Who benefits from release?
A question. Cui bono? For whose good? Whose interest is served?
A question we might now reasonably pose with regard to the pending decision affecting Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi.
I know - I have been told often enough - that Kenny MacAskill, the Scottish Justice Secretary, is acting in a "quasi-judicial" role with regard to the fate of the man convicted of the Lockerbie bombing.
This point is usually made in order either to explain that this is an individual decision for Mr MacAskill or, equally commonly, to rebut suggestions of any political deal surrounding this decision.
However much it may be true that the decision is quasi-judicial, there is another truth. Kenny MacAskill is not a judge. He is an elected politician, rightly subject to public opinion and, in particular, the views of his voters.
So, again, cui bono? What interests would be served by a decision to return Megrahi to Libya?
Palpably, the prisoner's own interests would be served. Either if he is returned to Libya to serve the remainder of his sentence or, more explicitly, if he is freed on compassionate grounds to spend what remains of his life with his family.
Merciful liberty
Given that the Libyan government has pressed for his return to Libya under prisoner transfer, one must also say that the interests of Tripoli would be served by a decision to concede to that request or the alternative of merciful liberty.
But who else? It would seem that, in one respect at least, the interests of the United Kingdom government and security services have already been served by the ending of the Megrahi appeal. London does not want the disclosure of further documents relating to the case, as demanded by Megrahi's legal team.
How about the United States? Just as with London, it is conceivable that there are interests in Washington who welcome the final closure of the case, the ending of the appeal.
Against that, one must set the views voiced by sundry senators and, most influentially, by the US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton.
At one level, their demand that Megrahi stay in prison in Scotland may simply be a reflection of constituency interests in the US, an expression of the disquiet expressed by US relatives of those who died in Pan Am 103.
Ms Clinton's Senate seat included Syracuse University. Thirty five students from Syracuse died in the tragedy on 21 December 1988.
Scottish ministers must hope that such discontent is primarily aimed at the option of prisoner transfer and not the more likely avenue of compassionate release.
That, I would suggest, is likely to be a tough sell. US opinion may simply find it difficult to understand why a man convicted of involvement in the death of 270 people, including US citizens, has been released. They may focus upon the fact of release - and not upon the mitigating argument of mercy.
Which brings us to Scottish interest. One again, cui bono? Whose interests are served here?
Ending the appeal
Remember that Scottish ministers are adamant that there has been no deal, there will be no deal. They insist that the issues of Megrahi's fate and the abandonment of his appeals against conviction and sentence are entirely separate.
Plus they argue that the Scottish Government - by contrast with others - has no interest in securing the abandonment of the appeals.
If we accept that at face value, then that means that the Scottish Government does not seek to claim any gain from the ending of the Megrahi appeal. No governmental interest is served.
Further, ministers will not, cannot claim that they have acted, covertly or openly, in the interests of co-operation with the UK Government.
So, to put it bluntly, what does Scotland get? Individual gratitude, perhaps, for an individual act of mercy. Collective gratitude from Libya. An end to responsibility for a controversial and dying prisoner.
Against that, one must set the prospect of resentment in the United States and disquiet among other relatives who still want to get at the facts surrounding the case.
The first should not be over-stated now - and may decline with time and careful handling. The second may at least be addressed, if not answered, by ministerial indications that they remain relaxed about the prospect of an inquiry into the tragedy.
Still and all, right now, it may be difficult to market this as a particularly good deal for Scotland, should the Lockerbie convict be released.
I'm 
~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~34~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
Brian
For a blog in aestivation, surely this is pushing the boat out?
Complain about this comment
IT got away from me. It should have ended - Cui bono?
Complain about this comment
So what, Brian, are you saying here? Is MacAskill in a no win situation? It certainly looks like you are saying this. So who is going to benefit from this?
Until the full facts are released regarding his conviction we can never know if there was a behind the scenes deal struck with Libya. Of course, we are never going to get the full details and this is what makes me suspicious. If the man is guilty then let him rot in jail, if he is innocent then let's see the evidence that he wanted to put before the appeal courts. Could it be that he does have some evidence to prove his innocence but certain parties would rather see him released rather than information being given to the public which may embarrass certain people and/or states. If he is released then we are never going to know the truth of what happened to those poor people who were murdered.
Complain about this comment
The question is a reasonable one only in so far as the initial answer that Mr Megrahi himself will benefit from a decision to release him on either set of grounds is correct. However it is also a dishonest question in that there has been no political decision to release him. As I pointed out on the previous thread Mr MacAskill did not initiate the present process, Mr Megrahi himself did so by asking to be released. Mr MacAskill must consider that request, not as a matter of personal choice or political expediency but because he is legally required to do so.
If he bows to some of the near hysterical pressure from home and abroad to continue Mr Megrahi’s incarceration other than in accordance with that due process that will turn him into a political prisoner rather than a criminal one.
Complain about this comment
The BBC has been very quiet re our stand in PM, the unelected Lord and everything else Mandelson, meeting with Colonel Gaddafi's sons at the Rothschild's in Corfu. All seems very convenient for a stitch up of the SNP!
If he gets released I wonder what the payback will be from the Libyan's on one side and the American's on the other?
With all due respect to the SNP it would appear that they have been done up like a kipper. James Gordon Brown must be grinning like a Cheshire cat whilst on holiday!
I wonder if Hillary was primed by the powers that be in London. It allows her to get in a cheap shot, sound all righteous at home on the tv and in the media comfortable that it is all putting pressure on the Scottish Government and helping out her mates in London whilst all the time doing herself no harm.
I wonder how many US companies that invest in Scotland or are thinking of doing so will step into the fray as well and express opinions?
Complain about this comment
Who benefits from the release?
What a very strange question Brian. It almost sounds as if Kenny MacAskill went fishing around looking for a dizzyingly complex, high profile, controversial prisoner transfer case to benefit the SNP.
In fact he's considering it as he is required to do so as Justice secretary in Scotland.
To be honest I would have thought that some in office observation of Glen, a quick look at statements by Tavish, McBride, Foulkes et al would have given you a pointer that (in the run up to the decision being made ), the unionist nat basher alliance have been the main beneficiaries up to now.
We can discuss who benefits when we know what the decision actually is.
I wonder if you'd be on your third speculative blog about it if the Grey man was First Minister. Would he have been treated any differently by the BBC and the rest of the unionist media while he made up his mind?
Would Grey have even been allowed a sniff at making the final decision?
The BBC started this media frenzy which has made MacAskill's job even more difficult. Your slightly detached tone is therefore a bit surreal.
Incidentally , for some reason I always picture you benignly typing away at your desk, taking pains to be fair and balanced with Glen lashed to the table leg on a sturdy chain.
Complain about this comment
The SNP should do what is required by Scottish Law.
I couldn't give 2 hoots about what American Politicians think... they gave up that right with all their previous war mongering lies (Ditto the London Unionist Parties).
Kenny MacAskill, follow the Scottish Judicial protocols, ignore the press and especially ignore political posturing from Obama and Brown abroad.
Saor Alba.
Complain about this comment
apologies, meant to write @6 "if the Grey man was Justice Secretary".
Complain about this comment
Scottish Law is independent of Westminster and its practice and custom were reserved by the Act of Union in 1707.
While this is something Lard Foulkes and his pal Elmer Fudd would prefer not to acknowledge in their 'slythey toading' of Westminster that is the actual reality of any decision on the Libyan.
The problem for Labour - as usual - is they are not in control and they do not like it.
Complain about this comment
Could it be that Scotland will gain internationally ?
Seen as its own country , making its own decisions and not in thrall to American Foreign policy of the gung ho variety, which seems to consist of " we are right , everyone else is wrong,and if your not with us your agin' us.
And the "lesser" mortals of this world just have to grin and bear it."
I have to agree with the person who suggested that the US geography lessons include invasion as a teaching resource.Unfortunately the UK followed suit.
Could it be that a Christian country shows mercy to a dying man?
Could it be that an innocent man has been incarcerated, used and abused?
Could it be that Scottish justice was lacking in some way?
Tell you what though , " Lessons will be learned" " We must move on" and that old favourite " it wisnae me , a big boy did it and ran away" etc. etc.
And truth dies again.
Complain about this comment
Scotland will gain, of course. Okay, not immediately, but once the nonsense and reteric, the knee-jerk reactions and fake outrage have all died down, the peoples of Scotland will be to say that we have a Justice Secretary who does the right thing regardless of the political pressures put upon him, a legal system that doesn't bow down to foreign powers (other than when it is oblidged to by laws made at Westminster). That is something to take pride in and I believe this whole situation will increase Scotland's reputation.
Complain about this comment
Brian
Until we know the decision, you are milking this topic.
Is it because Mandelson fed a story to a mate in BBC London instead of you?
Had the initial leak come from the Scottish Government, you are the obvious person to have released it.
Who benefits? Not you it would seem!
Complain about this comment
"Given that the Libyan government has pressed for his return to Libya under prisoner transfer, one must also say that the interests of Tripoli would be served by a decision to concede to that request or the alternative of merciful liberty."
Quite so. Furthermore, the timing of any imminent hand-over of Megrahi could not be better for Gaddafi: the 40th anniversary of his regime, which he will be celebrating loudly on September 1st as a triumph over the West.
Whether we like it or not, it is arguably appropriate to take into consideration the political context in which even quasi-judicial decisions are taken by government ministers, as it is the duty of government to consider the welfare of the whole community which it represents even when it is deliberating over the welfare of an individual, as in this case. A judicious ministerial consideration of the Megrahi case should balance his interests against those of Scotland, in other words. Not necessarily? It would appear to be a moot point, admittedly.
It should be apparent by now that releasing Megrahi would have consequences the implications of which cannot responsibly be ignored by the Scottish Government. 'Cui bono'? Releasing Megrahi would benefit him, of course, as has been remarked, and the Libyan regime. What harm would it cause and whose interests would be harmed? Release him and find out if you are in any doubt. The answer will not be long in coming.
Meanwhile, the Justice Secretary is away home to ponder the matter further, presumably, as the international press takes more of an interest in Scotland and its governance. Le Monde, for instance, has just published a very balanced and fairly well informed article on the Megrahi affair by Marc Roche, who sympathizes with Mr MacAskill's predicament, reminding him in his final paragraph of the motto displayed on the front of the High Court building in Edinburgh: persevere! Has he got that right? I haven't checked.
'Cui bono?' There you see that such interest is currently being shown in Scotland that one of the most respected newspapers on the planet has sent one of its best reporters to the Royal Mile to find out what the motto is that is displayed at the front of the High Court building. Let us hope it wasn't raining at the time.
Complain about this comment
Greetings from Raleigh, North Carolina. Scotland will gain because Kenny MacAskill will employ his impressive skills in logic to arrive at the right decision based upon the law and his powers as Justice Secretary. So, whatever the decision, Scotland gains.
As for what America thinks, that should not be a consideration in any case, but I can tell you that this corner of America thinks nothing about it. It is certainly not a "Skip Gates moment."
Complain about this comment
#13
CORRECTION
'You' is frankly_francophone, if you don't mind.
Incidentally, apropos of 'persevere' in my #13, the more appropriate translation in this case would probably be 'be steadfast', on reflection.
Complain about this comment
#6 GrassyKnollington
"Incidentally , for some reason I always picture you benignly typing away at your desk, taking pains to be fair and balanced with Glen lashed to the table leg on a sturdy chain."
ROFL - an enduring image.
Post or reactive moderation for all except CBeebies, please!
Complain about this comment
#5, Ian_the_Chopper
"The BBC has been very quiet re our stand in PM, the unelected Lord and everything else Mandelson"
Unnoticed by many, Chancellor of the Exchequer Alistair Darling is not subbing for the PM!
Complain about this comment
Brian is it possible that your are going overboard with this topic?
I understand its serious nature, but until we have a decision one way or the other surely there cant be much to be said? Lets wait, give Scottish Justice Sec. time, peace and isolation from 'media pressures' to come to a reasonable decision.
As I believe MacAskill will.
But who would benefit from his release; now that his second appeal has been dropped?
Well not Scottish justice anyway; not because of his release- but because of the dropping of the second appeal.
But it is compassionate to let a dieing man see his family in his own nation before he dies. But until he is otherwise cleared, me must treat him as guilty.
Complain about this comment
no one is going to gain from anything, not morally, as a lot of people have died , its a lose lose situation. The only right thing to do is the legal and morally right outcome, which is a decision based on Scots law, because it happened here in Scotland. If others score points out of it or want to appear to have done the right thing or said the right words so be it, but they will have lost too.
and the anti Scottish dross being dredged up must have the shadow people wringing their hands with glee http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/nickrobinson/2009/08/devolution_dile.html
I guess we should going by the authors piece hand back any hopes and thoughts of ruling ourselves and say sorry massa
Complain about this comment
I agree.
Let's have the real debate once the decision has been made.
After that, the public, political and international reaction will give everyone a better idea who will benefit.
Complain about this comment
I am nervous about the cancer. I happen to know the doctors who were involved in the diagnosis of General Pinochet (he that had acute Alzheimer's (sic)).
Their compassion allowed him, when he arrived back in Chile, to exit the plane and inspect a parade.....I watched the footage. I have known patients with alzhiemer's syndrome and none of them could have done what he did...need I say more.
The last thing we want for international justice's sake is to see something similar in Libya - given that, despite my doubts about the verdict, he has been convicted of a heinous crime.
I have also seen people in the latter stages of prostate cancer were it has spread, as indeed it must to kill, to other vital structures: it is awful; the pain can be excruciating; relief only by ever increasing doses of morphine; the body looking like that of a holocaust victim. If he is in this state I would believe he is close to death, if not....well?
Complain about this comment
Whether he is released or not, Scotland does not stand to benefit. In this world mercy is seen as weakness by the forces of evil ; not showing mercy will bring condemnation from the same people. Perhaps the decision should have been left to the relatives of the victims, though I suspect they rightly would be little inclined to show mercy. The only people who appear to be going to benefit if he is released are multinational companies south of the border who may be able to trade with a grateful Lybia after Lord Peter's overtures . " May " being the operative word ; knowing the Arab capacity for "honest" horse trading, they are liable to take the benefit of our weakness and then give the business to someone else. As far as the conspiracy theories are concerned, it's like the moon landing theory ; garbage, the suggestion that the police, the judiciary and indeed the government falsified or hid evidence is the height of nonsense.
Complain about this comment
Brian
You ask who gains? The answer surely must be justice gains, where a terminally ill man is shown mercy and compassion. The only doubt I have is given the extraordinary nature of the crime he stands convicted of and the deaths of 270 people. The decision should be announced tomorrow, then we will have a lot of wailing from the usual sirens.However a am confident that what ever the decision MacAskill will have a well reasoned and logical rationale for reaching it.
Complain about this comment
The Scottish Government, isolated as it is from 'dealing' directly with foreign goivernments ( la Clintons' very public intervention nonetheless) can not benefit unless it can be seen to act fairly with Mr Magrahi.
Scottish Justice was not seen in its best light in the way it was rolled over to hold the original peculiar court without a jury or open evidence which convicted Magrahi, but that was in the day when Scotland was without a government it could truly call its' own.
The decision can only be taken on humanitarian grounds given the contamination of all the evidence by competing international political interests.
I deplore those who despise those humanitarian grounds on old testament reasonings of vengeance.
It is interesting all the same to hear the musings of the conservative party (as in Nick Robinson's blog) who are suggesting that the devolution settlement surely did not contemplate decisions which had foreign policy ramifications. Will the conservative and labour parties conspire (or have they already conspired) to limit Scottish justice where its' decisions have aforesaid foreign policy consequences?
Complain about this comment
#22 kaybraes
Unlike you, I haven't seen the evidence that would have been produced at the appeal so I don't know whether it is nonsense or not. Can you provide links to the documents?
That "the government falsified or hid evidence is the height of nonsense". Again I don't know about the Lockerbie killings, but I did see Labour's dodgy dossier which pushed us into the Iraq war, and I'm surprised by your touching faith in the purity of politicians.
Complain about this comment
#22 kaybraes
"knowing the Arab capacity for "honest" horse trading".
How strange! You think that a large group of people share a bad morality because they have some "ethnic" linkage?
The "R" word comes to mind.
Complain about this comment
Tony Blair may have been classed as the Bush poodle and did all he could to obey the Yanks so come on Kenny call it as you see it and don't bow to Broon or Clinton,its just a pity we can't get all the evidence out in the open maybe Brian you should be pressing for that to happen.
Complain about this comment
Enough about the crack pot tory-labour conspiracy theories to 'do over' Scots- its all tosh. Anyone thinking such utter rubbish are foolish (remember the GE anyone!!!???)
Complain about this comment
So either Hillary isn't in the loop as to the contents of "further documents" or she's just making noise for her personal political ends, because she knows that Mr al-Megrahi is returning to Libya Thursday?
Complain about this comment
# 22 kaybraes
I admire your blind respect for the purity of the law. I, personally, don't hold the law in the same regard as you do. I had an occasion in my youth where I was standing at a bus stop after the match, waiting for the bus to take me home, when a black Maria pulled up and dragged me and three other young lads into the back. We were charged with a breach of the peace and fined £5 each apart from one of the lads whose dad could afford a solicitor. He never even appeared in court. I was innocently waiting for a bus and ended up with a criminal record. So, if the police are willing to do that to a 14 year old boy, and I am sure that this still happens, then I cannot imagine the police and procurators being 100% faithful to the letter of the law when it comes to international terrorism!
This wouldn't be the first time that the police, with the aid of prosecutors have stitched someone else up for a crime that they did not commit. How many times have you heard of people spending years in jail only for the law to admit years later that the conviction was unsound?
I am not saying that the judges or even the procurators were guilty of anything but they can only react to the information that they were given. However, I wonder if they knew about the CIA involvement and the drugs?
Complain about this comment
# 28 deanthetory
Surely you are not denying that the Tory party (UK) have a policy of retaining the Union? Also, you would have to admit, and DC has made this clear, is that he wants to keep Scotland within the Union. If that be the case then the Tories, when they get into power next year, will do all they can to keep Scotland within the Union, even if that means using dirty tricks similar to what GB and his cronies are doing.
There is nothing wrong to believing in the Union but I think that Scotland would be better out of it and I'm beginning to suspect that you may have a hidden desire for an independent Scotland, but not necessarily through the SNP.
Complain about this comment
#28 deanthetory
Did anyone say that the Unionist (don't forget the Lib-Dems) coalition was there to 'do over' Scots? I thought that it was to 'do over' the SNP.
Politics is about power, and there are alliances of opposites on one political dimension within as well as between parties, in order to attain power.
Some parties have a clear political goal - SNP, SSP among them. The Tories are more flexible, but essentially exist in some form in every country to ensure that the "haves" in society continue to retain that status. Labour and Liberal used to have principles but when they transmogrified into New Labour and Lib-Dems seemed to abandon anything other than electing their elite into power.
Of course, you have a working relationship with Labour in opposing what you want amongst other things! If your party was a right wing independence party you would have a working relationship with the SNP. Have a look at politics in Catalonia.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Why on earth can he not announce the decision this evening on the news?
We now have an almost further day of speculation.
Whatever decision he makes will be wrong to some.
Thoughts for both sides:
Compassion is important, as it prevents people sinking to the level of those who carry out such atrocities. It can get people to work together to eliminate extremism.
On the other hand....
I was involved in the clear up as well. I've seen the photographs that were NOT released to the press. Some bodies were never found. Megrahi will have the priviledge of receving a decent burial/funeral.
There are two sides to this story.
Complain about this comment
I don't normally post on blogs, but I feel I would like to add an important tuppenceworth to this debate.
It concerns an article by our own Tam Dalyell in the Mail on Sunday this weekend. Whatever you think of either of these two, the article was interesting to say the least.
In it, Dalyell makes the extraordinary claim that the US and UK knew that the bomber was not Megrahi, but an Iranian. He also states that the US "allowed" the bombing of the Pan Am flight as retaliation for the USS Vincennes shooting down an Iranian airliner, after the Iranians had threatened to "blow ten American airliners from the sky"
Dalyell claims that the US was determined to pin the blame on Libya, since they were a "pariah" state. Don't forget too, that Reagan ordered F-111 bombers to bomb Gadaffi in his tent a few years before this as well.
So an extraordinary claim, yes, but Dalyell points out that the US warned its diplomats not to fly with Pan Am during that christmas period, and he even claims that US troops and foreign diplomats were ordered off the doomed plane at the last minute, and poor students allowed to go in their place. Dalyell claims that the only reason the US want Megrahi to stay in Scotland, is to hide these facts.
Whatever you think of Tam Dalyell, his statements cannot be ignored.
Is this really what all the fuss is about - that the US know the identity (and nationality) of the real Lockerbie bomber?
Above all though, I don't take kindly to the idea of Mrs. Clinton thinking she can dictate to a democratically elected Scottish parliament.
Who does she think Kenny MacAskill is - Tony Blair?
Complain about this comment
#22 Kaybraes
I, despite any number of examples of fallibility, still have faith that a justice system can work.
But as has been acknowledged for thousands of years, the basic premise for it to succeed is the division of power.
That such division is sadly lacking in western democracy right up to the fourth estate is clearly demonstrated in the following link, that I have borrowed, hopefully with their acquiescence, from a wise fellow poster.
http://www.lrb.co.uk/v29/n12/mile01_.html
I urge you to read it in full. The essential facts can be widely corroborated and much of it has featured in Dr Jim Swire's letters over the years.
Remember he lost a daughter in the atrocity, yet now believes Megrahi was hung out to dry.
Complain about this comment
31. gedguy2
"even if that means using dirty tricks similar to what GB and his cronies are doing."
I have more faith in my party leaders, I believe that they would not stoop to any lengths to preserve the union.
If any of you where not awares ConHome ran a poll of our projected party candidates for the GE and it found that the vast majority described themselves as only "slightly unionist". So I'd protest anyone who believes that the majority of future Con MPs would be "unionist till we die".
Indeed this may not apply to the front bench, who very well could be more ideologically committed to the union than the broad party membership and future MPs.
32. oldnat
"Did anyone say that the Unionist (don't forget the Lib-Dems) coalition was there to 'do over' Scots? I thought that it was to 'do over' the SNP."
Perhaps we are both suffering from political paranoia asto each others party intentions?
"but essentially exist in some form in every country to ensure that the "haves" in society continue to retain that status"
I disagree with this point. The Conservatives did more to challenge the established interests of those at the top end of British society.
The 1979-1997 government saw (for all of its many faults) the greatest expansion of social mobility than ever before, matched by the end of the elites monopoly over share ownership (seeing share ownership go from just 7% of pop. owning shares to a much more enfranchised 25% by 1990).
I simply cannot accept that the Conservatives protect the highest earners when such record achievements demonstrate our enfranchising the many in the economic life of the nation!
Complain about this comment
It's quite simple Brian: JUSTICE would be served!
The Unionist lackey press has no interest in that.
Complain about this comment
35. At 8:53pm on 19 Aug 2009, cooleyn wrote:
I would suggest that, following the expenses revelation, Mr Dayell's comments are ignored. 18 grand for a bookcase? How many shelves does that make?
The news channels are going to be rife with speculation tomorrow. There will be extended news bulletins as well.
But I don't think MacAskill is under any pressure for Westminster, as Salmond would be shouting about this from the rooftops.
Complain about this comment
Apparently, the Scottish Government has issued a statement according to which a decision on Megrahi will be announced tomorrow.
In the meantime, I have been reading a fascinating publication which glories in the name Asharq Al-Awsat and is described as the leading Arabic daily. It reports today that a high-level Libyan official expects al-Megrahi's return to his country within days after his release from imprisonment in Scotland because of the deterioration in his health. The Libyan official, who asked Asharq al-Awsat not to identify him, declared in a telephone call from Tripoli that al-Megrahi would be the main guest at the celebrations that the Libyan authorities will be holding to mark the 40th anniversary of Col al-Gaddafi's coming to power in 1969.
He revealed that al-Gaddafi and senior Libyan Government officials as well as al-Megrahi's family would be on hand to welcome him on his return to Libya from Scotland. The Libyan official described the Lockerbie bomber (a convicted mass murderer, remember) as a national hero and pointed out that the Libyan state has been following his case unceasingly, constantly showing an interest in his state of health and being assured about what he called the good care accorded to his family during his absence.
He maintained that al-Megrahi had become a model for the Libyan citizen who sacrificed himself for his homeland and country by voluntarily accepting the sentence of the international court in The Hague that convicted him, "contrary to the truth". He stressed that al-Megrahi is a fully qualified citizen, will have full citizenship rights, and "will absolutely not be treated as a prisoner", adding that he would undergo complete medical examination due to his deteriorating physical and mental conditions.
On its part, a source in al-Megrahi's family told Asharq Al-Awsat that the family was waiting for his return as soon as possible and praised the role of the al-Gaddafi Development Foundation, which is led by the Libyan leader's second son, Saif-al-Islam, in returning al-Megrahi to his homeland and family. It added: "We thank Engineer Saif-al-Islam al-Gaddafi for all his positive efforts in this and also thank the foundation he leads for its constant care for him and his family through his years in jail."
It would appear to be worth repeating and bearing in mind that, according to information received by Asharq Al-Awsat, Megrahi "will absolutely not be treated as a prisoner" in Libya. A transfer to a Libyan prison appears, therefore, to be ruled out. As for releasing him unconditionally, remember that Megrahi "would be the main guest at the celebrations that the Libyan authorities will be holding to mark the 40th anniversary of Col. al-Gaddafi's coming to power in 1969", whether you think that a man with prostate cancer should by partying or not, and that he would apparently be treated as a national hero. How should one expect the victims' families to feel about that when they see the television pictures?
In view of the foregoing, does anyone seriously expect the partying Libyans to pause to appreciate a Scottish gesture of Christian charity? Take off those rose-tinted spectacles. The Libyans will be too busy praising the Gaddafi family for triumphing once again over the infidel. Surely you have heard that Gaddafi has been threatening economic sanctions against the UK if Megrahi is not released?
Virtue is its own reward, I hear someone say. It had better be.
Complain about this comment
There seems to be two possibilities: Megrahi was offered up as a sacrificial lamb by Gadaffi so Libya could return to the international fold or Megrahi was involved, but was doing the donkey work for Gadaffi and possibly the Iranian government without much say in the matter. Do we blame the pilot of Enola Gay personally for all the civilian deaths in Hiroshima?
Incidentally, is anyone serving a life sentence for bringing down that Iranian airliner? Another case of white Christians being of more value than brown Muslims methinks.
Complain about this comment
What would William Wallace do?
Complain about this comment
# 40 frankly_francophone
I would agree with you but you can look at the celebrations in another way; what if he was innocent? What if everything Gaddafi has been saying is the truth? The celebrations would then take on another slant.
I am still not convinced that he was guilty of the charges. Have you read impeachblair3's # 36 link here? It is quite interesting and would seem to support the idea that there was a miscarriage of justice. I'm not too happy with this case. It stinks of big power games and reeks of corruption. We've been lied to about this case from the very start and it is not stopping now.
Complain about this comment
41. At 9:39pm on 19 Aug 2009, Rover1976 wrote:
There seems to be two possibilities: Megrahi was offered up as a sacrificial lamb by Gadaffi so Libya could return to the international fold or Megrahi was involved, but was doing the donkey work for Gadaffi and possibly the Iranian government without much say in the matter. Do we blame the pilot of Enola Gay personally for all the civilian deaths in Hiroshima?
Incidentally, is anyone serving a life sentence for bringing down that Iranian airliner? Another case of white Christians being of more value than brown Muslims methinks.
-------------
You could also ask if all the Japanese war criminals were caught and convicted for mass murder of allied prisoners.
What about the murder of PC Yvonne Fletcher?
I do not condone the shooting down of the airliner by any means, but let's stick the to the current issue, as we would end up with examples of atrocities by almost any country - USA and UK included - you could name.
Complain about this comment
Well! the dynamic duo Brownedov and Oldnat have took the entire NR blog on! and I have to say, they do have the upper hand so far.
On this very delicate issue, I would like to here more from Dr Jim Swire.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Swire
Complain about this comment
#45 derekbarker
Thanks. Jim Swire has always struck me as being morally superior to any politician of any party. He has always seemed to be a GOOD man.
Complain about this comment
#43 gedguy2
Once upon a time, so I understand (someone correct me if I am wrong), there were in Scotland, as elsewhere, two verdicts that a court could arrive at in any case being tried. They were 'proven' and 'not proven'. Either the court declared after due deliberation that the case against the accused had been proved or that it had not been proved.
Whether the accused was actually innocent was, it seems to me, implicitly recognized to be something that it was beyond the power of the court to establish, the best that it could be expected to do being to determine, by the standard of proof that it was deemed appropriate to apply, whether or not the case against the accused had been proved. This seems to me to be reasonable, if society accepts that there is a limit to what can be known with certainty in some circumstances, indeed in any circumstances.
I don't know whether Mr Megrahi is guilty of the crime with which he was charged. What I do know is that a court found the case against him to have been proved in accordance with the standard of proof which was applicable and that the verdict of that court has not been overturned by due process. It seems to me, therefore, that the verdict of the court should be respected. This means, inter alia, not treating the convicted person as a national hero. That might be appropriate if the verdict had been overturned by due process, but that is not the case.
As the case against Megrahi's co-accused was found by the court not to have been proved, it was not objectionable for him to be welcomed back to Libya as some kind of hero, or so one may reasonably argue, I think. This is not the position in which Megrahi finds himself. To treat him as a national hero is to declare that the verdict of the court is not respected and that the court is not respected. It says more than that, of course, but we need not go into that.
Complain about this comment
#46
No prob's Oldnat, the funny thing is, that over on the NR thread they seem to have reverted to Lennon lyrics and UKIP slogans, what an odd mixture.
Complain about this comment
#35 'but Dalyell points out that the US warned its diplomats not to fly with Pan Am during that christmas period, and he even claims that US troops and foreign diplomats were ordered off the doomed plane at the last minute'
Funny enough although not funny in the context of what happened, this supposedly happened the day before and on 9/11. America had intellegence that something big was going to happen but did nothing. Like ive said already take a look at 'Loose Change ' and make you own minds up.
Complain about this comment
Nick Robinsons newslog never seems to amaze me! It attracts all sorts of rightist loonies.
Complain about this comment
I dont care about compassion or what Hilary Clinton says. The facts are that the people of lockerbie and on the plane were shown no compassion when they were murdered! He should die in jail and be buried in an unmarked grave!
Complain about this comment
Brian:
I think that only one benefits from the released of the Lockerbie Bomber..Will be the bomber himself, since, he can spend the remaining days of his life. In his own country of Libya...
=Dennis Junior=
Complain about this comment
When justice is abrogated, rule of law becomes politicised.
This man has previously been found culpable of crime by a Scottish jury. To release him as political hero to Libya before his full sentence is complete yet again marginalizes justice. The lost lives of the 270 should matter the most in this case. Not subordinate issues of criminals, not political exigencies and bleeding hearts.
Complain about this comment
#50, deanthetory wrote:
"Nick Robinsons newslog ... attracts all sorts of rightist loonies."
Pot, kettle, black.
Complain about this comment
#53 JESCO58
"When justice is abrogated, rule of law becomes politicised.
This man has previously been found culpable of crime by a Scottish jury."
Welcome, newbie. Your first statement is correct, but the second is untrue. Do check your facts to save embarrassment.
The man's trial in Camp Zeist had no jury but three judges.
Any web search of "Lockerbie trial" will confirm that. If you look at this website's 'Sad day for Scottish justice', you can watch the Rev. John Mosey, who lost his daughter in the bombing and watched the trial. I also recommend you to look at Dr. Hans Köchler's report of his observer mission on the trial.
Of course, they may both be mistaken but they are certainly worth considering.
Post or reactive moderation for all except CBeebies, please!
Complain about this comment
51 , even though he is innocent?
God help us all if that is the kind of justice we get on a doubtful conviction.
53, you obviously know less, there was no Scottish jury.Had there been the doubtful conviction might have remained doubtful therefore NOT PROVEN.
Complain about this comment
#44, Neil_Small147 wrote:
"Do we blame the pilot of Enola Gay personally for all the civilian deaths in Hiroshima?"
Or do we commend the pilot for the millions of lives which were saved (or, at least, not lost) as a result of the hastening of the end of WW2?
Complain about this comment
Brian,
You seem to have plenty theories about the Scottish Government and Scotland in general these days (most of them negative or trying to cast doubt on Scotlands ability to succeed in the big bad world), but very little in the way of facts.
Do you have any theories on what may have actually happened to Flight 103? Might be worth asking Gordon B if he has any knowledge of this?
Anyway, you are a "political" reporter. Shouldn't this story be covered by a legal reporter, or are you trying to politise this process along with your labour chums?
Complain about this comment
The prisoner might be a pitiless murderer. I am not, and in that repect I'm typical of most Scots. We should release him on compassionate grounds.
Complain about this comment
Maybe its my imagination, but Alex Salmond appears to be keeping an uncharacteristic low profile in this matter. He must be hoping that al Megrahi has a swift demise and does not have a miraculous recovery a la Ernest Saunders. If that happens then he can always blame the UK government.
Complain about this comment
Sorry- cui bono with the release of a train robber dying of pneumonia? Is charity not sufficient. This has been a political football for years, let the man die in peace.
Complain about this comment
I believe we all benefit; the Scottish judicial system is based on justice and not retribution. It is there to ensure that crimes are not repeated and those convicted are rehabilitated. It is there to take the responsibility away from the victims, otherwise we would be just as well saying to them here is your man, do your worst. This man is dying, he should be with his family; the pain of loss felt by the families of those killed will surely not be relieved by allowing him to die in custody, far away from his country and his family. That is cruel and cruelty does not play a part in the Scottish justicial system.
Complain about this comment
JESC058 wrone in #53 that "This man has previously been found culpable of crime by a Scottish jury" sadly he was not, but by three Judges sitting together.
There has been numerous distinguished legal brains in Scotland and elsewhere who have questioned the standard of evidence which was presented at the trial and have considered that the verdict could be "unsafe".
Kenny MacAskill has a VERY difficult decision to make which could potentially destroy his political career irrespective on how he decides, he is damned if he does and damned if he does not. The only thing he can do is immediately call for a totally independant enquiry to review ALL the evidence, whether produced at the trial or hidden from public view - including ALL the concerns of the (date I say it) the conspiracy theorists. He must force the US and Westminster Governments to produce EVERYTHING, whether governed by "security concerns" or not. However in doing that he may open Pandoras box, which might not be such a bad thing.
It is not just Kenny MacAskill's career at stake, it is the honour and reputation of the Scottish Legal System and the whole country.
Scotland MUST be seen to have done the right thing. We might be a small insignificant country in the "big picture", but we in this situation can weild a lot of power and influence.
NEMO ME IMPUNE LACESSIT.
Complain about this comment
Kenny 'Soft-Touch' Mackaskill strikes again, he does seem to like putting prisoners rights over those of the victims.
What I find even more interesting are those lauding the fact he is resisting pressure from the U.S.... because of course the SNP has a history of this, like forcing through Trumps golf course over the wishes of local democratically elected officials. But we wont get into that...
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Who benefits? We all would: his release would be the act of civilised state capable of showing mercy and compassion in the face of terrorism and fear. And in the current climate, that would be little short of a miracle.
Obama talked much of hope before his election - the release of Megrahi to serve out the rest of his sentence in Lybia would be an act of hope.
Complain about this comment
Who benefits? We the British people benefit.
We have this problem in the UK, where we're hated internationally because of the Labour government's Bush-like stance on how we must hate everyone that hates us. The Labour government for the last 12 years has been a government of war, and revenge, much like the US was under Bush. This has no made the UK more secure, it has had the opposite effect, it has made us a target.
The SNP would be doing the UK as a whole a favour by showing that not all of the UK is about revenge and furthering of hate-based agendas. By showing compassion that would surely win some brownie points amongst the less radical in the middle east, and ultimately could benefit security of the UK as a whole as more moderate people may be willing to step forward with real information as a thanks for doing a good deed and letting a dying man's family spend his last years with him.
The US, as a nation, for the most part does not get this. They aren't used to the idea of compassion, they believe strongly that if someone wrongs them it's best to wrong them back, and then get wronged back in return and keep wronging each other indefinitely, causing more hatred, more radicalisation of their opponents and ultimately, less security and more problems in the world.
The SNP should not bow down to US demands to follow the path of hatred that they themselves are so used to following, if they do it will be a tragedy for humanity.
Show some compassion, holding this dying man in jail can bring no good to the world, only satisfy revenge of people unable to show compassion. Most British/Scottish victims seem to support his release and ultimately, a Scottish judge should work for the will of the Scottish people, not the Americans. If he is released however, there will be those who are bitter for revenge in the US, who will show anger, but ultimately will get over it. That price is worth it for the benefit of a family who may otherwise never see their son, father, husband again and for the respect that will gain amongst those who already hate us.
Complain about this comment
# 47 frankly_francophone
I am impressed at the way in which you have avoided the question put you in my # 43. Just because three Scottish judges found him guilty, upon the evidence shown to them, does not mean to say that he is guilty. Mistakes have been made in the past in other court cases and I have a strong suspicion that this is one of those cases. Gadaffi seems to think that he is innocent and, looking at it from his point of view, then a celebration of the return of an innocent man seems a reasonable excuse to have a party.
However, if the man is guilty of this crime then I think it is an insult to the memory of those that died that he is to be released. Justice would demand that he rot in jail. I would find it difficult to allow a man who has murdered so many people to allow the word 'compassion' in any sentence relating to him.
Personally, I would like to see an appeal held so that we, the public and family members of those who have died, can view this new evidence that his legal advisors seem to have access to. This may clear up some of the muddied waters. However, both you and I know that this is not going to happen and we are, instead, going to witness a fudge up of the justice system in Scotland for the benefit of a deal done by the UK government. I must say that this stitch up of MacAskill is a brilliant move by Labour. MacAskill is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. The only light at the end of MacAskill's tunnel is to let the legal process take its course.
Complain about this comment
Albertobalsam , you repeat an untruth.
The First minister has been far from quiet, you obviously watch the wrong TV programmes.
Complain about this comment
He should fester and rot in jail where he belongs for the murders of 270 people. That is what he was found guilty of by a panel of Scottish judges.
Where does he deserve any compassion?!! It was his victims who deserved compassion!!
Complain about this comment
Prior to the decision being announced I'd be interested to hear what the other major political leaders in Scotlands views are. Do they have a set opinion or shall they do the political jig with it and just argue the opposite of what Kenny McAskill decides in order to score political points? Why am I even asking this? Its a no win situation for Kenny McAskill and the SNP yet whoever was in power would be vexed by the same pressures and decision.
It would be great to hear what they think. Their silence is predatory...
Complain about this comment
#43 gedguy2
Don't take the the conspiracy theories in #36 as the truth. They are full on inaccuracies and most of it doesn't stand superficial srutiny
Some good points are raised but on the whole these are swamped by the exaggerations.
The "senior" policeman is in fact a Detective Sergeant not Assistant Chief Constable or higher
Lester Coleman is in a Kentucky jail for mail fraud and passing forged cheques. He has admitted fabricating the drugs smuggling theory
Jim Wilson has made no statement to the effect that he found drugs in a case on his farm. In fact it would be pretty hard to get Jim to say anything about it now as he's sick of denying the widely reported "drugs" find.
I was at home on leave when it happened, 7 miles from Lockerbie town centre, and went to offer what assistance I could. There was chaos and pandemonium that night. Nobody knew the full extent of the incident and the main effort was centred around Sherwood crescent and the M74 which ran alongside it. I don't recall when the Americans arrived but I thought it wasn't until the next day. A reasonable response time, most governments have fast response teams and equipment stored for contingencies. There's also an American Consulate in Edinburgh so not entirely beyond reason they could have got someone to the scene within 3 hours. So I fail to see the significance but it all helps the conspiracy.
I think the author makes very good points about the motives and who actually instigated it, but as always in these conspiracy theories they can't help exaggerating.
Cui bono?
Will Scotland benefit if Megrahi isn't released? I would think the prisoner transfer would be a non starter and what if Megrahis cancer isn't widespread and life threatening, would MacAskill release him knowing the fanfare which awaits in Tripoli?
Complain about this comment
"let that maxim of Cassius apply..."
Brian, I like your choice of phrase, do I assume from 'Cui bono' that you take the view that those responsible for the inital crime have the most to gain from this situation and that Meghari is merely a scaprgoat? However I am unclear as to whom you conclude does stand to benefit greatest here?
Perhaps we need Alexander Luthor to solve this complex riddle???
Complain about this comment
Brian, Skip from NC stated "As for what America thinks, that should not be a consideration in any case, but I can tell you that this corner of America thinks nothing about it."
As an American Army Officer who lost a friend on that flight, I can state for myself that this is one American who is outraged at the thought of letting this terrorist free. Basic logic - Al-Megrahi denied all of the families of the victims the opportunity to see their loved ones again, therefore, he does not deserve that which he took away from them.
#66 - Liberal emotional psychobabble.
Scotland loses in my eyes if they release him - and they will in other Americans eyes.
Complain about this comment
It looks like the deal has already been done and he is going to be released, according to the media from around the world.
aljazeera
CNN
Complain about this comment
this man should never be allowed out ... they saying he should be allowed to die with his family around him ... did these innocent victims get chance to die with their families around them .NO . MAKE HIM SUFFER ... IT HAS COME AROUND AGAIN THAT MANY VICTIMS DONT HAVE A SAY THEY JUST HAVE TO ACCEPT WHAT THE GOVERMENT THROWS AT THEM , WHAT HAPPENED TO JUSTICE FOR THE VICTIMS
Complain about this comment
# 72 spartans11
Thank you for that information. Can you give me a link to some of the points that you have put over?
Complain about this comment
#70 Schwerpunkt
You're obviously happy with a non-jury trial of the man, where even the judges agreed the identity of the accused was uncertain and disallowed a deal of evidence. Fine. We'll have to agree to differ.
But if your view is that he "should fester and rot in jail", are you really happy that the US & UK governments are negotiating arms and oil deals with his boss?
Double standards somewhere, don't you think?
Post or reactive moderation for all except CBeebies, please!
Complain about this comment
I don't envy Kenny MacAskill in having to make this decision, he would have been damned if he didn't and damned if he didn't. Certainly I agree in principle with releasing a terminally ill prisoner on compassionate grounds but if some of my family had died at Lockerbie then I know I would have the complete opposite view. There was a cartoon in The Times last week showing the front of Flight 103 lying on the ground with "NO COMPASSION" written on it's side. Megrahi showed no compassion to the people on that flight or to those in Sherwood Crescent. Comparisons are naturally made with Ronnie Biggs' recent relaease but Biggs was not convicted of murder, let alone the calculated murder of over 200 people. I know how emotive the whole issue of terrorist prisoners is, I'm from Northern Ireland and the issue over the release of the Balcombe Street gang to appear at an SF rally nearly caused the Good Friday Agreement referendum to be lost. I hope that people stop politicking over this issue and instead bear in mind the feelings of the relatives of those who died.
Complain about this comment
BBC NEWS 24: The Scottish Justice Sectrary is expected to announce his release at one. Do you think this is the right decision?
It appears that the SNP Justice Secretarty's thoughts are already known to the British media. I will bet that the Beeb will be proven correct. Then there are clear grounds that the SNP have been attempting to spin this situation; leaking.
If this does indeed become apparently to be true then Bill Aitken was right to call for the opening of parliament in Holyrood. The opportunity to question the already compromised Justice Secretary must be provided to the opposition parties.
Complain about this comment
#74 zeke2230
There is a huge difference between US and European systems of justice and the cultural factors that underlie that.
Your system is primarily based on Old Testament concepts of revenge - hence why your country has sentenced 4,500 people to death since 1976.
Europeans are as horrified by your desire for revenge as you are by our system including compassion.
It's a different way of thinking.
Complain about this comment
It is true- on the BBC News 24 channel: "A plan has left Libya for Scotland" - it appears the SNP justice secretary came to a decision days ago. It all seems pre-planed.
Lets have Holyrood back! Questions need to be answered.
Complain about this comment
You missed one potential, oft-neglected beneficiary. Western secular society is currently engaged (perhaps unwillingly) in a war of ideas against a religious cult. One of the battlegrounds is the area of compassion and mercy towards fellow human beings.
If we are horrified by the lashings and amputations carried out in the name of "justice" in some unpleasant parts of the world, then quid pro quo we need to take a moral high ground when it comes to the treatment of terminally ill patients in prison.
When people say "he should die in prison", what they should really want if for that person to spend all of their useful life in prison. This man is very soon going to die - how does it reflect on our society and values if we force him to do so incarcerated and alone in a foreign country? He's not being released to spend 20 years laughing at our weakness and complacency, he's just going to be with his family at the end.
Cui bono? Western secular society.
Complain about this comment
If the guy truly has only 3 months to live he has already served a life sentence. We can't change what has happened. Scotland has nothing to gain from keeping him.
Complain about this comment
This was a done deal quite a long-time ago, indeed I'm quite sure the first hand shake was in a tent in the desert. There have probably been a rolling weekly flight plan as a contingency. All this nonsense that politicians / experts were carefully reviewing etc etc is just smoke & mirrors. The present incumbents of that sorry building called a parliament have done what their big brother version south of the border told them what they would be doing. I feel for those who thought they had an element of closure, now it'll be like who really killed JFK..wait for the movies etc....
Complain about this comment
#76 charmingsandrasmith
"NO . MAKE HIM SUFFER"
Charming, indeed, newbie. I take it you're not a Christian. Neither am I, but there's a lot to be said for their "Vengeance is mine, saith the Lord". In any event, if he's suffering from terminal cancer then you can be sure he's suffering.
"IT HAS COME AROUND AGAIN THAT MANY VICTIMS DONT HAVE A SAY THEY JUST HAVE TO ACCEPT WHAT THE GOVERMENT THROWS AT THEM , WHAT HAPPENED TO JUSTICE FOR THE VICTIMS"
There, I'm with you. Many of the families of the victims are, like Dr. Swire and the Rev. John Mosey strongly believe that justice was not done at Camp Zeist, especially because no jury was involved, and that important evidence was supressed by the US and UK governments. A full public enquiry is clearly needed.
Do you not think it would have been more helpful of the new US Secretary of State to pledge full co-operation in and release of evidence to such a public enquiry in the hope of shaming the UK government into doing the same?
As all of the outrage itself, the Camp Zeist trial and the first appeal were all carried out on the Republicans' watch, surely the new Democrat administration would have nothing to lose.
Post or reactive moderation for all except CBeebies, please!
Complain about this comment
#78 Brownedov,
Ref the oil and arms deals. I wasn't aware of this. Can you post some links? Ta.
Complain about this comment
#68 gedguy2
I am afraid that you appear to have missed the point that I made in my #47. I do not expect courts to be able to establish guilt or innocence. I expect them merely to establish whether, in their view, a case has been proved.
I did not say that Megrahi is necessarily guilty because the case against him has been found to have been proved in court. I said that, in my view, one should accept that the case against him has been proved by means properly established for doing so and that that should be regarded as sufficient until and unless due process overturns the judgment of those appointed to judge the case.
The point that I made in my #47 concerns the fact, as it seems to me, that what is important is due process and the conclusions arrived at as a result of it. If due process is to be respected, the conclusions arrived at in accordance with it should be respected unless and until they are found by due process to be defective. If the law does not allow further opportunity for the matter to come before a court, we still should accept the judgment of the court, as it is our duty to respect the law.
Due process is a vital principle in a civilized and orderly society as opposed to the shambles of a state run by Gaddafi as a family enterprise for the past 40 years. What Colonel Gaddafi or you or I may maintain or conclude by a less rigorous examination of the case against Megrahi may or may not be of some interest, but what really matters in a civilized society is due process.
If one prefers to take Colonel Gaddafi's view of due process and of the Megrahi case, of course, then perhaps one should reflect a little upon the nature of the good captain, who promoted himself to colonel after he overthrew the Libyan government in 1969 by very undue process. It is believed that he suffers from and is treated for manic depression, schizophrenia and narcotics addiction. In 2006 he declared that it was only "forgeries" in Western religious texts that prevented Westerners from acknowledging Mohammed as their true prophet. There is much more along these lines, of course, but enough is as good as a feast.
As for what Mr MacAskill will announce today, whatever decision he comes to should be regarded, in my view, as acceptable by all parties provided that due process has been followed in arriving at that decision. My personal preference, having considered much of the speculation about what may or may not be going on in the background and other matters, is to pay most attention to the mother of a Lockerbie victim who argued in a CNN report that, as no compassion has been shown to her or her late daughter, justice demands that no compassion be shown to the person convicted of the crime. I think that her view of the matter deserves to be taken into account, and I trust that it has been.
I agree that it would be nice if further due process could reveal more facts, but, in order for further due process to be respected, due process which has taken place so far must also be respected. Consistency requires that. Therefore, I must take the view that it is appropriate to treat Megrahi as a convicted mass murderer rather than the national hero that Captain Gaddafi is proposing to treat him as if he is released.
Complain about this comment
#79 I should have said "damned if he did and damned if he didn't..."
Complain about this comment
MacAskil: "These are my decisions alone"
Seeking to protect Salmond and the Scottish executive from these "ineffective" unionist assaults?
Complain about this comment
It is a sickeningly shameful day for Scotland,and a humiliating day for the SNP,who will surely suffer at the polls.I for one cannot vote for a party that allows a convicted terrorist to go free when 200 of our young soldiers have died in Afghanistan in the so called war on terror.Scotland is today the laughing stock of the world.
Complain about this comment
Well that was exactly as expected, these islands no longer have a backbone.
I am totally disgusted. The man has been sentenced to life and should have served life.
I only hope that his plane home gets the same treatment as his victims plane did.
Complain about this comment
MacAskil's attempts to avoid personal responsibility by blaiming the UK, blaiming articles of devolution, by blaiming "the medical evidence available to me"- it all smacks of opt outs.
I am trully sickened. I thought that this man was self serving, but to attempt to make constitutional point scoring over the imminant release of a man found guilty of murdering hundreds is the lowest he has sunk to.
Recall Holyrood! Questions need to be asked of this 'justice' secretary.
Complain about this comment
As my #88 has been referred to the moderators, to my surprise, I am submitting it in modified form.
#68 gedguy2
I am afraid that you appear to have missed the point that I made in my #47. I do not expect courts to be able to establish guilt or innocence. I expect them merely to establish whether, in their view, a case has been proved.
I did not say that Megrahi is necessarily guilty. I said that, in my view, one should accept that the case against him has been proved by means properly established for doing so and that that should be regarded as sufficient until and unless due process overturns the judgment of those appointed to judge the case.
The point that I made in my #47 concerns the fact, as it seems to me, that what is important is due process and the conclusions arrived at as a result of it. If due process is to be respected, the conclusions arrived at in accordance with it should be respected unless and until they are found by due process to be defective. If the law does not allow further opportunity for the matter to come before a court, we still should accept the judgment of the court.
Due process is a vital principle in a civilized and orderly society as opposed to the state run by the Gaddafi family for the past 40 years. What Colonel Gaddafi or you or I may maintain or conclude by a less rigorous examination of the case against Megrahi may or may not be of some interest, but what really matters in a civilized society is due process.
If one prefers to take Colonel Gaddafi's view of due process and of the Megrahi case, of course, then perhaps one should reflect a little upon the nature of the good captain, who promoted himself to colonel after he overthrew the Libyan government in 1969 by very undue process.
As for what Mr MacAskill should announce today, whatever decision he comes to should be regarded as acceptable by all parties provided that due process has been followed. My personal preference, having considered much of the speculation about what may or may not be going on in the background and other matters, is to pay a good deal of attention to the mother of a Lockerbie victim who argued in a CNN report that, as no compassion has been shown to her or her late daughter, justice demands that no compassion be shown to the person convicted of the crime. I think that her view of the matter deserves to be taken into account, and I trust that it has been.
I agree that it would be nice if further due process could reveal more facts, but, in order for further due process to be respected, due process which has taken place so far must also be respected. Consistency requires that. Therefore, I must take the view that it is appropriate to treat Megrahi as a convicted mass murderer rather than the national hero that Gaddafi is proposing to treat him as.
The announcement now having been made by Mr MacAskill, I cannot but applaud the manner in which he has done so and congratulate him on taking the opportunity presented to him to explain to the international media that it is the UK government that dishonoured the pre-trial agreement with the US government concerning where the convicted person should be held, the prisoner-transfer agreement between the UK and Libya having been objected to by the Scottish Government quite properly.
Complain about this comment
#93 deanthetory
Stop being hysterical. McAskill clearly spelt out why he took the two decisions he made.
Complain about this comment
#80 Dean
I take it you missed the point in the report where it was said that he tried to tell all the affected people personally about the decision before announcing it to the media. So that will be a thousand or so possible sources fro the leak, and ample reason for the decision to have been made days ago while only being announced now.
John
Complain about this comment
#87 deadgoatsociety
"Ref the oil and arms deals. I wasn't aware of this. Can you post some links? Ta."
Off out now, but see AP's US senators discuss military equipment for Libya for a taster, including pictures of them in Tripoli last Friday.
For UK contacts, try http://news.google.com/ and enter phrases including UK, US, Libya, Oil, Arms, Mandelson, etc.
I'll try to look back later.
Post or reactive moderation for all except CBeebies, please!
Complain about this comment
Kenny MacAskill - Scotland salutes you.
You were eloquent, honourable and have made the correct decision in very difficult and trying circumstances.
Complain about this comment
92. kglovatt
91. U9429156 - Banned
Well said both of you.
Today the SNP Justice Secretary attempted to pass the blame around for what he knew was an unjust decision.
MacAskil said "None of these events could have been predicted"- well the BBC seemed to know exactly what you were upto Mr MacAkil! They seemed to be more than capable of "predicting" that a man with terminal cancer might just attempt to secure compassionate release following his dignosed illness in 2008.
An ill prepared SNP government, which spived and spun the media to facilitate time to come up with MacAskils 'opt outs'. Inexperience comes to mind. Scotland today has been humiliated by a man who claimed that the UK are to blaime, the medical advice he recieved are to blaime for his decision to free a mass murderer.
Complain about this comment
David Mundell (BBC News) showed a total lack of understanding of the two different issues that McAskill was considering.
Complain about this comment
#92 kglovatt
what do you have against the pilot of his plane? Is another death Justice? If you answer yes to that I suggest you ask yourself what happens when both sides of a disagreement have that attitude.
John
Complain about this comment
#93 deanthetory
Shame on you Dean, the Justice Secretary was merely giving answers to answering the myriad of crap coming from the media as to why he has made the decision he has. His hands have been tied on a number of fronts and at least we all know why, it wasnt excuses it was fact. He has also said that it was his decision alone and made on the beliefs and values of the Scottish People - i also agree with much of what was said by #67 iwinter.
You should be able to look beyond your petty politics and appreciate that as the Justice Secretary said, a higher power than him has made the ultimate decision.
Overall I found McAskills speech to be fair, he fully explained why he had made his decision and also appreciates that many people wont like it, too bad, the decision has been made and recalling parliament wont make any difference.
We all want answers and it is time to start pushing the Unionist parties to hold a full public enquiry into the Lockerbie bombing or are they too scared about what it may actually turn up?
Complain about this comment
93 and questions need to be answered about your education ,particularly in spelling.
I am delighted that Kenny MacAskill , not McGaskil as BBC news seemed to suggest, has come to a decision.
No decision ever pleases everyone .
I was equally delighted to see and hear the gentleman who lost his son in the bombing, say that he believed this to be the correct decision and to correct the ITV report which had suggested that Lybia was the first country in the frame ,indeed the only country in the frame.
Complain about this comment
# 83. IRSWalker
Good Post
A "war on terror" is not a stragety as such - we are involved in a war of ideas or even ideals.
This decision is a huge boost for a strategy of winning minds.
It's also a decision which makes be proud to be Scottish as it puts compassion over revenge
Statesmanlike and humane
Complain about this comment
Cochrane writes:
"When the story of a probable release first surfaced last week it was not given the weight it deserved by the First Minister’s team. As a result it acquired a life of its own. The leaks and nudges that had first put the issue into the public domain were not dealt with firmly enough. Only in recent days did Mr Salmond try to put a lid on things.
By that time we had been treated to virtually every possible scenario under the sun for Megrahi’s release.
A better course might have been for Mr MacAskill to announce publicly at the end of last week that he was awaiting medical reports — which now appears to have been the case — and to state that he would make a definitive announcement on a pre-arranged date"
I entirely agree. Botched, mishandled. And ultimately reduced to a scene of Mr MacAskil attempting to sheild the SNP from blame of this dispicable decision with the meak offering "my decision alone" (note how he goes on to hypocritically turn the issue into a constitutional debate!!)
Complain about this comment
#93Dean
"MacAskil's attempts to avoid personal responsibility by blaiming the UK, blaiming articles of devolution, by blaiming "the medical evidence available to me"- it all smacks of opt outs.
I am trully sickened. I thought that this man was self serving, but to attempt to make constitutional point scoring over the imminant release of a man found guilty of murdering hundreds is the lowest he has sunk to.
Recall Holyrood! Questions need to be asked of this 'justice' secretary."
Get a grip man - I can see you dressed in twinset and pearls as you wrote this, a typical Tory auld wummins reaction.
Complain about this comment
Cochrine concludes:
"Nevertheless, and no matter what outcome Mr MacAskill announces today, the whole affair has presented Scotland and its devolved government in a pretty poor light."
Sadly he is again correct.
Complain about this comment
Al Megrahi, almost makes him sound Scottish, might of course be innocent and the conspiracy theories right for once.
One thing that does strike me though is the vehemence coming from the USA and Hilary that he should die in jail. It bodes well for the fair trial and treatment of Garry McKinnon if he ends up in America.
Our special relationship with them is looking more and more that of the relationship between the bully and the bullied.
If, as has been suggested, Westminster was putting pressure on us then we should expose that and then reach our own decision on al Megrahi, which should be on compassionate grounds and not for a share, if any, of the spoils.
Scotland should not be ashamed to show compassion regardless of the outcome.
Complain about this comment
Anyone read this from the Guardian?
Public-sector net borrowing was £8.016bn – much worse than analysts' forecasts of a £500m shortfall and the first time the government finances have been in the red in July since 1996. This was in sharp contrast to
Complain about this comment
#99&93.deanthetory
Sit down and take some deep breaths, high blood pressure is a killer, take care. Then you can spell out what ails you in a coherent manner.
Complain about this comment
Kenny MacAskil is a very brave man. He has shown that he is willing to take a decision that might turn out to be a fatal act politically in preference to a simple self and party-serving one.
He has taken, dare I say it, the Christian way (thinks....can I say the 'C' word???), the morally correct way. Personally I think that if Megrahi doesn't die soon, his career will be over and Alex Salmond will have serious problems. I don't know if I could have been brave enough to take this stand, I'd like to think I would but....
The Americans are in full girn mode with some even demanding a boycot of Scottish goods. Oh dear, poor Diageo! The White House is expressing, "regret". I doubt there's any regret there only joy at having something to take the attention off Obama's healthcare plans. Mrs Bubba is all indignant about it all. Well what does she want, is it that we should have given Megrahi to her to fry on their 'humane' electric-chair or have some feckless, redneck warder mess about with veins so that they can inject toxic, painful chemicals into their victims?
America knows nothing of justice. Despite the, "Liberty and Justice for All" mince what they really mean is, Liberty and Justice for All the Rich. Remember O J Simpson??? When was the last time any millionaire was topped?
It must however be devastating for the families of the victims of the Lockerbie massacre. Once again it is all played out on the world's stage and once again they feel that dreadful pain that must surely be uniquely theirs. There will be those who will understandably cry, "an eye for an eye" And there will be many in world in general who might say it too. But we must remember that that quotation was followed by, "let he who is without sin, cast the first stone". That means none of us have a right to take a life and that includes Megrahi.
If Megrahi is guilty and I have my doubts, he will soon we are told have to give an account of himself to his God.
So Kenny MacAskil IS a brave man, and honest man and a true Christian. Hopefully he will judged on that basis.
Complain about this comment
dean is that you?
you sound reasonable enough for weeks and then it's as though Auntie Annabel cries "enough!" and comes round to attach some electrodes to your sphericals to get you back on message.
Agree with Gavin@98, Kenny MacAskill's statement struck exactly the right note. It's a pity so many people are unable to separate their responses to the Justice Secretary's difficult decision from their instinctive need to have a yet another pop at the SNP.
Complain about this comment
For those who are more interested in facts than in anglo-unionist party-political froth, the text of the Scottish Justice Secretary's commendably balanced and properly comprehensive statement can be consulted here:
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/News/This-Week/Speeches/Safer-and-stronger/lockerbiedecision
Complain about this comment
Gee politics eh .... The only people who can honestly throw mud at Kenny McAskil are the relatives of those who died... if that is their oppinion that he did wrong. The British and American governments are just posturing and will be thinking its great cos now the whole thing will come to a close.. unless there is an enquiry and people play ball. As some people suspect Al Megrahi and Libya were stitched up then the real culprits and those who knew this had nothing to loose. Release him on compassionate grounds or prisoner transfer ...case closed . If he had gone for the second appeal ...stall because he has cancer and is dying case closed. We would never have found out the truth as there is too much money involved. The Americans and British will be over in Libya already looking to see what business will be done..... people seem to forget it was the Americans that helped the Afghans to fight the Russians ... only for those weapons to be used now against America soldiers. A few months from now it will all be forgotten Usa 1 rest of world 0
Complain about this comment
Dean ... whooaaaaaa ... you wont be leader of the Scottish Tories if you rant a lot ... look at Ian Gray it doesnt do him any good..just makes him look stupid.
Complain about this comment
Dean,
You and Cochrane miss the point.
Overtly - this was not a political decision. It was judicial - based on law and due process. As such, action or statements from a Governmental level ahead of Mr McAskills decision would have been inappropriate. I think the Scottish Government, and to be fair the UK Government, are stand alone in how well they have handled things, by remaining silent in the frenzy of the last few days. The Press, the Scottish opposition parties, and everyone else commenting and applying political pressure ahead of a judicial decision are the ones damaged by the affair.
Well done Mr McAskill. You retained dignity while showing compassion.
Dean, Cochrane, Tavish, Baker et al don't appear to understand either concept.
Complain about this comment
111. crazyislander
110. cynicalHighlander
106. fifebirder
102. skintybroko
Mr MacAskil has made closure for the families of Lockerby impossible. There shall be no second appeal- Scottish Justice is left short. The only man convicted has been released by a Justice Secretary who attempted to turn the compassionate release into some kind of constitutional issue with Westminster.
Despite the obvious humanity in this decision- releasing a dying man it was handled poorly.
Kenny MacAskil should have prevented the media firestorm erruptinng earlier in the week- he could have said "I am waiting medical reports before reaching a decision". Instead he prefered to let the imagination of many run wilde, why? Because this SNP executive is patently inexperienced. They dropped the ball.
This is why the Justice Secretary has been forced to say "My decision alone" - because Alex Salmond knows very well that this event was totally mishandled. And he doesnt want MacAskils failings to spread throughout and stain the reputation of the SNP executive.
270 Civilians were killed by this convicted terrorist. And convicted he is (and thanks to the dropping of the second appeal this will remain).
Megrahi has spent just a fortnight in prison for each innocent civilian murdered by him- and merely eight of a 27 year sentence. The Justice Secretary appear to think that so long as a terrorist is dying they should be released.
I just hope the SNP dont ever get hold of the terrorists who blew up the twin tower- otherwise their "christian charity" would override any semblence of justice.
Complain about this comment
#81 OLDNAT: "Europeans are as horrified by your desire for revenge as you are by our system including compassion."
What makes you think that requiring a convicted mass murderer to complete his sentence is revenge? Does that mean that all criminals who are sentenced are sentenced only for revenge? What planet do you live on?
My desire is that he be kept for the duration of his sentence as the death sentence he already enacted on his victims has been completed. That's not revenge - that's justice.
Maybe compassion for other mass murderers led Europe to do nothing in Bosnia and Kosovo as well...
Your side of this argument is quickly becoming irrelevant...and I doubt you speak for all Europeans...but if so, God help you all...
Complain about this comment
How oil rich is Libya?
Anyone know?
Could it be coerced into helping an ailing economy anywhere??
I have to say that I thought his statement a trifle slow but well balanced in content, though perhaps it was paced for foreign journalists.
Thanks to Frankly , I can now read it in peace.
Complain about this comment
#111 crazyislander Re: banning
That's what you get for fighting side-by-side with the USA in their illegal wars, ironically that are about instilling "democracy". You couldn't make it up.
Everything they do is seemingly clouded by conspiracies. This Megrahi thing seems to be another. Notice the SNP rants too? Wonder who planned that? It stinks!
Complain about this comment
In all of this conspiracy theory versus conspiracy theory, party political posturing and whatever else people throw around in this debate can I pose a question?
How would posters feel if, on compassionate grounds:
Tobin is released?
Beggs is released?
Baby P’s parents were released?
Complain about this comment
# 94 frankly_francophone
proved by means properly established for doing so'
I would agree with that statement 100% but what you say may not be the case. This is the point that I'm trying to get over to you. If this was the case, that there has been a miscarriage of justice, then the man is innocent and everything Gadaffi has been saying for the last 20 years is correct which means that the UK and the USA were telling us a pack of lies. In which case a party to welcome home an innocent man seems logical to me.
You keep going on about 'due process' and I agree with that, within a system which cannot be faulted. However, as I have pointed out before the law in Scotland is nowhere near perfection. There have been countless miscarriages of justice done in the Scottish courts (my experience for example) enough for me to be wary of the validity of this case and the judgement reached by a non-jury court.
Complain about this comment
The whole business stinks. If Megrahi is guilty he should stay in prison. "Compassion" is not called for in the case of mass murderers.
But of course there is evidence to suggest Megrahi has been a scapegoat from the first, and that he and Libya weren't even involved in the Lockerbie bombing.
Justice doesn't seem to come in to any of these shenanigans.
Complain about this comment
Some of you feel I have been slightly histerical. Here is my reasoning, put calmly down.
I appologise for my sudden "electrodes to your sphericals" initial reaction (GrassyKnollington I thoroughly enjoyed reading that, it did calm me down somewhat- never have I been accused of loyally toeing the party line!)
"The Libyan Government applied on 5th May 2009 for the transfer of Mr Al-Megrahi. Prisoner transfer Agreements are negotiated by the United Kingdom Government".
All true and fine. If Mr MacAskil had left talk of the rejected prisoner transfer at that then I would have no problems with this aspect of his public statement. However he went on to say "I find that highly regettable" (that the UK government simply let him decide without Westminster manipulation, as per Devolutionary articles).
MacAskil is out of order in attempting to create an exit strategy for this decision (gods stand by it mate!). His whole attack on UK prisoner transfer agreements was basically (as I heard it) a "its no ma fault govnor" routine of which Sid James would be content with.
Someone should help me if I have got the wrong end of the stick but it seemed to me that MacAskil was seeking to make nationalist constitutional points at this point (you could hear him dying to say "if we were independent however no such prisoner transfer agreement would have been present").
He goes on to project a MacAkil-home-brand conspiracy (without supporting evidence at all): "Therefore it appears to me that the American families and Government either had an expectation or were led to believe there would be no prisoner transfer" - let to believe Mr Justice secretary? By who- Westminster? By Blair? Another partisan nationalist point scored without any evidence to support it presented at all. Sick. No due reverence to the issue he is meant to be dealing with: i.e. the fate of the prisoner Al-Megrahi.
Personally I also disagree with his decision to release him on compassionate grounds- a prisoner transfer would have been more appropriate. This way the mass murderer might have spent his last days a prisoner in his home country; compassionate yet not letting go the mass murderer of Lockerby.
Recal Hollyrood. These points need asking.
Complain about this comment
Alexander Chancellor in the Grauniad gives a long suffering view from the south. It's the kind of opening paragraph that will probably drive Iain Grey and Jim Murphy into paroxysms of ecstasy.
"This is a very exciting time for Scotland's hitherto unheard-of (at least by me and, I imagine, by most other people south of the border) justice minister Kenny MacAskill. The eyes of the world are upon him as he claims to be wrestling with a decision about whether to release the Lockerbie bomber from a Scottish jail. Never before has Scotland's devolved government strutted so grandly on the international stage. MacAskill has had a phone call from the US secretary of state and a letter from a group of distinguished American senators (including Edward Kennedy) begging him to keep the Libyan Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi in prison. And he may have received other conflicting supplications from such people as Lord Mandelson and Prince Andrew, friends of Colonel Gaddafi's son. It must be heady stuff for a provincial Edinburgh lawyer."
Complain about this comment
Anyone been on Subrosablond blogspot?
She has discovered the NA refuses to sign off the MoDs accounts.
Could make you laugh or cry.
Complain about this comment
What does Scotland get?
The satisfaction of acting humanely despite the screams of the craziest of the interested parties from the Western side of the Atlantic.
To say this is a matter for Scottish jurisdiction but then say the U.S. will think less of Scotland if it makes the wrong decision is completely without justification.
The man will likely be dead in a matter of months (if not weeks), doubts remain over his conviction (his 'chief accomplice' is now cleared and free), "justice" gains nothing by ensuring he dies alone in a foreign land.
Complain about this comment
#117 deanthetory
Oh dear!
"Mr MacAskil has made closure for the families of Lockerby (sic) impossible."
Did you see the coverage and interviews from Lockerbie today? Or hear Jim Swire? So you consider (unlike the US widow I just heard on TV) that the UL and US Governments have no culpability - through failing to hold an enquiry? You are using cheap emotive language to try to score party political points.
"The only man convicted has been released by a Justice Secretary who attempted to turn the compassionate release into some kind of constitutional issue with Westminster."
Rubbish. McAskill pointed out that he had consulted with other Governments, but while the UK denied that there had been any pre trial deal that there would be no prisoner transfer (as the Americans alleged) they produced no supporting evidence. Hence he rejected the Prisoner Transfer idea. He was explaining fully the reasons for his decision - did you expect there to be no mention of the Prisoner Transfer?
"Kenny MacAskil should have prevented the media firestorm erruptinng earlier in the week- he could have said "I am waiting medical reports before reaching a decision"."
His message last Thursday was quite clear - "Clearly, he is terminally ill, and there are other factors," Scottish Justice Minister Kenny MacAskill told the BBC. "But I have made no decision as yet." The fact that the media chose to go into hype based on copying each other's reports is a condemnation of the Unionist Press - not the Scottish Government. You are using cheap emotive language to try to score party political points.
"This is why the Justice Secretary has been forced to say "My decision alone""
"forced"? Don't you have any idea about the quasi judicial status of Jack Straw in England or McAskill in Scotland? Legally only Justice Secretaries can make these decisions.
"I just hope the SNP dont ever get hold of the terrorists who blew up the twin tower- otherwise their "christian charity" would override any semblence of justice."
I'm not a Christian myself, but there's a lot of good in their moral code. Your morality seems to be based on Old Testament revenge. You are using cheap emotive language to try to score party political points.
Complain about this comment
#118 zeke2230
As I said - it's a different way of thinking. The Council of Europe Convention of Human Rights, for example, bans capital punishment.
You don't like our way of thinking. We don't like yours.
Complain about this comment
128. oldnat
"Your morality seems to be based on Old Testament revenge."
You honestly believe that the criminal conviction of the man who blew up 270 civilians is merely "revenge"?
Is criminal proestcution merely acts of state sanctioned "revenge" to you oldnat?
I am surprised at you.
Complain about this comment
its the message that is perceived throughout the world, that is important. the judicial and political elements are relevant yet will not matter. libya will celebrate a man that murdered 270 individuals.
the message is scotland condones mass murder, although in reality it does not.
this is unmistakeably a sad day in the history of scotland.
Complain about this comment
#124 deanthetory
"He goes on to project a MacAkil-home-brand conspiracy (without supporting evidence at all): "Therefore it appears to me that the American families and Government either had an expectation or were led to believe there would be no prisoner transfer" - let to believe Mr Justice secretary? By who- Westminster? By Blair?"
Didn't you listen to him? The US Government led him to believe that - and it was certainly commonly reported around the time of his trial that that was the case. He asked the UK Government for clarification - they declined.
Complain about this comment
It is my decision and my decision alone to pose this question:
Could Macaskil not have made the same statement (to release the prisoner on compassionate grounds) but defer the date?
So the understanding is that a prognosis of a likelyhood of 3 month to live made the prisoner, any prisoner, eligible for compassionate release.
This prisoner is only just in this "3 months to live" situation and is now free. Are there other terminal prisoners in a similar state still hoping for release, perhaps with Scottish families, that are not guilty of murder?
I think there was scope to wait until his condition worsened (as predicted) or set a release date for 1 months time? The plane already waiting on the tarmac is also a bit insensitive to say the least. Only after the official announcement and date/time went public should Libya have been able to arrange a flight.
Complain about this comment
#130 deanthetory
Don't misrepresent me. You know perfectly well that I was not referring to his conviction.
I was referring to your criticism of "christian charity" - Auntie Anneabel would not approve of that!
Complain about this comment
132. oldnat
"Didn't you listen to him? The US Government led him to believe that - and it was certainly commonly reported around the time of his trial that that was the case. He asked the UK Government for clarification - they declined"
I know you are always out to get the UK but clearly YOU didnt listen.
The UK government didn't "decline". They did clarify the position by saying that MaAskil could feel free to agree to prisoner transfer. This is what I wanted MacAskil to do. Not release a convicted mass murderer.
That seems to me a clear rejection of the MacAskil conspiracy theory.
I say again, let him present his evidence. I don't believe that the US government recieved any such guarantee- and there is absolutely no evidence of it.
Sorry oldnat- that is pretty lame "they told us so!" - kiddie stuff, little better than a MacAskil 'get out of jail free' card.
I say again- let him present his evidence otherwise he is talking- and spining. And this is hardly an issue where this behaviour is suitable.
Complain about this comment
117 deanthetory
"Because this SNP executive is patently inexperienced. They dropped the ball."
What sort of rubbish is this? Does your party have experience of Government in Scotland? No, it certainly hasn't and it's terribly easy to for you and your likes to fly this kite. Soon we can expect old Foulkes to give us his "unbiased" view and then the rest of the OPPOSITION will vent their hypocritical spleens. Truth is, this is actually unprecedented. The only reason under our system for Megrahi to be held until he dies is if he were to be regarded as likely to re-offend. As to the others who suggest that the likes of Beggs and Tobin could be released too...get real, these people are psychopathic and without doubt WOULD re-offend.
Complain about this comment
134. oldnat
"Don't misrepresent me"
I apologise if I have seemed to do so. It was not my intention- you have my apology.
"I was referring to your criticism of "christian charity" - Auntie Anneabel would not approve of that!"
Is this the same Annabel Goldie who has apparently taken to electroding my sphericals? :P
Complain about this comment
136. crazyislander
The SNP government did drop the ball.
"When the story of a probable release first surfaced last week it was not given the weight it deserved by the First Minister’s team. As a result it acquired a life of its own. The leaks and nudges that had first put the issue into the public domain were not dealt with firmly enough. Only in recent days did Mr Salmond try to put a lid on things.
By that time we had been treated to virtually every possible scenario under the sun for Megrahi’s release.
A better course might have been for Mr MacAskill to announce publicly at the end of last week that he was awaiting medical reports — which now appears to have been the case — and to state that he would make a definitive announcement on a pre-arranged date."
They failed to control the issue. Harold MacMillian talked of "events dear boy events" as the make or break of good government; the SNP have failed this test.
Need to go out now. Will be back later.
Complain about this comment
#122 gedguy2
I understand that the arrangements for the Lockerbie trial were agreed in advance by relevant parties and that the accused were made aware of what would be involved.
Of course the justice system is not perfect. No system of justice can be perfect, which is why one should temper one's expectations of them. The character of the Scottish system of criminal justice is such, however, that it generally operates in favour of the accused, in point of fact, as many victims of crime can testify. One should be wary of letting personal experience cloud one's judgment.
If the system is to be faulted, it must be faulted only by due process. If the process is unsatisfactory, it can be reformed by parliament. The fact that you or anyone else may consider it to be unsatisfactory is insufficient reason to fail to respect it. We all must live by the law, whatever we may think of it, and we always must respect the decisions of the courts, even if they go against us, in fact especially when they go against us. We are not entitled to accept some court decisions and reject others, but may, of course, appeal against them . . . by due process. This is absolutely fundamental.
I do assure you, my dear fellow, that I have not the least difficulty in understanding the point that you are seeking to make, as should be apparent. I simply do not share your view of the matter. I will not accept that anyone has been subjected to a miscarriage of justice until and unless it can be shown to be the case by the rigorous processes established by law for that purpose. In my view there is no acceptable substitute for this.
As for representing a convicted mass murderer as a national hero, I see no merit in that whatsoever. If a miscarriage of justice had been proved, that would be another matter, but it has not been proved in a forum and in a manner approved by law. If Megrahi did not commit the crime, I hope that an inquiry, possibly an international one, may reveal that . . . by due process. Until then it is not in my view justifiable to assume that the process which led to his conviction was fatally flawed. That has to be shown by means of a properly approved and rigorous process which itself must be respected unless it can properly be shown to be fatally flawed.
Complain about this comment
#135 deanthetory
Have a look at the actual statement
http://news.scotsman.com/latestnews/Lockerbie--Kenny-MacAskill39s-statement.5574230.jp
"The United States Attorney General, Eric Holder, was in fact deputy Attorney General to Janet Reno at the time of the pre-trial negotiations.
"He was adamant that assurances had been given to the United States Government that any person convicted would serve his sentence in Scotland.
"Many of the American families spoke of the comfort that they placed upon these assurances over the past ten years. That clear understanding was reiterated to me, by the US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
"I sought the views of the United Kingdom Government. I offered them the right to make representations or provide information. They declined to do so.
"They simply informed me that they saw no legal barrier to transfer and that they gave no assurances to the US Government at the time.
Complain about this comment
#137 deanthetory
LOL - but I really don't want to know about your fantasies :-)
Complain about this comment
#129 Oldnat: "As I said - it's a different way of thinking. The Council of Europe Convention of Human Rights, for example, bans capital punishment.
You don't like our way of thinking. We don't like yours."
You dance very well Oldnat. You might want to try out for the ridiculous reality shows we have here. Apart from that though your characterization that we colonials don't like or approve of compassion is ridiculous at best and outrageous at worst. Additionally, to espouse or believe that we are only about revenge is asinine. The "You" and "We" in the last sentence implies you speak for all Europeans regarding all Americans. A bit narcissistic don't you think?
I don't dislike you or your way of thinking. I just find it incongruous to the situation at hand.
Complain about this comment
#142 zeke2230
"You" and "We" weren't meant to personalise, but to represent "official" European and US views of judicial systems.
There are very highly civilized Americans who oppose capital punishment, just as there are atavistic Europeans who support it.
I am happy with the comments of the Kirk of Scotland's Church and Society Council today -
"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."
Complain about this comment
138 deanthetory
What in the name of all that's dear to democracy could MacAskil do? The entire BBC/Mandelson mob were dropping 'leaks' like a plumber's training session. You can scoff and mock all you like, Kenny MacAskil did his best and no more can be asked of anyone. Was his decision a mistake? Only time will tell. Oh what joy there must be in Josef Brown's little collective. Mr Molatov..oops sorry Mandelson, Lord Proctector of England will be dancing about singing that old refrain..."I've got the SNP by the....."
Dean, as the Hawaiians would have it, "Go slowly, come back quickly". By the way, whit are havin' fur yer tea???
Complain about this comment
I was interesting to see the BBCs' take on the event. Only two American relatives were questioned. Both were against the release of Megrahi. Are there any Americans who were in favour of his release? If so why not ask them? Also, one or two American Christians could have been asked for their opinion along with the two people who were asked and who appeared to be non-christians. America is a supposedly a christian country with all that implies about forgiveness.
The BBC went on to remind us of the background to the whole affair and the unanswered questions. It seems that Megrahi could well be a scapegoat, an innocent victim of dirty dealings and power politics.
Complain about this comment
144. crazyislander
"Dean, as the Hawaiians would have it, "Go slowly, come back quickly". By the way, whit are havin' fur yer tea???"
Ah, I cooked a meal for my dear father. Starters was nice highland receipy of my Grandmother - veg soup with just abou everything in it. Mushroom Risotto mains. And a drink of Indian Ice Lemon (A drink where you have a glass of ice, and soda water- and two bouls- one with sugar in it, the other lemon zest- add as you like. Lovely).
140. oldnat
Ifv this is indeed the case, I want to see the US secretary Mrs Clinton name the official(s) whom provided this 'assurance'. If it was Mr Blair then he certainly lived up to that 1997 gaffe when he refered to a future devolved parliament having little more power than an assembly. He may have set it up but he failed to respect its parliamentary sovereignty.
But as I say- Clinton and the US might have misunderstood 'assurances' (if they ever where any). Its the old Yes Minister word play I suppose.
141. oldnat
Lol, but that annabel goldie...she's a woman :) Get that handbag out leader!
Complain about this comment
Don't think it clear yet about who wins..but I did hear Obama refer to the "Scottish Government", surly that is a win in some people's book (Alex Salmond??)
But as someone that remembers and knows people involved in the disaster and the trial - I can't help feeling a we have wasted so much time, money and worst of all lives
Complain about this comment
I agree Brian, both the UK and the USA are quite happy that this decision has brought a final closure on the Lockerbie bombing issue. And why?
Because the real question has never been answered. Why oh why did'nt the authorities act on a Signal Intelligence report received by GCHQ Cheltenham on the 7th Dec, 2 weeks prior to the bombing, warning that an aircraft bombing was being planned. Surely increased security in the baggage handling areas may have prevented this terrible disaster from happening. Until this cover up is exposed the families of victims will never be able to rest in peace. But I suspect the threat to National Security will prevent any meaningful enquirey taking place.
Complain about this comment
It's really not that complicated. You released a convicted murderer - that's it! Scotland can now take it's rightful place next to France among the defeated nations. Oh, but you can still be proud. You put on your big-girl panties and you stood up to those ignorant AMERICANS. My consolation today is that my ancestors had the sense to leave your shit-hole island 200 years ago. Thank God for that! So, come on with your best anti-AMERICAN rant! Let US know what you think and where you stand! Scotland (We want our independence from England! We want to speak Gaelic! - what a joke.) Truly a nation of pussies.
Complain about this comment
RE:149 Lincolncounty
My friend, there is only one ignorant American on show. Have a read through these threads and you will find some balanced and respectable views from your fellow countrymen....
When you calm down, stop posturing and avail yourself of the facts, you will actually discover that this decision, has nothing to do with 'big-girl panties', has nothing to do with our 'rightful place next to France among the defeated nations' (??????), but rather it was a decision taken based on Law, Scots Law
Scots Law states that a prisoner who can medically be proved (or reasonably assumed) to have less than three months left to live, can be released TO DIE on compassionate grounds, providing they are not insane and do not pose a threat to society...
Funnily enough, American Law is based on Scots Law, but I'm sure you knew that....
Lets also consider compassion.... Something changed in our legal systems over the years and has obviously caused a level of disparity
I live in a country where a dying man, who has served his sentence, albeit, not his full sentence, if proven he has a short time left to live, can be shown some mercy.
However, in your country 37 of your fellow Americans already this year have been electrocuted, injected, shot, hanged, or whatever it is you do with them. That's your choice, your laws and if you agree with them fine, if you disagree, change them....
Thousands of American citizens have been executed in one way or another in the last 30 years by other American citizens, utilising your adopted legal system and its inherant practices
Just a thought
Has it made America a safer or better place to live... statistics would tend to suggest otherwise....
But to set the record straight, i am NOT having a pop at America or Americans, just at your slightly flawed view of my country...
So as you know, i have visited your country on many occasions and have nothing but positive things to say about my personal experiences... the people i met, on the whole, were very gracious and welcoming.... as i was to them and i am sure, when you get over your paranoia, if you visited these shores, my countrymen would welcome you too
Good luck and i hope you find people to shout at you for being American... (?????)
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
You're censoring me? Do I make you uncomfortable? I thought this was a political blog? Perhaps you gentlemen should be trading recipes instead.
Cheerio, Ladies....
Complain about this comment
Not being one to give up, I've edited my post. Why so sensitive? Really.
My good friend, your condescending tone is typical of those residing on your sad little (censored). I have read through a number of your Scottish blogs and have found most of them dripping with anti-American sentiment. Americans are repeatedly referred to as ignorant and illiterate. (And it's not censored!)
It's really not the fact that you've released a convicted murderer as much as it is your attitude towards America. I don't give a (censored) about Scottish law - do what you want. And yes, I am well aware that our system is based on yours and quite frankly, I'm not impressed with our system either. Like the British system, it's designed to enrich lawyers and those in the system - true justice is not the primary concern. But let me be sure I understand your argument - This muderer was released because America has the death penalty? Perhaps you should return to college and repeat your Logic 101/Debate 101 classes.
And as for America being a safe place to live, it's true American society is much more violent than your European societies. It has little to do with our justice system. (I would attempt to explain it but I don't think Europeans are capable of understanding and of course it would be censored). And, the death penalty in America is largely reserved for those true monsters that have no place in society - do a little research. Perhaps you'd prefer we send them to Scotland.
You see.....
Americans have little tolerance for tyrants be they common criminals or kings. Those of you who have a history of living under a monarchy couldn't possibly understand this. We understand that tyrants cannot be reformed or rehabilitated.
And please, I'd rather you call me an ignorant American or an idiot than to think I believe you released this murderer out of compassion. Really. Think of how (censored) you sound.
The real reason, I would think, would be to appease the (censored). Those at Europe's doorstep and those in Scotland. You (Scotland) are afraid of them and for good reason. But I'm afraid appeasement didn't work with Hitler and it won't work with the (censored) either. I do not believe Libya's leader is one of the good guys - but maybe I judge him to harshly. As for appeasing (censored), I don't even have to argue this point - I can just sit back and watch the next (censored) go up in flames, while in the safety and comfort of my living room watching TV.
A note on violence in America.....
(Censored) It's difficult for a European to understand but, well, we don't necessarily beleive this is the governments' responsibility; It's an individual's right (to protect his home and family). Thus, our beloved 2nd amendment. (Censored) This fact might offend your European sensibilities but we wouldn't have it any other way, and frankly, we are quite pleased that it (censored).
So while I may not like or understand your sensibilities; You're (You=Europe) condescending attitude (censored).
And as for visiting Scotland, well, you see, as you know, if you will, I live in a very large and beautiful country. It is filled with the rugged individuals that I like to associate with. I'm not talking about New York, Chicago or Los Angeles. I'm referring to places like Alabama, Louisiana, Tennessee, Florida, Mississippi and Texas among others (By the way, these states I just mentioned are filled with the descendants of Scottish immigrants, apparently the (censored) you had to offer.) It would take me a lifetime to see it all and meet all of the wonderful people. If you've only been to urban America - then you really haven't been to America. And Google maps will suffice for any interest I might have in Scotland.
Cheerio, Ladies.
Complain about this comment
Brian:
52. At 03:45am on 20 Aug 2009, you (Dennis Junior)
Wants, to update and revised the original information, I think that there are other countries and oil companies that will benefit from the release...
=Dennis Junior=
Complain about this comment
Not that you "scotch" would care, but this pretty much sums-up how most Americans feel.
http://votresistance.blogspot.com/2009/08/fbi-to-scotlands-justice-secretary.html
Complain about this comment
Lincoln -
As for how most Americans feel can you please post a link to prove this statement or is it perhaps your 'opinion'?
I draw your attention to an excerpt of a post made by X-Sticks on the next blog (#457) and welcome your 'opinion' on it -
"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."
Let's debate and not name call.... it's actually healthier that way... I will ignore what you have said about my people and your ancestors.... This is about politicians and politics, not ordinary joes
Complain about this comment
LincolnCounty
The US is big and mighty, while Scotland is wee and insignificant.
I wouldn't waste time trying to disabuse you of that kind of majority-held wisdom.
Personally, I don't think I've ever been moved to be critical of the US on a public forum in the past, despite a globally-accepted recognition of that country's often insular view of the world outside its borders.
Part of the reason is that there are myriad facets and aspects to the US, many of which we can be thankful for - including a great deal about American music styles and other entertainment forms which I for one appreciate immensely.
Being opposed to government from London, and anglocentricity in all its forms, moreover, I tend to favour the States as a 'secondary' source cultural and entertainment references (after Scotland), as opposed to 'looking south' as those of a more 'British' mentality.
Generally, therefore, my empathy towards the States ranges from something akin to pity through to all-time admiration, depending on the specific context.
I have passed through the States twice; visiting California on one occasion and Hawaii on the other. Impressed hardly covers it. Over-awed would be more accurate.
Of course, I feel I benefit immensely from being able to explore the world from my small country. On the world stage, indeed, there are many advantages to coming from a small country as opposed to a large one - as illustrated by the fact that so many Americans have never seen their own country, let alone further afield - and many of those who have done so still struggle to grasp the scale of diversity within a small country.
Your comment regarding your experience of Scotland through Google Maps speaks volumes - as does your generalised opinion of our country, founded as it is largely on ignorance, as exposed to experience or insight. These narrow and self-spun perceptions have, in turn, been allowed to inform your blinkered conclusions about Kenny MacAskill's principled decision, and fuelled your outpouring of derogatory bulls***.
In all cases, the loss is yours alone.
Incidentally, if the US is speaking with one voice on any of this, why are they directing such outrage at the Megrahi decision while cosying up to the very Libyan authorities who were supposedly behind the atrocity??? Another upstanding example of US 'principle'?
Complain about this comment
who benefits...answer probably clear if the Brown regime were not covering up relevant info,but we sure don't. McCaskill has shown that he aka Scotland, will quail at the prospect of revenge attacks. Ghaddafi basically told the clown that there'd be big trouble if his goon wasn't sprung. Scotland the Brave is dead.
Complain about this comment
#158
The many unanswered questions inherent to the Lockerbie case, added to by the inescapable controversy of these latest chapters, have predictably spawned many theories, often contradictory, some more plausible than others, and each offering its own claim as a contention for the truth.
Fortunately, yours is just drivel.
Alba gu Brath!
Complain about this comment
159 What a lucid refutation...I'll bob down instantly. Who's pulling your strings?
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
who benefits? - well if Donald Trump decides to join this laughable boycott of Scotland and cancel his plans to build his golf course here, we all benefit!
Complain about this comment
Lincolncounty - reading through your various posts I find it difficult to take you seriously. On the one hand you're clearly a man of principle and although I don't agree with your point of view, this is a free country as we are frequently told so you are free to express it.
I do wonder why you feel the need to insult the people of one of the world's great countries, who share a history so rich in cultural and technological detail that it has influenced practically every nation on earth.
I'm also more than a little confused by your assertion that it's an individual's responsibility to protect themselves not the government's, but who protects us from each other? Here in Scotland we don't allow people to legally possess handguns, it's a shame that our Olympic shooting team cannot now legally practise their sport but that's one of the costs of democracy I suppose.
If you look back through your own history, you'll find it is littered with contributions from Scots and most were not convicts exported to the colonies either.
I won't bore you with the list but as a couple of examples how about Andrew Carnegie and John Paul Jones?
Perhaps these guys and others are part of the reason why so many Americans visit Scotland determined to "find their roots" or at least claim some connection to a clan? We don't mind, no really we don't.
I and practically all of my colleagues and friends have no bad feeling toward Americans, I have met loads of perfectly nice, friendly and generous people from all over the States.
I found those I met in New York just as easy to get along with as those I met in Florida, Pensacola and Bermuda. Those I have met in Scotland seem to be even more friendly and polite, but I don't know if this is because they were on vacation?
I really do struggle with the idea that "rugged individuals" are better than the "appeasers" of Europe. Your own late president Roosevelt had a similar outlook to ours, hence his signature on the Montevideo agreement in 1933 and it wasn't until Borah and Taft pressurised hi into re-arming that he moved towards conflict and even then restricted the USA to providing assistance finally committing to war in 1941. I think you must be confusing appeasement with negotiation, surely much better than launching into battle every time you disagree?
The biggest difficulty I have with your position stems from your sweeping statements which really do you little credit. Sentiments like "residing on your sad little " and "living under a monarchy couldn't understand this" do nothing but show your incredible insensitivity and ignorance of history.
You too have a monarchy in everything but name, except that you vote them in, then their sons, then give power to their wives and relatives. You pay them incredibly well, overlook their indiscretions and let them walk away from anything that resembles a court case, "I did not have sexual relations etc.."
The states you favour have their own rich and varied history which we needn't go into but I'm sure you'll know what I mean. Its just a shame that being a relatively young country you haven't yet had time to use this experience to grow into a great one.
For the record, we didn't appease Hitler as hundreds of thousands of dead soldiers, sailors and airmen would tell you if they could. Neville Chamberlain (co-signatory of the Munich agreement with Roosevelt) did try to persuade Hitler to withdraw from Poland, but to no avail. History shows that it was a naive idea but it did galvanise opinion against the Nazis and against appeasement.
Overall I must conclude that you are truly ignorant, spectacularly unintelligent or just goading us into wasting time debating with you, just as I have.
Complain about this comment
158. At 1:27pm on 23 Aug 2009, graecus1948
Scotland the Brave is dead.
So why are our boys fighting your war in Afghanistan?
Complain about this comment
Okay, gentlemen, a little time has passed and my anger has subsided somewhat. And I admit that I was a bit harsh with Scotland. I had been reading through several Scottish blogs and I was pissed at what I perceived to be so much anti-American sentiment. Let me apologize for insulting the great people of Scotland and Britain but, and yes there's a but, I'm still a little pissed. All of you who answered my post made valid arguments and I can concede that you may be right.
For example:
1. Megrahi may not be guilty as charged. (I don't beleive he's innocent and I'd like to see more proof, after all, YOU convicted him. Am I right?)
2. The American and British gov'ts were probably both complicit in this guy's release. (Again, I'd like to see more proof.)
3. Taking Scotland's size and population into account (or even ignoring the fact that Scotland is small geographically with a relatively small population) it is one of the most, or perhaps even the most influential nation in history. Scotland's cultural contribution to the world and to my country cannot be calculated. I couldn't possibly list even a fraction in this little blog. I concede this with no further argument. The facts speak for themselves. And, yes, I'd love to see it in person some day.
4. The anti-American sentiment in this particular blog is mild in comparison to some of the other blogs I perused.
Please accept my apology for insulting you. But there are areas where we will probably not agree.
for example:
1. The authority to release this man (guilty or innocent) was Scotlands and Scotland must accept the responsibility for this decision. I would be much less pissed if Scotland had said, "We are releasing this convicted murderer (although we beleive he may be innocent of the crime) as a good-will gesture to the oil-rich nation of Libya." OWN IT.
2. Americans are not as ignorant as most Europeans think, and conservative middle-America is much smarter than you think. But this often works to our advantage - Europeans consistently underestimate America(ns).
3. I beleive a democratic republic, with sufficient, built-in checks and balances, is the most superior form of government yet acheived by man (with one caveat: as long as the vast majority of the population is guided by principles and morality - as opposed to money and/or religion). Without guiding principles and morality, any old dictator will do.
4. One of the "checks" I refer to above is an armed population. I beleive it is an individuals right to protect his home and family (even if that means protecting them from the government.) Individuals give the government the right to enforce laws. An individual's rights trump the gov't's rights. If the government is corrupt then it is the responsibility of the individual to correct the gov't - violence against the gov't cannot be ruled out.)
5. Europe is beyond corrupt.
I understand that #4 is difficult for the European to comprehend. It's a different mind-set and I'm fine with that. If that means I'm a hick or and ignorant red-neck American then I'm okay with that too. I'm not trying to convince you or persuade you to admit that I'm right. It doesn't mean that I'm going to lay down for you either.
#156. Regarding the American gov't's complicity and hypocrisy. It's sad for me to admit, but you are probably right. If so, I will be screaming at them right along with you. That said, I feel that most Americans are pissed-off about Megrahi's release - this is a subjective statement - I don't have any poll numbers to quote for you.
Which brings me to the real reason why I was so pissed. If a European says he doesn't agree with the actions (or suspected actions) of my gov't - fine. If Europeans attack regular Americans (calling them ignorant, etc.) because of the actions or suspected actions of their gov't then, well, it pisses me off. Having a different mind-set doesn't make one ignorant. I don't think most Europeans will deny that they dislike or even hate (regular) Americans. The UK is becoming more and more like Germany and France in this aspect. It's getting old. Whenever I'm confronted by those with this attitude (in person or on a blog), I'm getting right back in their face; as I did an Italian I recently had the pleasure of meeting here in our States. I left him, well, speechless. So, keep it up, if you feel you must, but many, many Americans are growing weary of it (just ask those fellows in France that used to cater to so many American tourists). And it's about time.
Complain about this comment
Lincolncounty - it takes a big man to admit his mistakes and I for one am happy to accept your apology. As I said, I have liked all the Americans I ever met and find them generally keen to gain knowledge of history, customs and are very sociable.
Of course I am really lucky to live on Scotland's West Coast where we see an above average number of tourists,especially cruisers coming into Greenock. We have had many interesting and informative conversations coming from requests for directions and are always happy to help.
I agree that there are many questions hanging over Al- Megrahi's release which I would rather had been answered sooner. Like most of my friends, I long for a clearly defined explanation of what happened on that fateful day over Lockerbie, but we can't escape from the commonly held view that he's probably not the real villain. He just happened to be the one with the weakest excuses.
I sincerely hope we get a definitive answer soon, so that your countrymen can get closure and the burden of suspicion can be lifted from Scotland's shoulders. That way, we can all get back to what we do best, you guys visiting Scotland and us welcoming our American tourist friends.
There are many American ex-service folk who stayed on when the US submarine base closed on the Holy Loch and I'm sure they would share my sentiments about this. No matter what we may think, he has been released and will probably die soon enough. I just hope we get the truth and don't end up with another JFK style cover up.
Sliante!
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS