Lockerbie Bomber set free for oil

[riddler 0]

Is anyone surprised by this? I'm not. From the Sunday Times:

The British government decided it was “in the overwhelming interests of the United Kingdom” to make Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi, the Lockerbie bomber, eligible for return to Libya, leaked ministerial letters reveal.

Gordon Brown’s government made the decision after discussions between Libya and BP over a multi-million-pound oil exploration deal had hit difficulties. These were resolved soon afterwards.

The letters were sent two years ago by Jack Straw, the justice secretary, to Kenny MacAskill, his counterpart in Scotland, who has been widely criticised for taking the formal decision to permit Megrahi’s release.

The correspondence makes it plain that the key decision to include Megrahi in a deal with Libya to allow prisoners to return home was, in fact, taken in London for British national interests.

Edward Davey, the Liberal Democrat foreign affairs spokesman, said: “This is the strongest evidence yet that the British government has been involved for a long time in talks over al-Megrahi in which commercial considerations have been central to their thinking.”

Two letters dated five months apart show that Straw initially intended to exclude Megrahi from a prisoner transfer agreement with Colonel Muammar Gadaffi, under which British and Libyan prisoners could serve out their sentences in their home country.

In a letter dated July 26, 2007, Straw said he favoured an option to leave out Megrahi by stipulating that any prisoners convicted before a specified date would not be considered for transfer.

Downing Street had also said Megrahi would not be included under the agreement.

Straw then switched his position as Libya used its deal with BP as a bargaining chip to insist the Lockerbie bomber was included.

The exploration deal for oil and gas, potentially worth up to £15 billion, was announced in May 2007. Six months later the agreement was still waiting to be ratified.

On December 19, 2007, Straw wrote to MacAskill announcing that the UK government was abandoning its attempt to exclude Megrahi from the prisoner transfer agreement, citing the national interest.

In a letter leaked by a Whitehall source, he wrote: “I had previously accepted the importance of the al-Megrahi issue to Scotland and said I would try to get an exclusion for him on the face of the agreement. I have not been able to secure an explicit exclusion.

“The wider negotiations with the Libyans are reaching a critical stage and, in view of the overwhelming interests for the United Kingdom, I have agreed that in this instance the [prisoner transfer agreement] should be in the standard form and not mention any individual.”

Within six weeks of the government climbdown, Libya had ratified the BP deal. The prisoner transfer agreement was finalised in May this year, leading to Libya formally applying for Megrahi to be transferred to its custody.

Saif Gadaffi, the colonel’s son, has insisted that negotiation over the release of Megrahi was linked with the BP oil deal: “The fight to get the [transfer] agreement lasted a long time and was very political, but I want to make clear that we didn’t mention Mr Megrahi.

“At all times we talked about the [prisoner transfer agreement]. It was obvious we were talking about him. We all knew that was what we were talking about.

“People should not get angry because we were talking about commerce or oil. We signed an oil deal at the same time. The commerce and oil deals were all with the [prisoner transfer agreement].”

His account is confirmed by other sources. Sir Richard Dalton, a former British ambassador to Libya and a board member of the Libyan British Business Council, said: “Nobody doubted Libya wanted BP and BP was confident its commitment would go through. But the timing of the final authority to spend real money was dependent on politics.”

Bob Monetti of New Jersey, whose son Rick was among the victims of the 1988 bombing, said: “It’s always been about business.”

BP denied that political factors were involved in the deal’s ratification or that it had stalled during negotiations over the prisoner transfer talks.

A Ministry of Justice spokesman denied there had been a U-turn, but said trade considerations had been a factor in negotiating the prisoner exchange deal. He said Straw had unsuccessfully tried to accommodate the wish of the Scottish government to exclude Megrahi from agreement.

The spokesman claimed the deal was ultimately “academic” because Megrahi had been released on compassionate grounds: “The negotiations on the [transfer agreement] were part of wider negotiations aimed at the normalisation of relations with Libya, which included a range of areas, including trade.

“The exclusion or inclusion of Megrahi would not serve any practical purpose because the Scottish executive always had a veto on whether to transfer him.”

A spokesman for Lord Mandelson said he had not changed his position that the release of Megrahi was not linked to trade deals.

Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

[wayneflorida 0]

If you do something for a reason stand up and be man and admit it. This makes the leadership look
like cowards double time. Time to send another bomb into Kadafi's (sp) tent again.

[SkyBastard 0]

Bla blah blabla bla bla blah blah.

Dude #320
"Superstitious" is just a polite way of saying "incredibly fucking stupid".
DONK!

[lawrocket 3]

Humanitarian reasons. To prevent the cruelty of leaving him in a Scottish prison.

This doesn't change my opinion a bit of the release. I thought it was bullshit.

This, if proven correct, would merely show that it was more bullshit than I thought.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[pincheck 0]

Quote

Humanitarian reasons. To prevent the cruelty of leaving him in a Scottish prison.

This doesn't change my opinion a bit of the release. I thought it was bullshit.

This, if proven correct, would merely show that it was more bullshit than I thought.

And the one time i would be ashamed of being scottish. Please Don't forget thats Scots also died that night not just Americians.

Billy-Sonic Haggis Flickr-Fun

[christelsabine 1]

Quote

I'm not.
....

You're not? Jesus! Baby!

There were wars/invasions - killing hundreds of thousands of innocent people - started b/c of oil!!

Welcome to reality.

dudeist skydiver # 3105

[shropshire 0]

Indeed!

It's not like American has never looked after its own interests and fuck Everyone else.

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[Darius11 12]

Quote

Lockerbie Bomber set free for oil

We did something for oil but pretended it was for noble reasons??????????????? hmmm where have i seen that before...oh yea everywhere.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[lawrocket 3]

Sure. This one was distinctly stated for humanitarian reasons.

It's interesting, though. Those who think he should have been released for humanitarian reasons should still believe the right thing was done. Those that don't, well, some may now think it was the right thing (especially prisoner exchange, etc.)

I'm not one of either.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[rickjump1 0]

Quote

Quote

Humanitarian reasons. To prevent the cruelty of leaving him in a Scottish prison.

This doesn't change my opinion a bit of the release. I thought it was bullshit.

This, if proven correct, would merely show that it was more bullshit than I thought.

And the one time i would be ashamed of being scottish. Please Don't forget thats Scots also died that night not just Americians.

You guys keep this up an i'll burn my family crest, kilt (if I had one), and pour the scotch down the toilet. Your thug politicians are no different than ours.

Do your part for global warming: ban beans and hold all popcorn farts.

[riddler 0]

Quote

You're not? Jesus! Baby!

There were wars/invasions - killing hundreds of thousands of innocent people - started b/c of oil!!

Welcome to reality.***


Ya know, I wish I could listen to the politicians (even the one like Obama, that I support), and think "yeah, I believe everything they're saying". I wish when the Scottish government said they were great humanitarians, I could say "wow, what a great society". I wish when Bush said "weapons of mass destruction", I could think "war is bad, but this is a just cause". I wish when Obama says "go to Afghanistan to find and kill OBL", I could think "I'm sure there will be no nation-building there". I wish I could think all those things. I think it would make me happier about our society.

But I have yet to see a politician that didn't spin the money and power motives, and turn it into the Cause of the Day. I think I will vote for any politician that just stands up and says they will do anything, ANYTHING that brings more money and power into the country. It's going to be that way anyway, but at least I would vote for someone who wasn't lying about it.

BTW - Obama condemned Scotland for this action, and I think Scottish citizens, as well as people from all 21 countries of the victims have a right to be angry about it. And I don't generally approve of the media, but I am damn proud of them for exposing this story. I hope the Scottish AND British PMs are handed their hats at the next election, since it's becoming clear that Downing Street approved of the whole thing.

Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

[dreamdancer 0]

the bulk of the libyan oil contracts are with us companies - not british
(not to say that british oil companies aren't as greedy and warmongering as the us ones)

stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding

[riddler 0]

Quote

the bulk of the libyan oil contracts are with us companies - not british

Not saying the US is innocent at all. In fact, I believe the entire Iraq war (part 2) was probably for oil. But I haven't yet heard of the US releasing convicted terrorists for oil. Let me know if I'm wrong about that.

Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

[cliffwhite 0]

Quote

Humanitarian reasons. To prevent the cruelty of leaving him in a Scottish prison.

This doesn't change my opinion a bit of the release. I thought it was bullshit.

This, if proven correct, would merely show that it was more bullshit than I thought.

Hey lawrocket,
What do you know of the evidence(or lack there of )at trial?
Was the conviction bullshit?
If so how would you feel about the release?

Blues,
Cliff

2muchTruth

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Quote

Humanitarian reasons. To prevent the cruelty of leaving him in a Scottish prison.

This doesn't change my opinion a bit of the release. I thought it was bullshit.

This, if proven correct, would merely show that it was more bullshit than I thought.

Hey lawrocket,
What do you know of the evidence(or lack there of )at trial?
Was the conviction bullshit?
If so how would you feel about the release?

Blues,
Cliff

I don't know anything about it other than he was convicted. I often say that "presumed innocent until proven guilty" applies in a court of law but not in the court of public opinion. Hence, I hate OJ and still stll have been known to comment that "Lizzie Borden took an axe and gave her mother fourty whacks."

It seems that you bring up a variation of "presumed innocent in a court of law even if proven guilty." Usually, this applies to political causes such as Mumia abu Jamal or of allegations of innocence, like Roger Keith Coleman.

Since this cat wasn't released on the basis of actual innocence, one could think that the argument about trial irregularities is no longer important.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[cliffwhite 0]

Quote

Quote

[reply I don't know anything about it other than he was convicted.

Quote

Oh ! OK, Well let's just hang the son'of a bitch and throw his nuts to the dogs then ,aye?

Perhaps could it be that thgere was no real evidence against this bloke but mounds of paperwork implicating the CIA and MI6?

Could it be?

Could it be that you might ought to research the case a bit before you immediately decide my brother was guilty?

Blues,
Cliff

2muchTruth

• Quote

Share this post

---

Link to post

Share on other sites

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Could it be that you might ought to research the case a bit before you immediately decide my brother was guilty?

No. I personally think that we are free to actually rely on a person's rap sheet and convinction history to conclude that there is a reasonably probability that a person did what he or she was convicted of doing.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[cliffwhite 0]

Quote

[No. I personally think that we are free to actually rely on a person's rap sheet and convinction history to conclude that there is a reasonably probability that a person did what he or she was convicted of doing.

Uhm.., how about "beyond a reasonable doubt". LOL!
Your just friggin' with me !
Good on ya!!!

Blues,
Cliff

2muchTruth

[lawrocket 3]

Here in the US, a conviction is "beyond a reasonable doubt."

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[dreamdancer 0]

Quote

Here in the US, a conviction is "beyond a reasonable doubt."

here in the usa you have a habit of convicting and murdering hundreds of innocent prisoners (mostly, oddly, black)
(how many would you say lawrocket your justice system has murdered - gotta love that electric chair)

stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding

[lawrocket 3]

You call executions "murder.". I don't. We will therefore disagree.

I am not philosophically opposed to capital punishment. I am opposed to how it is applied in the US. And I am not a big fan of prosecutors.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[riddler 0]

I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Whether he as innocent or guilty is irrelevant, with regard to what the Scottish government has done.

1. The government convicted him, and they have not changed their mind about his guilt.
2. The government released him on "humanitarian grounds", while still saying he was guilty.
3. The government, according to the above article, released a convicted terrorist and mass-murderer from prison in exchange for a lucrative oil contract.

Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

[dreamdancer 0]

Quote

I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Whether he as innocent or guilty is irrelevant, with regard to what the Scottish government has done.

1. The government convicted him, and they have not changed their mind about his guilt.
2. The government released him on "humanitarian grounds", while still saying he was guilty.
3. The government, according to the above article, released a convicted terrorist and mass-murderer from prison in exchange for a lucrative oil contract.

the scottish justice system convicted him (the general consensus though is that he was innocent and would have proved this on appeal)

the scottish justice minister decided to release him (no friend of the english politicians)

no doubt that the english government would have preferred to see him released and get their oil contracts (but the decision was 50/50 and out of their hands)

stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding

[Skyrad 0]

If his release enabled the UK to improve its economic stability in the current economic climate, then I think that would be in the national interests of the UK. What would be the point of wasting a potentially valuble asset by making him die in prison in a few weeks, when he could be released to die in our national interests?
In this instance I would not have a problem with the decision.

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

[Skyrad 0]

Quote

You call executions "murder.". I don't. We will therefore disagree.

I am not philosophically opposed to capital punishment. I am opposed to how it is applied in the US. And I am not a big fan of prosecutors.

What would you change about the way its applied?

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca