Scottish government defends Lockerbie bomber's release

I hope he dies soon and it's painful.

In Britain, the "terminally ill", once released from prison, often go on to make a remarkable recovery.

I do wonder why the SNP helped out Brown on this one. What's in it for them?

Libyan's are praising Scotland/UK and thanking them for the deal that they made in exchange for oil rights. The Scots are idiots. Islamic extremists see this as weakness and they are right.

FBI director Robert Mueller said in a letter to Scotland’s government that al-Megrahi’s release would give comfort to terrorists all over the world.

That comment is a slap in the face for over 200 British servicemen who have been killed in Afghanistan whilst supporting the US-led 'war on terror'.

and takes our relations with Libya back to where they were for too long, a bad place,” U.S. Sen. Joseph Lieberman, a Connecticut Independent, told CNN.

So the US idea of good relations with Libya would be to refuse the early release to his family of a terminally ill high-profile prisoner with connections to Gadhafi ? They just don't have a clue do they ?

Libyan's are praising Scotland/UK and thanking them for the deal that they made in exchange for oil rights. The Scots are idiots. Islamic extremists see this as weakness and they are right.

You could either approve the early release of a terminally ill terrorist who is about to drop dead, in exchange for oil rights. Or you could cost over 1 million Iraqi, British and US lives in exchange for oil rights. Sorry to correct you so soon and all that, but anyone taking the second option would be an idiot.

I notice how incredibly easy it is for anyone and everyone to criticise the Scottish justice minister, when none of them actually had to be the one standing up nin front of millions of people directly in the firing line making the decision and shouldering the responsibility for it alone.

Whichever decision he had made it would have been controversial. He was damned if he did and damned if he didn`t. I admire his bravery for being the one to stand up and make the decision, regardless of the decision itself.

As for the Libyans waving Scottish flags when the guy arrived back home. I agree that the "heros welcome" was totally tasteless, but why cant people see it for what it was - a gesture towards the people of Scotland for their humanity, and not the finger-slipping gesture everyone is trying to turn it into.

I think the Scottish have made themselves and the west "the bigger people" in this whole sad spectacle - dignity and humanity. I don`t think that is appearing "soft" to terrorists at all - quite the opposite in fact.

kirakira's point is very relevant. I am proud of the fact that the Scottish courts still respect the law and prisoners human rights and do not practice injustices of human rights such as Guantanamo Bay and the 700 secret flights of political prisoners to Guantanamo Bay. In the year 2009 the Scottish courts are progressive and respectful and the American establishment is barbaric.

When will Americans realise that mercy, forgiveness and conciliation are not bad things? If the world worked solely on people acting through feelings of revenge, we would all be living in places like Iraq.

a flag-waving crowd of hundreds in a country of millions this is not meaningful. Someone would celebrate anything political in any country in the world.

This will blow over quickly but Britain got something valuable out of it, probably the very thing Brown is denying, oil and gas rights. Yes, it's a slap in the face to soldiers, the US and the bereaved families, blah, blah, blah but it's still a very smart move.

Yeah, it's not that hard to believe the usual "you scratch my back" deal happens here. It happens all the time in geopolitics - the US certainly doesn't get a pass, and sure Scotland/UK doesn't get one neither.

And northlondon, the answer to the either/or question is "neither." For oil rights is not a right reason. Still happens, but that still doesn't make it right.

lostrune, you are correct. But my post was not about trying to justify the better of two evils. My point was in response to the poster who was crying out about exchanging oil rights for a murderer. I merely reminded everyone that the people currently crying out about exchanging oil rights for a murderer are the last people on earth who should be complaining about human life in exchange for the availability of oil.

http://www.consortiumnews.com/2009/082109a.html

The scots did right there is nothing behind the decision but compassion as SNP and Labour are not best of friends so would not come to any oil / gas agreement with Libya. The guy did bad, thats if he did do it as speculation still about he did not do it, but i know he was convicted.

Wolfpack - "Islamic extremists see this as weakness and they are right".

This is your opinion. I dont think you know anything of Islamic extremists, or the Scots for that matter. I think if you spoke to the Taliban that meet the Scots every day in Aghanistan you might get a different response.

The Scots may have been naive, guilty at most of thinking they might get some support from their allies. I dont have to agree with al-Megrahi's release to believe it was done out of compassion in accordance with the law. This is a strength.

So Gadaffi admitted to executing of these innocents, managed to get his guy released from jail, gave him a proud welcome when he promised not to, then openly admitted that the release was discussed along with lucrative financial deals for the UK knowing full well that disclosing that information would cause major embarrassment for the UK government. And the end result? Some Brits are talking about how proud they are.

I can't say I'm a fan of Gadaffi, but you do have to respect his ability to bend the UK over a barrel, then send them home with smiles on their faces.

“I understand the huge and strongly held views of the American families, but that’s not all the families who were affected by Lockerbie,” Salmond said. “As you’re well aware, a number of the families, particularly in the UK, take a different view and think that we made the right decision.”

Of course not ALL of the victims were American but with 180 Americans killed versus 52 from the UK this rationale is simply "bollocks".

kirakira25

As for the Libyans waving Scottish flags when the guy arrived back home. I agree that the "heros welcome" was totally tasteless, but why cant people see it for what it was - a gesture towards the people of Scotland for their humanity, and not the finger-slipping gesture everyone is trying to turn it into.

I'm pretty sure the 'well wishing' Libyan crowd wasn't waving any Scottish flags...

"but with 180 Americans killed versus 52 from the UK this rationale is simply "bollocks"."

Heh....I love to hear Americans say that word.

Hear, hear to bgaudry's post. "Forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us." Surely one of the cornerstones of the Christian faith to which President Obama and his predecessors claim to adhere?

I must admit a giggle when I saw reports earlier of livid Americans shrieking for a boycott of Scotland because of this. Brings back fond memories of those nutters that wanted to bomb Paris because the French wouldn't take part in the Iraq money grubbing exercise.

Heh, but American cheese's and wines..they're better, honest!! Next I'll be hearing what passes for "whisky" from Tenessee is better than a good old single malt...

Grow up for pete's sake.

northlondon: You could either approve the early release of a terminally ill terrorist who is about to drop dead, in exchange for oil rights. Or you could cost over 1 million Iraqi, British and US lives in exchange for oil rights. Sorry to correct you so soon and all that, but anyone taking the second option would be an idiot.

But didn't the Brits take both options? ;)

You've already admitted that you agree with the US and disagree with Scotland. What more is there to add? There are two sides here.....one side has you and the FBI....the other side has the UK and Libya. You're saying the US is right and the UK/Libya are wrong.

Now, feel free to bring up any distractions that will prevent you from having to say the above. I'll be more than happy to repeat your position again in the future if you start to stay a little too far from home again.

Oh my god, on the BBC News Front page it says loads of Americans are starting petitions to boycott Scottish products and renmae Scoth Whiskey, freedom Liquor. It is like something out of a comedy.

Scotland made the choice and should stop defending itself. It choose to follow the Scottish Law. The sill Americans getting so upset and asking for boycotts etc, are just making themselves look like very silly billies indeed.

Heh.....Freedom Liquor. What a bunch of cranks.

SuperLib - "So Gadaffi admitted to executing of these innocents, managed to get his guy released from jail, gave him a proud welcome when he promised not to, then openly admitted that the release was discussed along with lucrative financial deals for the UK knowing full well that disclosing that information would cause major embarrassment for the UK government. And the end result? Some Brits are talking about how proud they are.

I can't say I'm a fan of Gadaffi, but you do have to respect his ability to bend the UK over a barrel, then send them home with smiles on their faces."

You should be a politician. Youve pretty much managed to pervert that whole statement.

Dang....I wish I would have registered that .com name....I didn't even think of it. That one guy with (probably) a $6 GoDaddy account is now front page news on CNN and the BBC.

http://www.boycottscotland.com/

I didn't see any mention of Freedom Liquor, but Europeans will make that true even if it isn't. Hell if I were European I'd start my own website pretending to be an American trying to change the name and I bet I'd get on the BBC, too. ;)

The guy actually did a pretty good job. He's expressing a lot of outrage over the release, but he's also telling Americans to write their own representatives to stop American oil companies from trying to profit in places like Libya:

Oppose any attempt by American industries, particularly the oil companies, to take advantage of the Lockerbie scandal by writing to President Obama and making clear that any trade relations between Libya and the United States is an insult to the victims of Pan Am Flight 103.

In 2006 the Bush Administration removed Libya from the list of state sponsors of terror and we do not expect that this will ever be reversed by the current administration. However, the Obama Administration must take a stand and condemn any attempt by American corporations to take advantage of the current situation to justify business with a brutal regime on the grounds that the British are doing the same.

Dang....he even adds in a link to the Wikipedia entry detailing the overthrow of the Iranian government in 1953. It's probably good for Europeans to learn what happened since 99% of the ones I've met seem to think it was all about the US when in fact the UK was behind everything.

northlondon says:

You could either approve the early release of a terminally ill terrorist who is about to drop dead, in exchange for oil rights. Or you could cost over 1 million Iraqi, British and US lives in exchange for oil rights. Sorry to correct you so soon and all that, but anyone taking the second option would be an idiot.

American oil companies have not taken over the oil fields of Iraq despite the Left's looney conspiracy theories. The businesses and free people of Iraq will benefit from the export of their own natural resources in the form of tax revenue and jobs (and yes, probably some bribes here and there). By the way, it's not as if the US is stealing Iraq's oil and it's going directly to America to power all of those planet-killing SUVs. There is no deal between an non-existent Iraqi dictator and the US government for oil rights. The same may not be the case for the UK and Libya's dictator.

"didn't see any mention of Freedom Liquor, but Europeans will make that true even if it isn't."

I guess you're so embarassed about the actions of a few pf your shrieking country-men that made you cough up that one. After freedom fries and all the surrender monkey stupidity, I'm not surprised at your knee-jerk at Europeans once again ;)

I'm also left wondering how long it will be before this kind of stupidity from the US loses it the few friends she has left.

dontpanic says:

This is your opinion. I dont think you know anything of Islamic extremists, or the Scots for that matter. I think if you spoke to the Taliban that meet the Scots every day in Aghanistan you might get a different response.

Well yes, of course this is just my opinion. I am no more an expert on any particular topic than anyone else posting here. I am not an expert on Islamic extremists but I feel that I do know somthing about basic human nature. If one shows weakness, an opponent who is intent upon domination will take advantage of that weakness. Compassion for an adversary that seeks only to destroy you is indeed naive and idiotic. Releasing this man not only hurts the Scots and the UK in general (including those fighting in Afghanistan) but all countries that oppose tyranical religeous fanatics like the Taliban. These people stone their own women to death who are victims of rape - I don't think they believe in compassion in the way the Scots do. This is a terrible mistake for justic as well. This man was convicted for mass murder - no petty theivery.

If we get scenes of Americans pouring good Scotch down the drain and smashing shortbread with hammers, we'll know they've finally lost the plot. Do they seriously think the distilleries and bakeries are the ones who decide what the courts do?

Now if they wanted to show their displeasure by beheading a wild haggis and slowly squeezing a herd of bagpipes to death, people might be more prepared to listen to them. (Once the ringing in their ears from the screams of the dying bagpipes has faded, of course.)

I don't think they believe in compassion in the way the Scots do.

All the more reason to teach them.

Wolfpack - "Compassion for an adversary that seeks only to destroy you is indeed naive and idiotic"

"Releasing this man not only hurts the Scots and the UK in general (including those fighting in Afghanistan) but all countries that oppose tyranical religeous fanatics like the Taliban"

Whats naive is to think that any of the conflicts with Islamic extremists are going to be solved by military power. The terrorists arent going away, the military can only hope to contain them at best. Unless attitudes change, the US will abandon the fight long before any negotiated settlement can be reached.

The US president is already finding it hard to garner support to maintain numbers Afghanistan. Wrecking its relationship with its staunchest supporter over this issue would indeed be idiotic. Time for calmer heads to prevail I think.

Although I don't agree with the Scots decision, America really has no leg to stand on here. When we force our hand, without the approval of our allies, we have to expect that our allies may do the same to us.

As for boycotting scotch, I've had a self-imposed ban on all scotch, ever since I discovered Bushmill's Black.

Taka

So one idiot creates a website to 'ban Scottish products' and you classify every American as a knee-jerk lunatic. Oh wait, we are a nation of knee-jerk lunatics; but none-the-less it's an unfair conclusion. Yes, let's punish the hotel or shopkeep in Glasgow because some idiot in government decided to free a terrorist (humanitarian grounds? Come on). Hmmm. Rings a bell. Seems a good many of us have been condemned in a similar manner for our governments doings. No one quite gets that a democracy is only so to an extent.

Sod it. I'm not giving up my haggis or a good scotch (and no, the crap produced in the states does not compare at all!).

You agree with the US on this issue, correct?

My last post was directed at northlondon.

The boycott is a symbolic thing. People won't really follow through with it. But the Europeans will probably build it up as if every American is now obsessed with taking a hammer to anything Scottish. I mean one guy created one website with some text and he's on the front page of the BBC. No doubt the BBC will have yet another "Have Your Say" topic about this in the next 24 hours.

A Libyan terrorist blows up a plane full of innocent people and Scotland allows him to go free, yet somehow the Euros will turn this into the US being the bad guy. They have to. It's the only card they know how to play. Blaming the US for everything is the best way for them to avoid the guilt they should feel for the mess they've created in the world during their turn in power. Even a man like northlondon says he agrees with the US but he has nothing but contempt. It's like it's come full circle now....even agreeing with us brings criticism.

In the end it will all blow over once the Europeans get bored convincing themselves that the US is to blame. Then they'll just move on to the next topic.

defenders such as SuperLib seriously do not see the complete hypocrisy when the US gets on it's soapbox and whines about global injustices of law and swapping lives for oil money

You have a real problem with objective criticism. Try looking at the small picture, that being the U.S's anger about the U.K releasing a terrorist, before you look at the larger picture, what you percieve as U.S hipocrisy.

The Scotish government claims to have released the bomber on compassionate grounds. I think that is a load of bull, I may not have seen it another way if he were released under house arrest with his family in Glasgow. Being allowed to die surrounded by one's family, thats compassion. Being sent to a country that hails you as a hero for blowing up Americans, making friends with the countries leader, and ensuring the oil relationship between the U.K and Libya, that is not compassion.

Had he been released to Glasgow I would still think it was far to good for him but I could at least understand where the Scotts were comming from. But the situation didn't play out that way and now he's a national icon.

TheQuestion this row isnt at all objective.

The US was happy for al-Magrahi to be tried and convicted under Scottish law. The US was also happy that Scottish law rejected his appeal. Al-Magrahi's release was on objective grounds according to Scottish law. If the US legal staff didnt know the law made allowances on compassionate grounds then perhaps the US should have whisked him off to god knows where before the trial.

Neither the US nor the rest of the UK have any say in Scottish law. I have a lot of sympathy for the families feelings, but on this issue Scottish justice does not equal revenge.

Well, it just gets better and better! No conspiracy theories needed, because the whole matter came up in the British House of Commons! (The Mother of All Parliaments!)Crucial evidence against two Libyans for the Lockerbie bombing was planted by the CIA, it was claimed in the Commons yesterday. Crucial evidence against two Libyans for the Lockerbie bombing was planted by the CIA, it was claimed in the Commons yesterday.

"A fragment of circuit board alleged to have been part of the bomb's timing mechanism is the sole item of physical evidence linking the two Libyans to the December 1988 bombing. But Tam Dalyell, Labour MP for Linlithgow, declared: "I have come to suspect that the timing device in question was not that of Pan Am 103 but a different timing device that the CIA had picked up from the Libyans ... I have been driven to the conclusion that the device was a CIA plant." from The Independent newspaper, Thursday June 15 1995. They already knew! Check: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/lockerbie-evidence-planted-by-cia-1586487.html

So, once again, facts and science has outwitted CIA outrage. C'mon, America, face facts. Your whole country is riddled by a disease that begins with "Z" and you're paying for it all with your blood, sweat, tears and hard earned dollar$! As far back as 1995 this Libyan patsie was set up, and YOUR government knew about it! I rest my case, your honour.

but on this issue Scottish justice does not equal revenge.

No, quite the contrary actually. In letting him return to Libya rather than to die with his family in Glasgow it seem's like he is being rewarded for the crimes he committed. I mean the entire country of Libya seems to be throwing one big party just for him.

"yet somehow the Euros will turn this into the US being the bad guy. They have to. It's the only card they know how to play. Blaming the US for everything is the best way for them to avoid the guilt they should feel for the mess they've created in the world during their turn in power"

Heh, jesus buddy calm down. Boycotting your allies and shrieking insanities simply because they don't agree with you on a given issue is probably what is making many Scots and Brits think Americans act stupidly when they're up there on that hoss.

The rest of your Euro umbrella (i.e the Europeans not in Britain or Glasgow) aren't really taking that much notice of what's happening here. But thanks for the outburst ;)

madverts: Boycotting your allies and shrieking insanities simply because they don't agree with you on a given issue is probably what is making many Scots and Brits think Americans act stupidly when they're up there on that hoss.

I'm just pissed off you have a Mustang and I don't. But seriously, think about it....one guy made one website with some text and it became front page news on the BBC.

The article itself even says the boycott shouldn't be taken seriously. Scottish businesses don't expect any drop in revenue and they quoted travel agents who said they haven't and don't expect any change in tourism. The net result will be nothing.

If you want to talk about making mountains out of molehills....are you sure you're pointing to the right crowd?

TheQuestion - "it seem's like he is being rewarded for the crimes he committed"

Well hardly, al-Megrahi was sentenced to life in prison. Whether he dies in prison or at home he cant serve any longer.

Well hardly, al-Megrahi was sentenced to life in prison.

Well he's not in prison right no is he? Last I checked he was still being congratulated by the up and ups of Libya.

Thats true but not for long though eh?

Your point was one of objectivity not revenge. Which is why most legal systems in the free world dont practice state sponsored killing. The Scots system took an objective view and acted on its own rules. It might seem unjust to you but thats the objective point. It seems under the guise of objectivity, you really want revenge.

If Im wrong and your problem is more with the reception al-Megrahi got from the Libyans. You should apply pressure to your local politicians to take it up with them.

It wasn't so long ago that certain Americans were demanding the early release of terrorists who had killed British citizens. It's funny how it's different now isn't it?

certain Americans were demanding the early release of terrorists who had killed British citizens. It's funny how it's different now isn't it?

Who are you talking about?

Oh and do a bit of research on Noraid as well.

It is official,according to the Times Online. "Secret letters reveal Labour’s Libyan deal". Scotland released this terrorist in exchange for BP rights to explore for oil off of Libya's coastline.

In Europe life prison terms are only about 20 years anymore anyway. This guy just helped them with their population control. It was the Margarat Thatchers that put him away not the current liberals in Europe who wouldnt have had the stomach now a days to even put him away for more then a few years anyhow.

Money talks, BS walks. Of course this was an oil deal, and damn the feelings of the victims.

This article give some clues about details: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article6814939.ece