Today the UK is releasing to Libya, al-Magrahi the convicted Lockerbie bomber who killed 246 passengers and 16 crew members with 11 collateral deaths on the ground. Apparently he has prostate cancer and for compassionate reasons he is being sent home. It seems he spent 10 months in prison for each of the 11 Scots who died and 33 seconds for each of the 266 murdered on the plane. Thank God he wasn't tried in the US, those barbarous Americans may have executed him.

It does seem to be a political decision, and one that rankles somewhat, but it is hardly unprecedented.

In light of recent news, it was pointed out elsewhere that 2Lt. Calley served two months house arrest for each of the Vietnamese civilians that he was convicted of killing.

Why don't you pack your moral relativity crap and SHOVE IT?

 

No one else except Calley's close family and friends in the US has ever been giving him a hero's welcome. Yet, a country must protect her henchmen, or otherwise no one will be willing to do her deeds. No one likes what happened in May Lai and that became a collective shame carried by the US. How DARE you compare the Libyan case to the US? They've admitted that they conspired the terror attack still feel no shame about it. There is no moral equivalence between both cases, and, if you insist so, let me remind you that Michael Savage is still savagely and unfairly maligned by UK government, in blatant violation of freedom of speech, without any compassion or sympathy.

This is a complex subject, but it is a pity that his appeal hasn't gone ahead because there do seem to be doubts about the conviction.  Suggestions of paid perjury to add veracity to flaky evidence, it's useful to remember that two men were charged but only one convicted, if the appeal had gone ahead and the conviction overturned then there would have been 3 embarrassed Scottish judges who were conned, but at least we might have a better idea about who was really to blame.

 

As for the welconing crowds, it depends a bit what they were welcoming, was it a guilty man who'd 'escaped', or an innocent one who'd been 'fitted up'?

 

Then there's another view, let's assume that he was guilty in some way (and I don't discount the possibility that he was involved in the operation in some way).  He was an operative of his country's special services, as such I don't see how he can ever be called a terrorist.  His misfortune was that Libya didn't hold any US agent who could be swapped.

 

What we don't understand is the relationship between Libya and Iran in this whole affair, which really arose from the incompetance of the commander of USS Vincennes when he paniced and shot down an Iranian airliner.

Clarifications are in order.

 

The commander and the crew of the Vincennes were a lot of things (overly aggressive may be a correct.assessment) but none of them panicked in that action, ever.   

 

As an operative of his nation, if he did plan and execute a terrorist act, then he was a terrorist. Being an agent of government does not give you legal cover when you commit terrorism.

 

 There was no formal link between the two events that I can see..

 

3 July 1988, Vincennes shot down the airliner.

 

 21 December 1988 Lockerby plane destroyed. 

 

It's more likely that this incident was part of the undeclared war between the United States and Libya ever since the Berlin Discotheque bombings of 1986.

 

Libya admitted it was responsible. That only happens piblucly when a nation has been caught red-handed. 

  

Herald

 

 

Yellichink,

Perhaps if you checked the context, you would notice that I was responding to the comment that al-Magrahi served 10 months per person. I didn't address the Lybian reaction at all. Perhaps you could address what I wrote rather than making something up to be outraged about.

Political releases are pretty sucky and all countries seem to do it.