Merged [Ed] Convicted Lockerbie bomber released

[Rolfe]

A Lot of commentators in the US are suggesting this is being partly done as a delibertate snub to the US by the SNP.
If true, way to go,guys.

Just a bit of education here.

The SNP is so anxious not to upset the US government I was a bit worried it might cave under pressure and not do the right thing. Happily, when it came down to it, they had more backbone than that.

One of the serious concerns within the SNP is that when we get to the stage of negotiating independence, the USA may decide to use its international muscle to stand in the way. Because of this, the SNP is extremely keen to stay on the right side of the USA whenever possible. Give Alex Salmond half a chance to brown-nose any influential US politician, and he'll be right in there; big brown eyes, sincere smile and all.

I really wish it hadn't been necessary to upset anyone at all in the USA, for purely personal and pragmatic reasons. And I think this is the general view within the SNP. However, it had to be done, if the right thing was to be done.

Rolfe.

 

[E.J.Armstrong]

But clearly, even if he was, he wasn't the only one who was guilty. He didn't just dream this idea up all by himself and decide to bomb an airliner. He was an intelligence agent, not Osama bin Laden.

So who did?

Well, if you adhere to the Official Version, Gaddafi did that bit. Because of a series of US bombing raids on Libyan cities in 1986, launched from UK air bases, in which his step-daughter was killed and which were believed to be aimed at killing him.

So what the hell is the point in demonising a terminally ill catspaw, while shaking the hand of the man who planned and ordered the atrocity?

Rolfe.

Good point. I share your question about the behaviour of the US and UK governments.

It is remarkable how often patsies are set up to conceal the truth. If I was a relative, like Jim Swire, who has campaigned for decades, for the real truth to come out I would be appalled that the last avenue to the truth via the appeal appears to have been cut off.

Maybe Syria, a country the US wanted to get close to at the time of the trial apparently, will swim into the frame again when Libya's oil runs out?

 

[funk de fino]

So you served in NI (and I do have respect for you for doing so), yet you are unable to explain what the reasoning was behind the release of prisoners?
And you consider that the release of a convicted mass murderer from Libya as being basically the same?
Ronnie Biggs killed no-one, never mind 270 people, Im lost as to why you bring him up.

Your diversion is not working.

You have no idea what my thoughts on prisoner release are and are assuming because I am defending the SNP right to act on the behest of the people of this country, free from influence by other politicians from other countries, that I agree with him being released in this way. You are sadly mistaken and have been fooled by your anti SNP bias.

The UK released the Irish murderers because it wanted something politically. And do not forget the US role in this as well.

The Scots govt released Magrahi because it is what they do and have done in the past. Even if it was for political gain then it is equivalent to the above.

What is worse?

You have made up a CT and have spectacularly failed to provide an ounce of back up for any of your spittle flecked ranting.

Ronnie Biggs was released from prison on compassionate grounds despite the opposition of the families of the train driver who was attacked during the robbery. Now I know Ronnie did not attack the driver and I know the driver did not die till 7 years later of leukemia, but he was sentenced to 30 years (an unfair sentence in my opinion) for the crime. He did not serve it, the UK govt let him out because he was dying.

Whats the local anti SNP guy think of that? "Its different." It will be different even if it was exactly the same just because someone spelled a word different eh? It will never be the same again unless it is the SNP again.

But here's the hook. In a thread about Ronnie Biggs, my thoughts on parole and early release are made very plain. My posts in this thread are very plain. I have supported the Scots govts right to make these decisions without bowing to pressure from outsiders on a matter that happened in this country and involved our justice system. You supported the UK govt doing something similar. You probably think I am an SNP can do no wrong guy and I am a rabid lefty, you are very wrong. You probably think I am anti Labour, you are very wrong. You probably think I am anti English, you are very wrong. You went from having banter with me to saying you hate all nationalists. You are the bigot. You are the extremist. You are wrong.

You could not be anymore wrong if your scottish parent was Wrongity McWrong from Wrong Crescent, Wrongtown, Wrongness.

If you really care, and do not want to be the wrong-un any longer, then I can discuss my thoughts on parole, The SNP, Labour, Megrahi and Ronnie Biggs. But you need to reign in your seemingly rampant, testosterone fuelled, hatred and act like a rational adult.

 

[scissorhands]

You have no idea what my thoughts on prisoner release are

Because you keep refraining from telling me.

The UK released the Irish murderers because it wanted something politically.

You mean republican AND loyalist prisoners?
Yes they did.
It was necessary for the peace process.

The Scots govt released Magrahi because it is what they do and have done in the past.

Explain when they freed someone convicted of killing 270 people on compassionate grounds before.

You probably think I am an SNP can do no wrong guy and I am a rabid lefty, you are very wrong. You probably think I am anti Labour, you are very wrong. You probably think I am anti English, you are very wrong.

Well thats a lot of assumptions isnt it?
I cant remember accusing you of anything there.

But yes my post last night about hating nationalists may have been slightly over the top.
Im not a rabidly political until 10pm.

 

[E.J.Armstrong]

Explain when they freed someone convicted of killing 270 people on compassionate grounds before.

Explain why it has to be 270 for the comparison to count?

PS
Any chance of you supporting your claims yet?

 

[Rolfe]

I note that Kenny MacAskill has granted 100% of the requests for compassionate release made to him.

How unlike the home life of our own dear ex-Governor of Texas....

Rolfe.

 

[scissorhands]

I note that Kenny MacAskill has granted 100% of the requests for compassionate release made to him.

How unlike the home life of our own dear ex-Governor of Texas....

Rolfe.

Evil Texans keep prisoners in prison shocker.

 

[Rolfe]

Hard to find a contemporary article about the 2007 deal in the desert now, because every search is swamped by recent stuff.

Try this.

:: May 29, 2007: Mr Blair hails the strength of the relationship between the UK and Libya after talks with Col Gaddafi during his farewell tour of Africa.
:: June 7, 2007: First Minister Alex Salmond tells the Scottish Parliament he has expressed concern to Mr Blair over a deal struck with Libya, which could lead to Megrahi being transferred back to Libya.

Blair did a deal with Gadaffi in 2007 to open the way to have Megrahi returned to Libya. Only hours later, BP announced a multi-million-pound oil deal with Libya.

The reason it didn't go ahead was that Jack McConnell was no longer First Minister, and Alex Salmond doesn't take orders from Tony Blair.

So it's a bit rich for the Labour party and its supporters to be getting on their high horses now.

Rolfe.

 

[Jaggy Bunnet]

Hard to find a contemporary article about the 2007 deal in the desert now, because every search is swamped by recent stuff.

Try this.




Blair did a deal with Gadaffi in 2007 to open the way to have Megrahi returned to Libya. Only hours later, BP announced a multi-million-pound oil deal with Libya.

The reason it didn't go ahead was that Jack McConnell was no longer First Minister, and Alex Salmond doesn't take orders from Tony Blair.

So it's a bit rich for the Labour party and its supporters to be getting on their high horses now.

Rolfe.

I'm sure our resident Labour apologist will be happy to explain that this deal was nothing to do with Megrahi but was a priority to deal with the other Libyan prisoners being held in the UK.

After all Tony tried that one, even though there were a grand total of ZERO other Libyan prisoners. So the prisoner transfer agreement had nothing to do with the one prisoner who actually existed but was in fact about hyopthetical other prisoners should any turn up in the future. Or Blair lied.

 

[Rolfe]

I'm sure our resident Labour apologist will be happy to explain that this deal was nothing to do with Megrahi but was a priority to deal with the other Libyan prisoners being held in the UK.

After all Tony tried that one, even though there were a grand total of ZERO other Libyan prisoners. So the prisoner transfer agreement had nothing to do with the one prisoner who actually existed but was in fact about hyopthetical other prisoners should any turn up in the future. Or Blair lied.

It was all quite funny at the time. Tony shaking hands with Gadaffi on the deal they'd struck, already knowing that the SNP had won the election, but I think still at the stage where Labour was faintly hoping to put together some sort of grand coalition to hold on to power, or just beyond it when everybody was predicting that the minority government woudln't last five minutes.

According to the Libyans, the prisoner transfer deal was all about Megrahi, who else would it be about, since there was nobody else it might apply to. They'd been assured by Tony that there would be no problem with the Scottish Executive. According to Tony - well, who knows. A different story for every day. One day Megrahi had been explicitly exluded. The next day, well, no, but he wasn't the reason for the deal and of course Scottish sovereignty in the matter would be respected.

Poor Tony, he'd been quite confident that he could deliver, because Jack McConnell would do as he was told. And then during May, it all unravelled.

Now the Libyans are saying that Megrahi's release was indeed connected to a trade deal. Well of course it was, from their pont of view. They signed a $900 million deal to allow BP access to their oil a few hours after they shook hands with Tony in May 2007. It took a while, but it's finally happened. And according to Oliver Miles, the SNP played it straight and the Westminster government was wheeling-dealing behind the scenes. Oh, a summary of the interview is up now.

Oliver Miles interview

Krishnan Guru-Murthy asked the former British Ambassador of Libya whether he suspected some kind of deal between Libya and the UK government had been negotiated over the release of Al-Magrahi. He said:

"Yes I do suspect that. I can't be quite sure. I think that what MacAskill said yesterday struck me as being straight and I wouldn't want to impune in any way his decision to release Magrahi on humanitarian grounds which I think was right.

"But I think behind the scenes there'd been a lot of wheeling and dealing - and I think it's too much of a coincidence that Magrahi's informing the court of his wish to withdraw his appeal happened on the very same day that the Scottish decision to release him on humanitarian grounds was leaked to the BBC. It could be a coincidence but I don't believe it."

Asked what he thought would have been the British motivation for this deal? He replied:

"In the first place I don't think anyone in the British government or probably in the Scottish government was very keen on the appeal going ahead. Because I think it would have been embarassing frankly. I think it's quite likely that various dirty washing would have been brought out and washed on subjects like manipulation of evidence and so on.

"Secondly I think the British government saw this, quite rightly, as a potential snag for Anglo-Libyan relations and they wanted to get it out of the way. I think Tony Blair originally thought that he could deal with it quite simply by putting Magrahi back to Libya under the prisoner transfer agreement. It turned out it wasn't as simple as that."

It just gets more and more convoluted.

Rolfe.

 

[T.A.M.]

And Im supposed be compassionate to someone who murdered 270 people in cold blood, none of which got any kind of time with their relatives prior to their deaths?
Nah, he should have been dropped out of an airplane without a parachute, a long time ago.

Well it is a personal thing of course, and I myself find it incredibly hard, if not impossible as AN INDIVIDUAL, to have compassion for this monster.

However, as I said before, really it is the CHRISTIAN thing to do. My comment was, to be honest a comment on how far from "Christian" we sometimes are as a society, or to look at it differently, how IMPOSSIBLE it is to follow all of the Christian teachings.

On another point, beyond what you, or EJ, or I think as individuals, there is a difference in what has been decided as law by a people/society in the clear and unfogged light of ethical debate and arm chair legislation, and what we may think as individuals concerning a PARTICULAR SITUATION, and from our particular perspective.

I agree with the Scottish law in principle, to be beneficent and merciful as a society even where others were not, despite how hard I find it to see the law enacted in this particular horrible circumstance.

TAM

 

[scissorhands]

Well it is a personal thing of course, and I myself find it incredibly hard, if not impossible as AN INDIVIDUAL, to have compassion for this monster.

You dont need to, the especially compassionate SNP has compassionately let him out to return to his family.
If only they were so compassionate towards the relatives.
Thats politics, at least in SNP land, if it was a plane full of Scots blown up over Texas you could well expect a different response and a different interpretation of "compassion".

 

[Jaggy Bunnet]

So much for your credibility.

Someone has a credibility problem, but unfortunately for you it is the person denying that Blair did the prisoner transfer deal to get Megrahi released and that Salmond wanted him excluded.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/7224194.stm

Mr Salmond told BBC Scotland: "My role, the role of the government is to defend the integrity of the judicial system in Scotland and that's exactly what we intend to do."

"We've made it quite clear that, in terms of prisoner transfer agreement with Libya, we thought it would be appropriate if anyone connected with the Lockerbie atrocity was excluded specifically from any prisoner transfer agreement.

"Until very recently, that was also the position of the UK Government."

'Commercial deal'

Mr Salmond went on: "Now that seems to have changed and it's up to the UK government to explain why that position has changed and why that exclusion hasn't been gained."

http://www.sundayherald.com/news/he...arned_blair_tell_salmond_about_libya_deal.php

The insider said that the British had effectively "deceived" the Libyans into believing the UK government could orderprisonersfromnorthofthe Border to be transferred by not making the situation explicitly clear. "It was pretty plain the Libyans were involved in the late stages of involvementinnegotiationswhichtheythought would culminate in al-Megrahi's transfer home," said the source. "It's perfectly within the UK government's powers to draw up a memorandum of understanding, but one would think honesty would lead the British to say that such prison releases are within the UK legal framework, but not in Scotland or Northern Ireland.

"The Libyans clearly didn't understand the political process and were still saying we are going to get our man back'. Someone pointed out to them the UK cannot arrange the transfer of a prisoner from a Scottish prison to Libya. That came as something of a shock, but by then the deal was virtually signed andsealed.Thoseresponsiblefor drawing up the memorandum were economic with the truth by not saying that the ultimate decision on al-Megrahi must be left to Scotland."

 

[Jaggy Bunnet]

You dont need to, the especially compassionate SNP has compassionately let him out to return to his family.
If only they were so compassionate towards the relatives.
Thats politics, at least in SNP land, if it was a plane full of Scots blown up over Texas you could well expect a different response and a different interpretation of "compassion".

That's right because on your planet, no Scots were killed as a result of the Lockerbie bomb, right?

Of course in the real world, that isn't true, and you know it isn't true but hey, why let a little detail like that get in the way of your lies.

 

[Rolfe]

I salute your Google-fu, JB.

Rolfe.

 

[scissorhands]

That's right because on your planet, no Scots were killed as a result of the Lockerbie bomb, right?

Oh some were killed, but they are expendable, when it comes to making sure that the murderer gets his hugs in Tripoli, after all he killed LOTS of Americans.
That makes him a hero.

 

[LibraryLady]

I have split off ten posts to AAH. EVERYONE needs to stop bickering and to remember civility. Thank you.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: LibraryLady

 

[Locknar]

The bickering stops NOW, and yes this means you (Scissorhands and Rolfe). Why the back to back Mod warnings...because every post between LibraryLady's post and this one just continued the bickering. Address the OP in a civil manner.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Locknar

 

[Ausmerican]

At least we are finding out how certain lefties in the UK really feel about the mass murder of Americans; No Big Deal.

Really? I would say no more than this post of yours means that you think that the American lives lost were the only ones that were worth mentioning.

 

[Jaggy Bunnet]

Oh some were killed, but they are expendable, when it comes to making sure that the murderer gets his hugs in Tripoli, after all he killed LOTS of Americans.
That makes him a hero.

Isn't it strange how you have nothing to do say about the direct quote from Salmond proving you wrong?