Stu-Fred Posted August 28, 2009 Report Share Posted August 28, 2009 I think the decision to release Al-Megrahi was the right one! It was an act of compassion and I really respect McAskill for having the stones to do it. Gordon Brown can lick the "behinds" of the Americans as much as he wants for all i care. I mean....what's bitterness and agression going to solve on our part? Nothing! Alba Gu Brath! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatal Paper Cut Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 Releasing Megrahi was absolutely the correct decision, but the simple fact of the matter is his conviction was incredibly unsafe and he should never have been jailed. A few years ago, I spoke with Derek Ogg QC. He was one of Megrahi's appeal team and outlined the history of the Lockerbie bombing. It goes something like this. In 1988, the USS Vincennes which was was operating in the middle-east, shot down an aircraft they took to be hostile. That aircraft was an Iran Air Airbus on it's way to Dubai. 290 people were killed, Iran was outraged. The Iranian government then contacted a Palestinian group who were opposed to the U.S. as a result of America's support of Israel. They agree to detonate a bomb on Pan Am flight 103 in return for a large sum of money. Accordingly, a bomb is placed aboard a flight from Tel-Aviv to Heathrow. Upon arrival at Heathrow, the Tel-Aviv flight is parked directly alongside Pan Am 103. At some point, the luggage is removed from the Tel Aviv flight and placed in a holding bay near the two aircraft. The rubber doors of the luggage bay are cut open, the bomb is removed and mixed in with luggage on Pan Am 103. Two days after 103 was blown up over Lockerbie, the Iranian government transferred the sum of $11m to the Palestinian group. The evidence about the luggage bay was not made available in the original inquest. A flight from Tel Aviv directly to Heathrow would have minimised the amount of scrutiny luggage would have gone through. Personally, I would have like to see Megrahi continue his appeal. As such, he is likely to die wrongly convicted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustMe Posted August 31, 2009 Report Share Posted August 31, 2009 Fatal Paper Cut wrote Accordingly, a bomb is placed aboard a flight from Tel-Aviv to Heathrow. That just sounds wrong. Security on flights to and from Tel Aviv is much higher than normal and I am sure that if Palestinian groups were able to get round Israeli airport security they would have been targeting El-Al flights for years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatal Paper Cut Posted August 31, 2009 Report Share Posted August 31, 2009 That just sounds wrong. Security on flights to and from Tel Aviv is much higher than normal and I am sure that if Palestinian groups were able to get round Israeli airport security they would have been targeting El-Al flights for years. Possibly. It certainly seems more plausible than three or four flights/connecting flights from Libya to Heathrow. According to Lockerbietruth.co.uk, the Palestinian group that was contacted by the Iranian National Guard was based in Beirut, so it's possible Derek Ogg was mistaken. However, I have read other accounts about the security doors of the luggage bay next to Pan-Am 103 being cut open. Those accounts also mention the aeroplane adjacent to Pan-Am 103 being a flight from Tel Aviv. Given that those responsible must have had men at Heathrow to be able to break into the luggage bay, its not beyond the realms of fantasy to suggest that they might also have had sympathisers working within the Tel-Aviv airport. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marooned in Maywick Posted September 5, 2009 Report Share Posted September 5, 2009 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/6140801/Jack-Straw-admits-Lockerbie-bombers-release-was-linked-to-oil.html Was this ever in doubt? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Posted September 5, 2009 Report Share Posted September 5, 2009 So it was part of discussions for a deal for prisoner transfer... which had nothing to do with Scotland and the decision to release him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marooned in Maywick Posted September 5, 2009 Report Share Posted September 5, 2009 If it was only the government in Scotland who could make the decision to release him...what was Straw doing including him as part of a PTA? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Posted September 5, 2009 Report Share Posted September 5, 2009 Well he wanted a prisoner transfer, which as far as i'm aware downing street mistakenly thought they were able to authorise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Symbister Posted September 5, 2009 Report Share Posted September 5, 2009 Well he wanted a prisoner transfer, which as far as i'm aware downing street mistakenly thought they were able to authorise. I don't think Downing Street ever thought that. They were negotiating a Prisoner Transfer Agreement with Libya as part of the moves to improve relations. The Scottish Government wanted Megrahi excluded from any PTA and Jack Straw initially tried to achieve that; but the Libyan Government insisted that this PTA be the same as every other PTA, in other words there should be no mention of specific prisoners. Jack Straw then realised that he couldn't win that argument and that if he didn't accept the Libyan proposals he'd put Libyan-British relations (and commercial opportunities) at risk. The PTA was a UK-wide one, but there is no suggestion that London thought it could over-rule Edinburgh on a Scottish case. In the end, the Scottish Government couldn't authorise a transfer under the PTA because the Scottish Crown Office still had some sort of proceedings in hand involving Megrahi (separate from his own appeal) and that was why the release on compassionate grounds was approved - rightly, in my view. The Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission found six grounds on which Megrahi might succeed in an appeal; I don't know whether that includes concern about the US paying the Maltese shopkeeper huge sums of money to testify against Megrahi. Dr Jim Swire of the UK families group thinks neither he nor Libya had anything to do with it and many people have pointed to the shooting down of the Iranian aircraft as a far more plausible trigger. There really needs to be a full inquiry, but the chances of the UK government and the US government co-operating don't look good, given that they withheld some evidence from the defence team on the basis that it was too sensitive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Posted September 5, 2009 Report Share Posted September 5, 2009 Thanks for clearing that up. As for the last couple of paragraphs I agree. Personally I think secretly the the US is quite pleased with this outcome, as it is very unlikely the full truth will come out , which could harm their reputation if it's found Megrahi is innocent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArabiaTerra Posted September 6, 2009 Report Share Posted September 6, 2009 I have to say, I think the Scottish Government called it right. Release on compassionate grounds. No fear or favour given because of the notoriety of the case. This guy is dying,.... release him. The most humane thing to do, ... regardless of whether he was innocent, or guilty. ( and I do believe there were serious flaws in the case against him, and significant leads pointing in other directions that were not addressed at the original trial, In other words,.... I think his appeal might well have succeeded.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KOYAANISQATSI Posted September 18, 2009 Report Share Posted September 18, 2009 This guy is dying,.... release him.The most humane thing to do, ... regardless of whether he was innocent, or guilty. If I thought for a second he was guilty of this I'd approve of his release only if it involved him being released from life at the same time.Never mind that they felt they had to lie about his guilt; I'm starting to wonder if he ever had cancer in the first place. On the Lockerbie bombing's 20th anniversary, The Independent newspaper published an opinion piece by award-winning journalist and author, Hugh Miles, repeating questions around Megrahi's guilt, writing in part,Since the Crown never had much of a case against Megrahi, it was no surprise when the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) found prima facie evidence in June 2007 that Megrahi had suffered a miscarriage of justice and recommended that he be granted a second appeal...If Megrahi didn't do it, who did? Some time ago suspicion fell on a gang headed by a convicted Palestinian terrorist named Abu Talb and a Jordanian triple agent named Marwan Abdel Razzaq Khreesat. Both were Iranian agents; Khreesat was also on the CIA payroll. Abu Talb was given lifelong immunity from prosecution in exchange for his evidence at the Lockerbie trial; Marwan Khreesat was released for lack of evidence by German police even though a barometric timer of the type used to detonate the bomb on Pan Am Flight 103 was found in his car when he was arrested On 14 August 2009, Megrahi withdrew his appeal. South of Scotland SNP MSP Christine Grahame said, "There are a number of vested interests who have been deeply opposed to this appeal continuing as they know it would go a considerable way towards exposing the truth behind Lockerbie.... In the next days, weeks and months new information will be placed in the public domain that will make it clear that Mr Megrahi had nothing to do with the bombing of Pan Am 103."Tam Dalyell, the former Labour MP for West Lothian has long believed Megrahi is the victim of a catastrophic miscarriage of justice, and has publicly stated that Megrahi is merely a scapegoat. And how's that cancer going? Following the release, doubts were expressed whether Megrahi was as ill as claimed by MacAskill in his statement to the Scottish Parliament. The guidance on compassionate release of a terminally ill prisoner under Scottish law specifies that death must be likely to occur "soon"; there is no fixed time limit but a life expectancy of three months is suggested as "appropriate".Dr Simpson, a former member of the British Association of Urological Surgeons' prostate cancer working group who specialised in prostate disease research, expressed doubt that Megrahi would die within the next three months and claimed that Megrahi could live for eight months. He then went on to say that, "Kenny MacAskill released him apparently on the advice of just one doctor whose status is not clear and who is not named."On September 2, 2009, it was reported that his terminal cancer worsened, and that he had been transferred to the Intensive Care Unit. However, Libyan Foreign Ministry spokesman Mohammed Seyala claimed that Megrahi had actually been moved to a special VIP wing of the hospital and was receiving full treatment from a team of doctors, and that his condition was not dangerous. However, Megrahi's family claimed that they had been informed that he had been taken to the Intensive Care Unit, but they were not allowed to visit him. The Foreign Ministry confirmed that his family was not allowed to visit him, but claimed that it was to ensure his safety. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdelbaset_Ali_Mohmed_Al_Megrahi "it was reported that his terminal cancer worsened""his condition was not dangerous""family not allowed to visit him to ensure his safety. " If his family are such a risk to his safety, then why bother shipping him to them. Yup, it stinks; just the same as almost every other piece of crap they channel down the lie box to the goodly flock to get them bleating in tune about what a caring bunch they have running the show. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shetlandpeat Posted October 25, 2009 Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 On the bbc today http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8324512.stm The Lockerbie bombing investigation is being re-opened. A suprise... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RileyBKing Posted October 25, 2009 Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 I'm not a clever edinburgh lawyer, but shouldn't an investigation PRECEDE the decision to release (or not)? Stable doors and horses spring to mind... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KOYAANISQATSI Posted October 25, 2009 Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 A suprise... Not really. They're not going to be looking for anyone outside of the box where they placed the blame in the first place. The best the families can hope for out of this is for a load of money to be wasted chasing shadows, perhaps more hefty payments given out for more fake evidence to get some other mug thrown to the wolves and of course some headlines to convince everyone that they got off their erses to do something. Justice and truth mean less than nothing to these people. How is Megrahi? not dead I expect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now