska can no more "impose" the political leader on the USA than Scotland can in the UK. The numbers aren't there to do it.
With no separation of powers in the UK, the nearest analogy between the UK and the USA is to consider that in both systems at a General Election the voters select an Electoral College who then vote for the political leader.
You may dislike the fact that a majority of both UK and English MPs are Labour and that they therefore determine who is the PM, but the current (rather awful) voting system produces that situation.
If you think that the PM is being imposed on England by Scots suggests that you are either motivated by national grievance, or simply ignorant of the UK political system.
Complain about this comment
#172 oldnat
i really do despair you are like a dog with a bone...just what is your problem?....if you dont think there was any involvement by the UK government, fine.... rightly or wrongly i happen to think there was.. now try to convince me with solid arguments instead of this childish backbiting
p.s Gaddafi's son has publicly thanked the Scottish authorities AND the British government for their stance.
source the Guardian http://tinyurl.com/nx8gdn
pps oh and read paul masons newsnight blog.. http://tinyurl.com/53se7c
and douglas Fraser's Ledger.. http://tinyurl.com/nm94pw
Complain about this comment
oldnat #165. . .
My apologies!!!! I meant in no way to imply that I thought that Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland were devoid of respectful and empathetic people!!! Of course I think such people exist!! When I said that, I was merely refering to 'john112UK specificly because he said he was from England, and I know how sensitive the issue of devolution is to many of you, and so I was just making sure all my bases were covered so as not to offend anymore people than I apparently already totally unintentionally have. Forgive me, I meant nothing by it. Also, I saw your post at #159, and I wanted to thank you for your support on that as well. It seems that unfortunately (on these forems at least,) people of our mindset are few and hard to come by.
Tom Porter #168. . .
I know how your political system works; in fact, I am very envious of much of it and wish we had it in this country. I was just unsure as to the details of the facts surrounding the issue of devolution and how the four countries that comprise the United Kingdom interact and work with one another and the rest of the world. But thanks very much for the education.
Complain about this comment
#174 jolo13
You do try to avoid the original point, don't you. Are you still trying to maintain that Brown wrote the letter last week?
A simple yes or no will suffice.
Complain about this comment
#175 NoRashDecisions
It's OK. I didn't seriously think you were being discriminatory!
I might get some sense of it when I fly to the US next week, but I'd appreciate your take on what "Scotland" is in the US media.
Like a state within the USA?
The "UK" in a different format?
A separate country?
Something else?
Complain about this comment
#176 olnat
i have no idea when he wrote the letter, i was just reporting what i read and what i believe, it is of no great importance.... the point is whether the UK government was involved...i believe they were you believe they were not...it is not rocket science, convince me by argument that you are right and i am wrong, you are very good at criticism but you do lack any original thought...
omg...i too am flying to US next week, it would be fun if you are in the next seat! I am flying AirFrance......
Complain about this comment
I've no idea if Brown/Mandelson etc were involved but why the big deal if that was the case? - surely one would expect the Scots to consult over something like this - or at least give notice ... a bit of a heads up ... of the fact this guy was going to be released? - don't see anything wrong with that - seems quite healthy to me
Complain about this comment
#179 sagamix
i agree with your comments, the problem is the UK government is denying any involvement, that is what is hard to believe....
Complain about this comment
The European hatred toward the various American Governments apparently extends to the American children who were the majority on that plane.
Since Scotland has a 'quirky little law' that allows murderers to walk because they are 'dying', I think we here in Florida would be best protected with a new statute that allows the immediate release of anyone convicted of killing a person with a European passport. Surely, there is no harm in allowing the release of the killers of YOUR visitors to our country, since the killer is certainly 'dying' of something. The only real argument is 'when'. 3 months, 30 years, there is no real difference in the grand scheme of things.
It's the only appropriate response. They release our children's killers, we release the killers of their visiting tourists. It's Christian charity, don't you know?
Complain about this comment
#178 jolo13
That might have been fun! - but I'm flying Continental.
We could have spent hours discussing why you think that "what you read" equalled "last week" in your mind.
However, I'm glad that you accept that your statement was wrong.
Complain about this comment
#179 sagamix
MacAskill did consult with the UK Government, as with all interested parties. He said so in his statement.
Complain about this comment
#178 jolo
The Scottish justice secretary approached the the Westminster justice secretary, to debate the position of releasing Megrahi on a transfer and exchange option. Jack Straw refused to be drawn into the debate.
The UK and USA governments have refused to sanction an enquiry into flight 103, even with new and compelling evidence now available?.
Jolo I think it's wise of you to compromise your responses towards Oldnat and since you raised the issue? what is GB's response to the release of Megrahi, we know what Obama thinks?.
Complain about this comment
#184 derekdraper
My concern is not that they were consulted on the legality of the issue, but that there was a commercial deal behind the whole affair, as we speak gadaffi's son is saying that the release was indeed linked to a commercial deal (skynews) of course he may or may not be telling the truth...but i would like to know what the governments are afraid of re an enquiry...perhaps it would come out that megahri was innocent which would then lead to the real perpetrators..... Iran??
Complain about this comment
john112uk #170. . .
While I don't dare wade into the debate going on between you and oldnat about which annalogy best represents the true UK constitutional set-up, I would like to say that I'm sure Nebraska wouldn't mind the attention at all. They, along with the rest of the nation, have probably been feeling left out since California and Texas tend to get most of it over here.
"Basically people are saying mass murder is OK so long as it's Americans that are killed. If people want to engage in a quasi racist anti American rhetoric then they can't complain when Americans respond (in quite a restrained way)."
Thank you!!! Exactly!! And that is the point that I have been going to great lengths, without (admitedly) much success to explain all along on here! Now keep in mind, that this is in no way meant to imply in any way that I think that all Britains hold this view!!! But it does seem that many do, and I just find it frustrating trying to explain something that in my opinion is so blindingly obvious to people which I feel any adult should be able to reasonably grasp fairly quickly. But anyway. In my post #162 I was actually thanking you for defending me and the rest of my fellow countrymen's rights to express our opinions on this on here without fear of recrimination. I think it was very brave of you. Same with oldnat.
Complain about this comment
Jolo, just a quick thought! remember Blair meet Gaddafi in Libya 2005, were both agreed to set up an exchange and release prisoner agreement.
Complain about this comment
#185 Jolo13
Hmmm! the thing about truth and justice is not to prejudge the outcome, without the proper evidence in place.
I like you believe that Dr Jim Swire has far more to offer this situation than any politician.
Complain about this comment
#187 derekbaker
and a certain peter mandelson met gadaffi's son in corfu not two weeks ago......i say no more in case oldnat asks me for my sources!
Complain about this comment
#189 jolo13
Since your sources agree with mine, I'm happy to agree that "peter mandelson met gadaffi's son in corfu not two weeks ago" (what have you got against capital letters?)
My speculation (wholly unsubstantiated) is that Mandelson took the opportunity of briefing someone in the BBC that MacAskill was considering compassionate release - the discussions between MacAskill, the USA, the Libyans, the relatives had been going for some time.
Why? To create difficulties for the SNP, since Scottish seats are vital to Labour having any chance of running the UK after the next GE. Seems to me typical of Grima Wormtongue's normal behaviour.
Complain about this comment
TheBlameGame #171: '"OK NRD, agree tit-for-tat politics gets us nowhere. What really sticks in the craw is not the reaction which is understandable, more the hypocrisy. A trait which many of our politicians have in common."
You acted in your post #146 as though the reaction (on the part of the government) was not understandable, and that in fact it was an over reaction that was highly immature and uncalled for. Further more you appeared to think that the American government, and the American people were the same thing. So forgive me for responding so pashonitly.
I understand your point about hypocrisy. But here too, you have to be careful. Barack Obama didn't set up Guantanamo Bay. Barack Obama didn't have the bright idea to induce extrordinary rendition. Barack Obama didn't invade Iraq for the oil. George Bush did all those things. So when you say things like '"The US has no right to lecture us on how to run our justice system because it has Guantanamo Bay etc," it implys that our founding fathers practicly initiated it, and that it has always been among the most charished institutions of this country, and obviously everybody knows it wasn't and that it disgusts many Americans!!
Complain about this comment
oldnat #177. . .
Unfortunately, I regret to inform you that I don't know too much about how the US media views Scotland. But if I had to guess, I'd say that it is a cross between the UK in a different format and another country entirely.
Perhaps once you've learned something during your travels you can report back to me?
Where in the US are you going? For how long?
Enjoy your stay!
Complain about this comment
#192 NoRashDecisions
5 weeks in North Carolina looking after my grandson.
Complain about this comment
jolo13
Out of purely pedantic interest - from the Guardian -
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/aug/21/us-anger-release-lockerbie-bomber
"Sir Vincent Fean, the British ambassador to Tripoli, delivered Brown's letter to the Libyan prime minister an hour after Megrahi's plane left Glasgow airport."
Complain about this comment
Laura:
I think that the United States was accurate in the way they, responded to the release of Mr. Megrahi and his "compassionate ground" by Scotland on 20 August 2009...
=Dennis Junior=
Complain about this comment
Funny how the BBCs news front page has quickly changed its headline this morning from the allegation that trade issues were part of a deal struck with Libya to a less ... provocative ... one.
Complain about this comment
I am sickened by the Tory (for whom I had been going to vote) response to the release. The man is likely to be dead within months and even if the most cynical interpretations are true, various national goods will flow from the release viz. trade, the closure of a very, very murky orocess of conviction and getting our most important ally of the hook of having its dealings in the affair further explored at appeal. To seize on this situation as a politcal opportunity for embarassing the Government is to priveledge party over country. And in case they start weeping crocodile tears over the undoubted hurt caused to the relatives, I stand alongside those of the British relatives who think the Lybian was almost certainly a scapegoat.
Complain about this comment
Gaddafi is loving all this! Especially the drift in relations between Britain and America, does this mean that all convicted long term prisoners serving sentences for murder or terrorist activities can now be released on compassionate grounds, listed as terminal illness or perhaps they miss their mum. Unscrupulous lawyers could make a killing out of this after all we are all going to die sometime or other. Who will set the criteria as to whether it's a few days before they die or several years.
Complain about this comment
#198 vetskidkid
I don't know if or how it happens where you live, but in Scotland the power to release is granted by the Prisoners and Criminal Proceedings (Scotland) Act 1993 and the criteria are set by the Scottish Prison Service, who assess applications. While there are no fixed time limits, life expectancy of less than three months may be considered an appropriate period.
Please note that the legislation was put in place by the Tories 16 years ago.
Complain about this comment
Aah, the good ole USA.
Hypocrisy like nowhere else in the world.
Ever since the days of Foster-Dulles (and probably way back to Teddy Roosevelt), whatever is expedient for the US State Department -regardless of the bigger picture- they just go ahead and do. Loads of shady deals in the past on terrorism, freedom fighters, military juntas, enemies-of-their-enemies for us to remember.
Megrahi was never the only bomber, and not the mastermind either.
I suggest Barrack goes and looks at his own intelligence services files and internal reports on the matter before he makes too much noise about how indignant he feels.
I support the decision to free that dying man. I think, notwithstanding anything else about the case, that he conducted himself with consistent dignity. Perhaps (if it was not orchestrated by Gadaffi's machine) this is what his people wanted to express solidarity with on his initial arrival in Libya.
I also support the victims families in trying to get to the truth.
I don't support aborting the appeal, that just keeps the rest of the facts away from the glare of publicity -and probably suits a number of people near Langley.
Regards,
Complain about this comment
so its thanks to brown that this evil little man is released,the puppets that run scotland did exactly what brown wanted, thank god we have got just 282 days(max) of this excuse for a pm left,and good on cameron for telling us all what he thinks,which in a democracy hes allowed to do.God Bless all the 270 murdered,its a pity we have a government that thinks more of money than the relatives of the poor souls murdered .
Complain about this comment
210 - for info - Gordon Brown Is the Prime Minister at Westminster, Kenny Macaskill is the Justice Secretary for Scotland. If you had any understanding of UK politics you would realise that the Scottish Parliament are not puppets. Alex Salmond (first minister of Scotland) hardly ever agrees with Brown and they speak to each other rarely.
Besides, this is nothing to do with politics, is a legal matter and a Scottish legal matter at that. Any lifer in a similar life-threatening situation is entitled to the same consideration and by definition, if they are serving life its unlikely they were jailed for speeding or shoplifting.
It has nothing to do with Westminster, or Holyrood for that matter. If it had been under English law, the Home Secretary would have decided.
As he's been released its time to get over this and show how grown up we can all be and try to remember that it wasn't only American citizens that died that night, despite what some of the commentators on here would have us believe.
Complain about this comment
#190 it doesnt matter about snp seats in the next election,brown and his pathetic government will be wiped off the face of the earth and good riddance.They will be lucky to get 100 seats and with a bit of luck we be shot of them for ever.
Complain about this comment
#202 its 201 not 210, so your really on the ball. I couldnt care a less whether salmond likes brown or not,the scots government is a puppet government for the uk shambles.
Complain about this comment
Oldnat wrote:
"Nebraska can no more "impose" the political leader on the USA than Scotland can in the UK. The numbers aren't there to do it".
Except, perhaps, for the Blair landslide of 1997, no Labour government since WW2 would have got into office were it not for Scottish seats. In terms of both senior public figures and impact on government complexion, Scotland has had a wholly disproportionate share. It has been a wonderful situation for Scots, boots full of influence, and somebody else to blame when it all goes wrong. Pity the poor English!
Complain about this comment
#202 does it matter what the nationality of the poor souls murdered were? a human being is a human being,and thanks for the info on how the uk government works,i wasnt aware that it worked at all.
Complain about this comment
Gaddafi thanks Brown for release ........ http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8215807.stm
Complain about this comment
allmyfault #200: '"Aah, the good ole USA. Hypocrisy like nowhere else in the world."
And don't you forget it!
"Ever since the days of Foster-Dulles (and probably way back to Teddy Roosevelt), whatever is expedient for the US State Department regardless of the bigger picture- they just go ahead and do. Loads of shady deals in the past on terrorism, freedom fighters, military juntas, enemies-of their-enemies for us to remember."
Pst...I have a secret to tell you...all other countries have pursued their own selfish interests as well. We're not the only ones!! Now does that make it anymore right for us to do the things we've done? Of course not!! But don't think for one second that we do it anymore than other countries did when they were enjoying their 15 minats of fame!! We just happen to be enjoying ours now so our greed is just more noticeable.
Incidentally, sometimes when fighteing a large enamy, one must bite the bullit and pretend to be allies with a smaller enamy in order to defeat the larger one. Like what the allies did with Stalin during World War II. Which was a good thing too, because Soviet casualties in fighting the Nazis acounted for 60% of the total amount lost fighting them!
Complain about this comment
#205 MikeWaller
2005 GE (England) - Labour 285 : Tory 193
You voted Labour in all by yourselves!
Complain about this comment
ScorpioRicardo #202: '"As he's been released its time to get over this and show how grown up we can all be and try to remember that it wasn't only American citizens that died that night, despite what some of the commentators on here would have us believe."
If that is a sly way of accusing me of suggesting that only Americans were murdered, let me assure you, I never said any such thing!!! I am fully aware of, and feel for the families of, those remaining British and other nationality citizens who were murdered alongside the Americans, but it is a fact, Americans made up the majority of the people killed on that plane, and I was merely pointing that out.
Unlike you and apparently many other Britains, I don't believe that it is OK to murder, much less gleefully welcome, the murder of wholly innocent human beings just so long as they are of a particular nationality. A person is a person is a person.
Jees!! Talk of a lack of "compassion!!"
Complain about this comment
The scathing remarks by the FBI Boss sums it up.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/8216122.stm
When David Miliband refers to the decision being one for the Scottish Government when he should have said Scottish Executive it give us all some idea of how out of touch this Government is. The British Government is the Scottish Government because Scotland is still part of the Union, in spite of the SNP pretending otherwise.
Complain about this comment
Do we tell the Americans what they can/should do with their prisoners? Doesn't Obama profess to be a Christian and something of a liberal? Anyway, if it was a cynical political decision, wasn't it the right one. We've annoyed the Americans, but they will get over it, and are unlikely to send terroroists to blow us up, whereas if we'd annoyed the Libyans they might well have chosen to do business with the Chinese and/or send ppeople to do evil deeds against us
Complain about this comment
Mea culpa, oldnat, but how about 1945, 1950, 1964, 1974? And even in 1997, England gave less emphatic support to Labour than did Scotland. Only between 1951 to 1964, and 1979 - 1997 did the election go other than the way Scotland wanted. In terms of post-war years, my rough calculation is that Scotland got what it wanted in 28 out of 64 years and in 16 of those years it was Scotland than made the difference i.e. England did not get what it wanted in 16 years out of 64 largely because of the Scottish component. Obviously, if you see no benefit in the UK, a total split is the best idea so that everybody gets what they want all the time (save only that in Scotland it would then be, say, highland vs lowland, and in England, north vs south - plus la change...) However, the above figures, given the relative population sizes, do not suggest any kind of English tyranny and, contra your original claim, demonstrate that in some circumstances Scotland can and has determind who governs Britain.
Complain about this comment
191. NoRashDecisions
NRD
You are being a touch patronising. Of course I know Obama (whose election I welcomed) wasn't responsible for what his predecessor created and that the Founding Fathers did not write the handbook for the CIA, illegal covert operations and the exploitation of third world countries. (Yes I know we did that as well)
I have also read a fair bit of American history and do read your media and watch your channels from time to time. (Fox for light entertainment)
The Director of the FBI is now ratcheting up the pressure. He says "(Your) action in releasing Megrahi is as inexplicable as it is detrimental to the cause of justice. Indeed your action makes a mockery of the rule of law."
I get back to my point about hypocrisy. I could refer to many cases where US administrations, from Kennedy through to Clinton, not just Bush, made decisions detrimental to justice and made a mockery of international law. You say this is a new administration and can therefore comment off the back of a clean slate. Well Obama has been more measured in his comments. Possibly because he suspects the case for Megrahi's conviction was not as clear cut as was made out; there is still doubt hanging over the trial, as you know. But as we also know, Obama is a figurehead, he has to tread a careful path.
The scenes in Tripoli and the status given to al-Megrahi do leave a bad taste in the mouth, but this is Libya we are dealing with, and you can't tell me that a U.S. government has never made a dodgy deal with Gaddafi before now.
Complain about this comment
211 I totally agree, excellent point!
The SNP may have changed the name on their buildings, business cards and letter headings (at massive cost to the taxpayers) but they are still legally "The Scottish Executive".
So that's at least two us who can see through President Salmond's pipe dream.
Isn't it interesting that he can't make his mind up whether he's a constituency MP in Westminster, an MSP or First Minister in Scotland. Still may as well collect salaries (and presumably pension contributions) for all of these whilst he decides eh?
Complain about this comment
NoRashDecisions 210, please read my posts more carefully!
If you read back through the various posts you'll see plenty of people, not all of them American, talking about the Americans who were murdered, but far fewer reminding us of the other nationalities who died. My heart went out to those going about their business in Lockerbie before the plane crashed into their village, but that was then and this is now.
The clue is in the use of the word COMMENTATORS (plural), my comment wasn't aimed at you, in fact I don't recall responding to any of your posts. It was rvpisneverinjureds 201 I was replying to about the puppet comment, and others who only ever mentioned murdered Americans.
Complain about this comment
ScorpioRicardo:
Alex Salmond was not the first person to be an MSP and MP at the time. It's a problem now simply because Salmond is a nationalist, so get off your high horse and be critical of the others or you'll show yourself as apart of the anti-SNP/Alex Salmond brigade. It's like open prejudice against one group of people...
Oh, while your researching who else was MSP and MP please also check what Alex Salmond actually claims. You will find that by law Alex Salmond must actually claim his MP salary and 1/3 of his MSP salary, all of which is donated to a charity.
But please do not let facts spoil your good anti/salmond rant.
Complain about this comment
Laura:
An revised note regarding the ongoing diplomatic consequences in the Megrahi release; Was, the United States authorities lodged their protests in the response of the way he was released and sent back to Libya....
=Dennis Junior=
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
217 Thomas_Porter
You're quite correct, both Donald Dewar and Henry McLeish were also MP's. Sadly Donald Dewar didn't live long enough to make good his promise to stand down at the next Parliament and Henry McLeish had to resign in disgrace so neither of these guys really compare to the current situation.
Where I and a great many others have a problem is that Alex Salmond appears to do very little, or even appear at Westminster these days, and we all would prefer him to stand down as an MP so he could concentrate on the business of Scottish politics. If he did, he would possibly be replaced by another SNP minister at Westminster. He is currently the only MSP also serving as an MP and has faced numerous calls from both the Westminster members and those in Holyrood to stand down as an MP.
The sentiment here is that he cannot do two fairly heavy-duty jobs at opposite ends of the country as well as if he concentrated all his efforts on one of them, and that he claims his MP's salary under false pretences. It is commonly held that if he believed in devolution as much as he says he does, he would have quit Westminster in protest long ago.
His claims for Westminster expenses haven't helped is cause either, claiming £130,000 for a period during which he visited the house of commons only 6 times, according to the Times newspaper, and claiming £400/month for food whilst Parliament was in recess!
Donating his MSP income to charity makes him look generous, but remember the money comes from the taxpayer and I stand by my comment about the pension pots he's accruing as many other Scots have also noted with disgust at a time when Scottish jobs are vanishing almost daily.
I'm not anti SNP, I'm anti-hypocrite!
Complain about this comment
I think that is a bit rich for some of the Labour Politicians to now cry foul re the issue of the "Freed Bomber". There appears to have been several of them at a Westminster Level, that have been involved in this farce and are passing the "buck/blame" onto the shoulders of the Holyrood Government.
No matter which flavour of "Political Effluent" had to deal with this issue; the matter can be seen to be a "poisioned chalice", all would try to gain "political points" by appearing to shift the blame, hide away so as not to be tainted by the "stink" that would be kicked up.
I do not agree with the choice made ie to allow this Person to return to the bussom of his Family. A certain amount of any sentence is put in place to address the crime committed and an amount of time to refect about the behaviour that needs to be adjusted, in order to become a "useful Member of the Community"? I feel that this has not been addressed.
Are we to belive that Gordon Brown, other Members of the incumbent Political Party at Westminster; did not have a say, influence, or exert any pressure on the S.N.P. Scottish Government? Mr Jack McConnell seems to be intent to keep the "Blame Game", North of the Border. Hopefully in the fullness of time, the true involvement of the Westminter Groups will be seen? It is true that "a fish stinks from the head" and I am sure that in the case of this "Farce", we will find that there has been some involvement from "Higher Forces"
Complain about this comment
All this pious wringing of hands about the due process of scottish law and not one of those complaining including oback obama has the decency to remember that in international law one sided extraditition is regarded by most decent law abiding people an insult to them and due process before members of the fbi start complaining the should start investigating the corruption within the justice department that beleives that this is reasonable
Complain about this comment
#213 MikeWaller
For shame! You have ignored all those times in the late 19th/early 20th century when the Scots forced Liberal Governments on England. :-)
I'm not sure how far back in history you want to go.
Anyway 1945 - are you sure that the Tories had a majority in England? I'd like to see the numbers to support that claim.
Actually, I was making no claim of "English tyranny" (fairly silly idea).
Finally you say "in some circumstances Scotland can and has determined who governs Britain." Now read that again. You can argue successfully that in some elections, where English Lab/Con MPs were fairly evenly matched, the different voting patterns north and south of the border means that the total numbers of UK Labour MPs has been greater than the number of UK Conservative MPs, compared with the pattern that emerged in England only.
Your statement could only be true if Scotland elected more MPs than England! To return to my original comment which you criticised - I didn't say that Nebraska had no influence on (and might even deliver a crucial Electoral College vote for) the US President. I said that they couldn't impose their choice against the will of other states.
So good try, but your argument falls.
Complain about this comment
#222 apollonemesis
Since the Americans were being consulted on Megrahi's possible prisoner transfer, why didn't they just extradite him, and thus guarantee that they could give him multiple life sentences?
Complain about this comment
Megrahi release - where is the compassion for the hundreds of parents that lost their loved ones.
The decision is stupid and makes a mockery of justice, but then the British seem to be getting used to that i.e. Biggs, etc, etc.
Sentences should be made to fit the crime and should mean what they say.
We really have gone soft - no wonder there is no such thing any longer of 'Rights' measured against 'RESPONSIBILITY'.
Complain about this comment
214. me
191. NoRashDecisions
Sorry to harp on like this, NRD, but isn't your country considering selling arms to Libya? Which makes the FBI Directors rant all the more ridiculous.
('OK you keep their terrorists locked up while we sell them arms')
Complain about this comment
I was outraged this morning to see Joke McConnell decrying Kenny McAskill's decision to release Megrahi on comassionate grounds. He said there was "outrage across Scotland" and that the decision "brought shame to the country". I'd like to know what gives him the right to speak for the country. Every rational, intelligent person I have spoken to supports the decision.
I am not ashamed to be Scottish in the light of McAskill's decision, quite the opposite, it made me (for the first time in a long time) proud to be Scottish. It doesn't say much for the kind of people that McConnell mixes with if he is basing his opinion on what he hears around him. More likely he's the mouthpiece for the very quiet Gordon Brown who must be very worried that his "special relationship" with the US has been damaged.
Almost everyone I have spoken to supports the view that Professor Alan Millar expounded - McAskill made the right decision. He made it correctly and with due process. He made it objectively and without prejudice.
I can fully understand the outrage felt by the victim's families when seeing the reception for Megrahi on his arrival in Tripoli, but it was to be expected. It does not mean that anyone in Scotland supported it. I doubt very much that it was Scots who were waving the Saltires (all both of them!)at the airport, and I'm sure no Scot would have attended or supported the celebrations in Tripoli. That Gaddaffi ignored Gordon Brown's request for a low key release just shows how much Libya has him over a barrel with regard to his arms deals and oil contracts. Gaddaffi knows full well that he has the upper hand and can thumb his nose at the West with impunity. He has the oil they want.
The American government's duplicity in this affair beggars belief. Consider this; if Mergahi IS guilty of perpetrating the bombing then logically Gaddaffi must have been his sponsor. If this is so then why would a delegation of 5 US senators led by Senator John McCain just have completed a trade mission to Libya to discuss arms contracts and oil deals this very month! So it was wrong for Kenny McAskill to release the alleged perpetrator of the bombing, but it's ok for the American government to snuggle up with his sponsor in the name of Profit. Hypocracy in extremis! America should be ashamed of itself.
Joke McConnell may just be worried that his special relationship with Donald Trump might be damaged and that his free life membership to the Balmedie course might be in jeopardy!
This whole affair has just convinced me that independence for Scotland is now a necessity. The sooner the better.
Complain about this comment
#225 gwr12345
"Megrahi release - where is the compassion for the hundreds of parents that lost their loved ones."
Quite right. The failure of the UK Government to release evidence which might have helped establish which state/organisation ordered this murder, and give some understanding if why their loved ones died showed no compassion whatsoever to the relatives.
You can also fairly criticise the Tories 1993 Act which put the decision in the hands of a politician.
If you are relative of one of the dead, then you have my sympathy. Otherwise you are simply ranting.
Complain about this comment
226. At 10:58am on 23 Aug 2009, TheBlameGame wrote:
(191. NoRashDecisions)
Sorry to harp on like this, NRD, but isn't your country considering selling arms to Libya? Which makes the FBI Directors rant all the more ridiculous.
=======================================
The whole point of the situation prior to the naive scottish foul up was that the old US=satan/Libya=terrorists thing was OVER. A negotiated end to that conflict was in place. America would no longer send F-111s to kill Khadafis family in Libya, Libya would no longer send bombers to kill American servicemen in discos in Germany.
It was all over, finished, ended.
There was no reason whatever why America should not trade with Libya and no reason whatever why Lybia should not trade with the US or the UK: we were no longer in conflict. (...until the scots did this)
(Oh, and you fail to mention that the 'arms' in question are early discussions of non-lethal equipment that can be used military purposes - transport planes (C130 hercules) and utility vehicles (HUMVEEs). They can also be used to support oil wells or deliver humanitarian supplies out in the desert. Not exactly F22s and cruise missiles.)
Complain about this comment
229. jon112uk
The whole point of the situation prior to the naive scottish foul up was that the old US=satan/Libya=terrorists thing was OVER.
=
So if it's all OVER, why not allow a compassionate release, especially when you consider the BIG question marks hanging over the trial. Why not release all documents and let the TRUTH be known?
Complain about this comment
what happens , in a few months time,and this evil little man isnt dead and hes recovering? does the scots government have the power to put him back in a scots prison? or is it the fact that the scots government think hes innocent and they havnt the guts to tell us.
Complain about this comment
Somebody obviously doesn't like the inconvenient truth! I'm still waiting to find out why my #227 was referred.
Complain about this comment
Does that mean we release all criminals who are sick and terminally ill?
The reason being, we are a civilised society and it is the right thing to do, I question. I hope this good will is infectious and all extremists catch a dose of it.
This was a political decision no matter how you look at it.
If there was any doubt of his guilt, why sentence him to life in the first place?
In addition, if innocent, of course he should be a free man.
Complain about this comment
230. At 12:13pm on 23 Aug 2009, TheBlameGame wrote:
"...So if it's all OVER, why not allow a compassionate release, especially when you consider the BIG question marks hanging over the trial. ..."
========================
Obviously because RELEASING him is not part of the peace deal.
Libya handing him over for trial WAS part of the deal.
Unfortunately years of diplomacy and progress to end a situation that was killing people has been wasted due to naive decision making of some obscure scottish activist who happens to be in a position of power for the moment.
Complain about this comment
Ref my #227 which has been referred:
It says on the BBC's Questions and complaints page:
One of your messages has disappeared or been removed from the board
Please be patient - your message is being checked by one of our moderators.
If there is no problem with your message it will reappear shortly.
If your message breaks our House Rules it will be removed permanently and you will be sent an email explaining why. Please reply to this email if you would like to query or comment on the decision.
"If one of your messages is removed you will be sent an email explaining why. If you feel one of your messages has been removed unjustly, please reply to that email."
I'm patiently waiting for a response - how long should it take?
Please either re-instate the message or tell me why it has been removed.
Complain about this comment
234 jon112UK
Reading through your posts you are obviously a Unionist Troll and have an ignorance of how the UK Political system works.
The Devolved Scottish Government have always had control over justice matters and Scotland has always had a different Legal System amongs other separate responsibilities.
The Scottish Justice Minister made a bold decision whether or not you agree and the decision was certainly not made on the grounds of popularity.
Complain about this comment
Megrahi's links to the Lockerbie crash are at best uncertain.
What is certain is that Pan Am flight 103 went down on 21 December 1988.
What is equally certain, but a lot less well remembered is the other event involving a civilian airliner just 5 months before, on 3 July, 1988.
This is the day a US guided missile cruiser, the Vincennes, deliberately fired upon an Iranian Airbus, Flight 655, operating an established route between Teheran and Dubai, flying inside Iranian airspace when it was shot down laden with 290 civilians, including 66 children in an event just weeks after Ronald Reagan assured the Iranian people that they would never be allowed to win the war with American backed Iraq. The shooting down of Flight 655 was effective, showing Iran that Reagan spoke much truth, and the 8 year war ended shortly after this incident.
Reagans Vice President Bush (Daddy of Dubya) said in reaction to the outcry at the time:
"I'll never apologize for the United States of America, ever. I don't care what the facts are"
I don't think its a huge leap of logic to imagine that some of the 290 passengers on that Iranian Airbus A300 flight had relatives and that those relatives were not satisfied with the US payment of 131 Million dollars in compensation, or that USS Vincennes Captain Will Rogers III should not be prosecuted for murder but instead given a hero-medal. Perhaps Gaddafi's celebrating Megrahis release is a pointer to the celebrated return offered to Capt Will Rogers in 1988?
I think it is far more likely that Pan Am Flight 103 was the reply to Iran Air Flight 655. And to imagine that 1 lone Libyan could mastermind and be made accountable for this beggars belief.
Complain about this comment
well oldnat reading the UK sunday papers.. it does look like my original theory that the UK were behind the release as part of a commercial deal is looking more than ever like i guessed right.... and in reply to your pedantry it says "delivered" after the release not "written"...you see i can be as pedantic as anyone... see you in beverly hills hotel you can buy me a drink...
Complain about this comment
236. At 8:34pm on 23 Aug 2009, falkirkblues wrote:
234 jon112UK
Reading through your posts you are obviously a Unionist Troll and have an ignorance of how the UK Political system works.
=
And is hacked off that the UK has been made to look stupid by an 'ex-dictator and ex-terrorist' and a devolved government. But knows that it is all of their own making.
Complain about this comment
I am taking a chance here because the BBC is not a great fan of my writings and tend to reject my statments when the tough get going, mainly because the decisions to reject are made by computer rather than a HUMAN.
OK we seem to have descended into farce about the issue of Al Meghrahi but there certainly was not much media coverage of the situation in Libya when Gadafi first overthrew Idris in 1963 especially since Exxon were drilling for Oil in Marsa Brega then. How do I know? because I was there as a child as were my parents. No one leapt up and down when Ghadafi had people disappeared or forced people to run into exile. My parents almost in a destitute situation were given no assistance to restart their lives unlike people who came out of UGANDA only a few years later. Nice that for a man who had in fact served his country for 31 years.
That does not alter the fact that I support the Scottish Government's actions, firstly because the British Government- which is largely run by Scots ducked the issue. The Scottish Government has no remit for foreign policy but it does for the application of law in Scotland. And just like any legal system it deals in law, not speculation or personal feeling.
I think it is well known that it hardly befits the US to instruct us as to the realities of Law. There is no problem making representation through the proper channels, but I am old enough to remember losing mates in Northern Ireland and how I felt when the exposes came on about the good old US of A supplying the money for the weapons that killed them.
Lastly there is the nonsense about why we do not have an English Parliament is that someone has commented that we have not had the opportunity to vote for it. That is perfectly correct. Most Mps are Scots. Just like in America they are selected by the political parties at constituency level, so we have no say in who our MPs are other than those selected.
Why? Because the political parties are in control and all three major parties are against a split in the Union because they are very scared of the English. Those of you who know your History will remember the peasants revolt will recall that the punishment against those who took part was draconian, so that in every Parliament we have boundary commissions. These ensure that the political parties ensure their vote and the last thing they want is the English actually have any control. Scots, Welsh, Irish and ethnic minorities are all catered for in this way, so Americans criticising the English ought to be a bit more informed. We have absolutely nothing to do with it, we never have- not since that Dane William came hareing over the hill in 1066.
So in general can we have a bit more balance here Neither of our countries have exactly covered ourselves in glory and Megrahi had to withdraw his appeal in order to get his freedom. That means that none of the relatives of PAN AM 103 will ever find out the real truth and couldn't that be in someones interest?
Complain about this comment
TheBlameGame #214: '"I get back to my point about hypocrisy. I could refer to many cases where US administrations, from Kennedy through to Clinton, not just Bush, made decisions detrimental to justice and made a mockery of international law."
And I get back to my point. Yes I know that presidents from essentially FDR (when our international involvement really took off) to W have indeed made awful and downright humiliating decisions that were detrimental to the cause of justice and a huge mockery of the rule of law!!! I'm not disputing that for one second!! What I have been trying to say, however, is that no matter how many bad things we have done, indeed no matter how many bad things you have done, those instinces don't make this particular case any less detrimental to the cause of justice and any less of a mockery of international law in the eyes of those who truely believe that this guy was really responsible for the bombing.
Now your point about hypocrisy in particular would in my opinion hold much more weight if Obama were flouting our most cherished ideals and violating our constitution right now while daring to lecture Scotland on how to run their justice system, but as I'm sure you know he has stopped, or is in the process of stopping all the hypocritical measures of the Bush administration.
Of course I know that we have sold, and are selling large amounts of weapons to Libya, which doesn't bode well for our '"Accept democratic rule and we'll work with you in the international comunity" message we have been giving all the dictatorships in the world at least during the Bush years. But this rather unpleasant hypocrisy merely goes to prove the old addage that money really does make the world go around, as cold as it seems.
Regarding the FBI director, I personally don't think it appropriate and wise of him to express his feelings so strongly and so publicly so soon after the event, but he was one of the people who originally helped investigate the bombing back in the early 90s, so perhaps he feels that the release is a slap in the face of his work? I speculate.
Complain about this comment
236. At 8:34pm on 23 Aug 2009, falkirkblues wrote:
234 jon112UK
Reading through your posts you are obviously a Unionist Troll and have an ignorance of how the UK Political system works.
The Devolved Scottish Government have always had control over justice matters and Scotland has always had a different Legal System amongs other separate responsibilities.
=====================================
Wow that is so dumb.
1) Under the pre-devolution system you lot had a seperate law/courts, but the person making this decision would have been the secretary of state for scotland - a British politician. I can't believe you don't even know your own political system.
2) Unionist??? I couldn't be clearer on this issue: the sooner England is independent of scottish rule the better. (I said that higher up the page #20, but unfortunately under the culture imposed on us in England any criticism of scotland is not allowed so the censors delete the post.)
Complain about this comment
#239
"...hacked off that the UK has been made to look stupid by an 'ex-dictator and ex-terrorist' and a devolved government. But knows that it is all of their own making."
=================================
I'm not hacked off at all.
Unfortunately under scottish rule we are not allowed to criticise scotland - so my origninal post got censored. I'm very pleased that scotland is copping for flack and hopefully a trade boycott.
I want the London government to keep up distancing us from the decision made by the scots. So long as it keeps being reported as a scottish foul up I'm laughing my socks off.
Complain about this comment
Oldnat wrote:
"Your statement could only be true if Scotland elected more MPs than England! To return to my original comment which you criticised - I didn't say that Nebraska had no influence on (and might even deliver a crucial Electoral College vote for) the US President. I said that they couldn't impose their choice against the will of other states.
So good try, but your argument falls."
But for the petulance of the last remark, I would have let this go. However, ......
I had thought you had something interesting, though wrong, to say; but your correction makes clear that it was an exercise in the blindingly obvious.
Getting back on topic, it seems to me that the last people weighing in on the merits or otherwise of the release are the former investigating offers, current head of the FBI included. World over, this category of person has an horrendeous record for refusing to believe they got it wrong. In the UK, years after Evans was hanged and then postumiously pardoned for a murder committed by Christie I meet serving and former police officers who would insist that Evans had done it. Ditto the "Birmingham Bombers". There is something about the police mentality that seems to have extreme difficulty in letting go of an idea once they have locked on to it. That is not to say that I am sure that the Algerian was not involved, merely that excluding Iran from the picture and making Lybia the be all and end all stinks to high Heaven.
One other thing, showing compassion to one dying terrorist will not "encourage les autres", although doing it en mass to healthy ones as we were encouraged by America to do in respect of those in Northern Ireland, may well have done. But, as the IRA told us, their best recruiting sargeant was the brutalisation of working class catholic males by British squadies sick to death of seeing their mates killed. This suggests that the head of the FBI would do better turning his attention to US treatment of prisoners and bystanders. As to whether it is fair to drag up past US blows against justice in the present context, I think the answer has to be yes. If I lived in a world in which I could do whatever I wanted yet nobody could raise MY past behaviour when I cried foul, the likelyhood of my behaving better in future would be very remote.
Complain about this comment
To those discussing our constituion just remember this. The Scots have always insisted on a separate consitution for Scotland, that was the sticking point in the negotiations leading up to the UK agreement of 1707. However King James the VI of Scotland, who became King James i of England after Lizzies death in 1603 had pretty much the same idea. That's why the first step was to stop the border disputes. However where devolution falls apart was that the 1707 act states quite clearly that there will be one Parliament and that will be at Westminster. It stands to reason that the first breach came into play with the setting up of the Irish Republic in 1921 and the second was the act of devolution, insisted upon largely by Scottish MP's who fail to inderstand the difference between self determination and Independance.
It is of course no surprise that our ex colonial brethren fail to understand this but I have not forgotten this; they got their independance with the assistance of the French, which is why I have to take a very cynical view of the "special relationship" with Britain. Add to this the Scots and Irish and some welsh had little love for their country and instead took their fundamentalism to America, where it has spawned that very fundamentalism in outlook. Frankly there is no difference between a fundamentalist Christian, Jew or Muslim. We have gone past that and America needs to catch up.
Complain about this comment
I find it surprising that nobody on this side of the Atlantic has yet publicly responded to the 'outrage' coming from all levels of the US Administration by quietly reminding them, and us, of the shooting down of an Iranian commercial airliner in 1988 by the USS Vincennes. " Who mistook it for a Tomcat fighter" - this in spite of the ship possessing such highly developed, sophisticated detection equipment that such an error is hard to credit.
I believe that the US response was:
1. to give medals to the captain and crew for ( apparently )their performance during their tour of duty in that Zone - but which singularly failed to mention the episode in question; and
2. to pay compensation of something over $40 million. A cop out, if ever there was one.
Does anyone seriously believe:
a) that the two tragedies are unconnected? and
b) that we should not be looking elsewhere for the authors of the Lockerbie disaster?
Is it too much to expect that someone over here can take up the cudgels on our behalf instead of the allowing the Americans to go on rubbishing us seemingly without let or hindrance.
Their own record of dealing with terrorists is not exactly inspiring.
Complain about this comment
In 1990, President George H. W. Bush awarded Capt. Rogers the Legion of Merit decoration "for exceptionally meritorious conduct in the performance of outstanding service as commanding officer ... from April 1987 to May 1989."
Capt. Rogers was in command the USS Vincennes in 1988 when it shot down Iran Air Flight 655 a civilian airliner over the Strait of Hormuz, killing all 290 passengers and crew aboard, including 66 children.
Bush said of the incident "I'll never apologize for the United States of America, ever. I don't care what the facts are."
What were you saying about Mr Ali al-Megrahi, America!
Complain about this comment
Navarrica, you are quite right it would be quite pointless to bring this up. Wether the downing of the Iranian airliner led to Pan Am 103 will now never be known because the secret files do not now need to aired by virtue of Maghrahi's abandonment of his appeal, we will never know if he was convicted fairly. This is why I consider the American position to this hype so ridiculous because it may be that the Americans and us for that matter know more than we let on. For a man in his position the question could be largely accademic.
I seem to recall than an exhaustive enquiry revealed that the IFF (recognition)got mixed up with an Iranian Airforce sortie, though I would have thought that military codes would have been very different from international Aviation codes. Of course Iranians would have been calling for American heads, but this is the point I meade in a rejected comment to HYS in all this, that the passengers and the families are always no more than pawns in all of this.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
243. jon112uk
Unfortunately under scottish rule we are not allowed to criticise scotland - so my origninal post got censored. I'm very pleased that scotland is copping for flack and hopefully a trade boycott.
I want the London government to keep up distancing us from the decision made by the scots. So long as it keeps being reported as a scottish foul up I'm laughing my socks off.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It's interesting that you're able to laugh about this but Ill assume it's Scotland's apparent embarrassment rather than the actual event that amusing you. What you need to remember is that no matter what the papers would have us believe, and no matter how much the British Government would love to interfere here, Scottish Law is above and beyond the reach of politicians, even Scottish ones. That's why the decision was taken by a Scottish lawyer in accordance with existing principles which have been exercised several times before.
On the previous occasions, before devolution, they decisions were handled by the Secretary of State for Scotland under the criteria that are available to any terminally ill prisoner, irrespective of what crime he or she had committed.
All of this is a far cry from Nixon's decision to pardon the William Calley, convicted of murdering Vietnamese civilians. It is interesting to compare the punishment - Calley served 3 years and was pardoned, Megrahi served 8 years and has been released on licence, not pardoned and effectively has a death sentence hanging over him. If he hadn't been so ill, he wouldn't have been released and we wouldn't be having this debate.
I just find it difficult to accept that somehow the Justice Secretary has "shamed the nation" for following a legal process backed up by precedent, yet everyone is happy to accept the US President's pardoning of a soldier who unquestionably committed the crime, when there are nagging doubts over Megrahi's guilt.
On second thoughts, I can't find anything here to laugh about,
Complain about this comment
233. At 4:02pm on 23 Aug 2009, fabulousoldwoman wrote:
Does that mean we release all criminals who are sick and terminally ill?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Actually if tried and convicted under Scots law, and are within 3 months of dying and request it - Yes!
No request that met the criteria has ever been refused.
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS