riddler 0 #26 September 4, 2009 QuoteIf 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. Setting a dangerous precedent. Once you start such practices, it becomes common to release mass murderers for any number of political or monetary gains.Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
christelsabine 1 #27 September 4, 2009 Quote .... Setting a dangerous precedent. Once you start such practices, it becomes common to release mass murderers for any number of political or monetary gains. Hey, how new is that? There even are several countries having best biz connections to mass murders dudeist skydiver # 3105 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
riddler 0 #28 September 5, 2009 From this article, Quote Gadhafi's son Saif al-Islam Gadhafi told CNN that initially, Britain refused to heed to Libya's demands that al Megrahi be included in the prisoner release agreement. "There was no mention of Mr. Megrahi until the British said, 'we are ready to sign but there should be a clause mentioning that Mr. Megrahi is excluded.' And then we said no," Gadhafi said. "We were very very angry. It's not acceptable." The agreement was eventually signed and days later, Libya approved a huge oil exploration contract with BP. It means Britain -- not Scotland -- gave in to Libya's demands that al Megrahi be eligible for transfer, even while insisting that the actual decision about whether to transfer him would be Scotland's. Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #29 September 5, 2009 QuoteNo one in authority has had the guts to state the truth about the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 above the Scottish village of Lockerbie on 21 December 1988, in which 270 people were killed. The governments in England and Scotland in effect blackmailed Megrahi into dropping his appeal as a condition of his immediate release. Of course there were oil and arms deals under way with Libya; but had Megrahi proceeded with his appeal, some 600 pages of new and deliberately suppressed evidence would have set the seal on his innocence and given us more than a glimpse of how and why he was stitched up for the benefit of "strategic interests". “The endgame came down to damage limitation," said the former CIA officer Robert Baer, who took part in the original investigation, "because the evidence amassed by [Megrahi's] appeal is explosive and extremely damning to the system of justice." New witnesses would show that it was impossible for Megrahi to have bought clothes that were found in the wreckage of the Pan Am aircraft - he was convicted on the word of a Maltese shopowner who claimed to have sold him the clothes, then gave a false description of him in 19 separate statements and even failed to recognise him in the courtroom. The new evidence would have shown that a fragment of a circuit board and bomb timer, "discovered" in the Scottish countryside and said to have been in Megrahi's suitcase, was probably a plant. A forensic scientist found no trace of an explosion on it. The new evidence would demonstrate the impossibility of the bomb beginning its journey in Malta before it was "transferred" through two airports undetected to Flight 103. A "key secret witness" at the original trial, who claimed to have seen Megrahi and his co-accused, al-Alim Khalifa Fahimah (who was acquitted), loading the bomb on to the plane at Frankfurt, was bribed by the US authorities holding him as a "protected witness". The defence exposed him as a CIA informer who stood to collect, on the Libyans' conviction, up to $4m as a reward. http://www.newstatesman.com/international-politics/2009/09/pilger-megrahi-justicestay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
riddler 0 #30 September 5, 2009 Well, to restate my position again, I'm fine if Scotland says he is innocent and then releases him. If so, then they fucked up, and a man lost much of his life because of it. But they are not saying he was innocent. They are saying he was guilty. AND they released him. AND it's becoming clear that he was released for oil. Either way, the government screwed up royally, IMO.Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #31 September 6, 2009 QuoteWell, to restate my position again, I'm fine if Scotland says he is innocent and then releases him. If so, then they fucked up, and a man lost much of his life because of it. But they are not saying he was innocent. They are saying he was guilty. AND they released him. AND it's becoming clear that he was released for oil. Either way, the government screwed up royally, IMO. we all know now that he was innocent and libya chosen as a scapegoat for the bombing. if you had the power would you let an innocent man die in prison?stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
riddler 0 #32 September 7, 2009 Quotewe all know now that he was innocent and libya chosen as a scapegoat for the bombing. Sorry - how do you know that?Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tonyhays 86 #33 September 7, 2009 He'll reply once alternet gives him the scoop! “That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.” Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #34 September 7, 2009 QuoteMegrahi was convicted by three Scottish judges sitting in a courtroom in "neutral" Holland. There was no jury. One of the few reporters to sit through the long and often farcical proceedings was the late Paul Foot, whose landmark investigation in Private Eye exposed it as a cacophony of blunders, deceptions and lies: a whitewash. The Scottish judges, while admitting a "mass of conflicting evidence" and rejecting the fantasies of the CIA informer, found Megrahi guilty on hearsay and unproven circumstance. Their 90-page "opinion", wrote Foot, "is a remarkable document that claims an honoured place in the history of British miscarriages of justice". (His report, Lockerbie - the Flight from Justice, can be downloaded from www.private-eye.co.uk for £5.) Foot reported that most of the staff of the US embassy in Moscow who had reserved seats on Pan Am flights from Frankfurt cancelled their bookings when they were alerted by US intelligence that a terrorist attack was planned. He named Margaret Thatcher the "architect" of the cover-up after revealing that she killed the independent inquiry her transport secretary Cecil Parkinson had promised the Lockerbie families; and in a phone call to President George Bush Sr on 11 January 1990, she agreed to "low-key" the disaster after their intelligence services had reported "beyond doubt" that the Lockerbie bomb had been placed by a Palestinian group, contracted by Tehran, as a reprisal for the shooting down of an Iranian airliner by a US warship in Iranian territorial waters. Among the 290 dead were 66 children. In 1990, the ship's captain was awarded the Legion of Merit by Bush Sr "for exceptionally meritorious conduct in the performance of outstanding service as commanding officer". Perversely, when Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait in 1991, Bush needed Iran's support as he built a "coalition" to expel his wayward client from an American oil colony. The only country that defied Bush and backed Iraq was Libya. "Like lazy and overfed fish," wrote Foot, "the British media jumped to the bait. In almost unanimous chorus, they engaged in furious vilification and open warmongering against Libya." The framing of Libya for the Lockerbie crime was inevitable. http://www.newstatesman.com/international-politics/2009/09/pilger-megrahi-justicestay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
riddler 0 #35 September 8, 2009 Quote(His report, Lockerbie - the Flight from Justice, can be downloaded from www.private-eye.co.uk for £5.) If it was such a grave miscarriage of justice, then an honorable man would probably do everything he could to make sure the whole world knew about it (including not profiteering from the opinion/information?) I don't know if the man was innocent or not. I do care that the government says he is guilty, and still released him for money. At that point, it's not a government, it's an extortion ring.Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
happythoughts 0 #36 July 5, 2010 new update Quote The cancer expert who predicted the Lockerbie bomber would die within three months of his release from prison has admitted he could live for another ten years or more. QuoteHe told the Sunday Times: 'There was always a chance he could live for ten years, 20 years . . . But it's very unusual.' The guy is 58. Are we saying 68, or 78 now? Different from 2 months. i guess the hope is that people will forget he is alive after 10 years, except for two groups. The people in Tripoli who view him as a hero and the families of the 270 people who died on the plane. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
