|
Post by Beady’s Here Now on Aug 20, 2009 21:59:14 GMT -5
I've got to agree with globe, although there's probably no way of ever finding out if he was innocent there wasn't enough evidence in the first place to convict him. With this in mind it's a sickening thought to effectively sentence him to death by letting him die in prison if we can't say with 100% certainty that he did it. I've seen a lot of Americans on the news the past few days and they've all just been shouting aggressively, blindly believe his conviction, rather than discussing any sort of evidence. Debate in Scotland has been far more balanced. Giving him an appeal and finding him not sufficiently guilty and thus releasing him is one thing. But still believing he's guilty but releasing him because he's going to die in 3 months is another. This should not be a debate whether or not if he's innocent, because that's not what the issue is about! So let's take that aspect away from it and just assume he's 100% guilty. If he's 100% guilty, as the authorities believe, then why they fuck should he be released? If he is truly responsible for killing 260+ people in one attack why should any of us feel any compassion for this pathetic excuse for a human being? Once again, Western society is showing a weak stance on terrorism. This will be greeted with joys around the terrorist-world. It's fucking pathetic and incredibly sickening. I can just see it now: Osama bin Laden caught but deemed to be in his final years so he will be released on compassionate grounds. FFS, get a grip.
|
|
|
Post by globe on Aug 21, 2009 1:33:14 GMT -5
I've got to agree with globe, although there's probably no way of ever finding out if he was innocent there wasn't enough evidence in the first place to convict him. With this in mind it's a sickening thought to effectively sentence him to death by letting him die in prison if we can't say with 100% certainty that he did it. I've seen a lot of Americans on the news the past few days and they've all just been shouting aggressively, blindly believe his conviction, rather than discussing any sort of evidence. Debate in Scotland has been far more balanced. Giving him an appeal and finding him not sufficiently guilty and thus releasing him is one thing. He was appealing and the chances are he would have won his appeal and been freed because his conviction was flimsy to say the least. If I thought he was guilty, I couldn't give a flying fuck if he had cancer or not, he should have rotted in jail for the rest of his days, however I honestly believe that Megrahi was a patsy, a symbol of wicked terrorism for people, particularly those who lost somebody, to unite behind... a, we got the guy and he's doing his time... nothing more to see here, type scenario... Its been a poor show by the UK Govt - they've basically hung Scotland out to dry, but up here they have been left looking like the spineless bastards they really are - bye bye at the next election Gordon and Jack.
|
|
|
Post by wankinginthebushes on Aug 21, 2009 1:45:30 GMT -5
Gordon has been goin for a very long time And we have Cameron to look forward to. Great
|
|
|
Post by Beady’s Here Now on Aug 21, 2009 1:59:53 GMT -5
One more time - the issue isn't over whether you think he's guilty or innocent.
I havent researched it enough, but from what I know I'd say he's guilty - in 1988-2000 we werent as concerned/paranoid, call it what you like, about terroism. Chances are that if he was convicted back then he is guilty.
But one last time, fuck that debate.
Let me try to explain this one more fucking time - the authorities who released him just now believe he's guilty. If he's believed to be guilty, what the fuck is he doing out of jail? Let this ass clown die in jail. What makes him so special? Why not release every criminal who comitted any crime who's dying released so they can die at home?
I'm sorry, but this is typical Brit nonsense. Go to hell you idiotic Scots.
I'm outraged by this, OUT RAGED. Let's assume Attah never boarded a 9/11 plane, and was diagnosed with a terminal disease. Do you think the US would release him even though he was one of the master minds behind the plot? Do you think Americans would allow the government to allow the release?
One think I admire Obama and hillary over is that they are outspokenly against this move.
I've lost so much for the Scottish authorities here. Fuck you. Seriously. What the fuck is wrong with you lot. "Ooo boo hoo he killed almost 300 people but he's dying of cancer, let's release him" WHAT THE FUCKING FUCKING FUCKING HELL IS WRONG WITH YOU FUCKED UP PEOPLE
You know, those who released him just now deserve to die RIGHT NOW and go to hell along with him.
There's NO excuse for what just happened. And I'm sick of the few of you thinking you're on the jury who can make the conviction, or whatever. FUCK YOU TOO.
Unbelievable. We need the days of Bush and Blair to return ASAP, the world has turned even shittier since both left office. "Oh let's appease and apologize to terrorists"....FUCKING IDIOTS.
|
|
|
Post by globe on Aug 21, 2009 3:07:26 GMT -5
Gordon has been goin for a very long time And we have Cameron to look forward to. Great Quite a sobering thought isn't it? I havent researched it enough, but from what I know I'd say he's guilty - in 1988-2000 we werent as concerned/paranoid, call it what you like, about terroism. Chances are that if he was convicted back then he is guilty. Right so you think that he is guilty even though you have done no research, but the families of all the Scottish victims of the attack, who sat through the whole case and have studied all the evidence since, think he's innocent. I think I know who's opinions I would rather listen too.
|
|
|
Post by halftheworld on Aug 21, 2009 4:36:33 GMT -5
One more time - the issue isn't over whether you think he's guilty or innocent. shut the fuck up, idiot! it's not like you decide what people talk about!
|
|
|
Post by matt on Aug 21, 2009 9:25:52 GMT -5
Gordon has been goin for a very long time And we have Cameron to look forward to. Great Quite a sobering thought isn't it? I havent researched it enough, but from what I know I'd say he's guilty - in 1988-2000 we werent as concerned/paranoid, call it what you like, about terroism. Chances are that if he was convicted back then he is guilty. Right so you think that he is guilty even though you have done no research, but the families of all the Scottish victims of the attack, who sat through the whole case and have studied all the evidence since, think he's innocent. I think I know who's opinions I would rather listen too. I've been thinking about this, and I was wondering whether Al Megrahi is innocent. Does anyone think that there was a possibility that he was persuaded to drop his appeal for conviction by others? His appeal would have continued after he'd die and I was just wondering whether if an appeal went ahead, then a can of worms would be opened up, perhaps showing it was a miscarriage of justice and showing the ineptness of the British intelligence. Were the Scottish Government forced to take the brunt of it and advised to let him free? I didn't know what the opinions of the Scottish families were until globe said. If victims aren't convinced, then who is going to be?
|
|
|
Post by globe on Aug 21, 2009 9:36:12 GMT -5
I feel so sorry for the families of the victims who do not believe the he was responsible, as I doubt now that there is any chance that the government will allow any formal enquiry into the case. They still have a convicted man responsible for the crime, and will hide behind that.
This case makes me so uneasy. I have to accept that lawyers are possibly the biggest gossips going, so one has to be careful about the rumours etc floating about, but word on the pavey has it that there are very serious doubts about the conviction of this man and a serious concern that his appeal would be successful.
If nothing else, we know (well maybe not NL4E since he knows fuck-all about this case even though he still wants to spout his usual venom about it) that this appeal comes about following an extensive review by the Scottish Criminal Case Review Commission, not an organisation that recommmends reviewing a conviction unless there are serious and obvious concerns about the conviction (there is a similar body in England, and it has been responsible for uncovering some dreadful miscarriages of justice in recent years).
If we follow that line of thinking, there was a serious risk that this man would die in jail and then his appeal would be successful, and that would have left the Scottish justice system looking morally bankrupt.
Also, a successful appeal would then open up huge cans of worms about exactly who was responsible, and we will all have heard various differnet theories about that and concerns about improper conduct by government bodies, with the Americans looking like they would be on a sticky wicket if the proper questions were ever actually asked.
I worry that the decision to release this man has nothing much to do with compassion, but more political manouvering. The (UK) government may have dodged a huge bullet.
|
|
|
Post by matt on Aug 21, 2009 11:39:35 GMT -5
The (UK) government may have dodged a huge bullet. I think they may well have.
|
|
|
Post by MEANSTREAK on Aug 22, 2009 14:58:12 GMT -5
globe could you point me in the direction to read about what convinced these Scottish families he is innocent? TBH I've never done much research into it either, he was convicted when I was about 10 years old so I really only remember seeing the wreckage on TV and not much else.
|
|
|
Post by matt on Aug 22, 2009 19:05:21 GMT -5
Hard dilemma, I just can't decide whether he's innocent or guilty looking in to it much further and from what globe has said.
Do you think Westminster advised Edinburgh? This government are known for scheming just like the previous one so I wouldn't be at all surprised.
|
|
|
Post by globe on Aug 23, 2009 0:38:01 GMT -5
globe could you point me in the direction to read about what convinced these Scottish families he is innocent? TBH I've never done much research into it either, he was convicted when I was about 10 years old so I really only remember seeing the wreckage on TV and not much else. well this is probably a good place to start www.lockerbietruth.com/
|
|
|
Post by globe on Aug 23, 2009 0:49:45 GMT -5
Hard dilemma, I just can't decide whether he's innocent or guilty looking in to it much further and from what globe has said. Do you think Westminster advised Edinburgh? This government are known for scheming just like the previous one so I wouldn't be at all surprised. The foreign office are saying that the decision was 100% made by Scottish ministers, but its wideley believed in Westminster that the whole process started when Tony Blair met with Gaddafi 4 or 5 years ago - still want your hero Blair back NL4E? Blair brokered a prisoner transfer agreement with Gaddafi, as part of a thawing of relations between the West and Lybia. There was new British, American and European investment in Libya’s vast oil and gas resources promised if the Libyans would come in from the cold. But there was the small matter of the Lockerbie bomber still sitting in jail in Greenock... There is no doubt in my mind that London put severe pressure on Hollyrood to see this through, but I guess the whole truth will never come out.
|
|
|
Post by MistyMorning on Aug 26, 2009 9:53:45 GMT -5
I found this in The Times today and thought it rather thought provoking
Sir, The anguish and anger expressed by American relatives and friends of the Lockerbie victims are, of course, understandable. However, what is not acceptable is the continued hypocritical moaning about giving comfort to terrorists from the likes of Robert Mueller, Hillary Clinton et al, given that for years America through Noraid openly supported members of the IRA to escape justice for their acts of terrorism. Where was American compassion for the hundreds maimed and killed during the Troubles?
Anthony Hudson
|
|
|
Post by globe on Aug 27, 2009 10:45:58 GMT -5
I found this in The Times today and thought it rather thought provoking Sir, The anguish and anger expressed by American relatives and friends of the Lockerbie victims are, of course, understandable. However, what is not acceptable is the continued hypocritical moaning about giving comfort to terrorists from the likes of Robert Mueller, Hillary Clinton et al, given that for years America through Noraid openly supported members of the IRA to escape justice for their acts of terrorism. Where was American compassion for the hundreds maimed and killed during the Troubles? Anthony Hudson Sssshhh, that stuff has to be swept under the carpet now remember.
|
|
|
Post by thechemist on Aug 27, 2009 20:46:33 GMT -5
I used to agree with NL4E that is didn't matter if we thought him guilty or not. He was found guilty by a jury, so let him rot. A British friend of mine had this spin. Libya gave GB what, 50 Billion quid in compensation? If he were to appeal and win, Lybia would have grounds to want that money back. If there was doubt of his guilt, they may have worked this deal t keep the cash.
|
|
|
Post by globe on Aug 30, 2009 9:47:57 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by NYR on Aug 31, 2009 12:06:35 GMT -5
that's unbelievable. releasing a terrorist so we can get oil? shame on the british government.
|
|
|
Post by wankinginthebushes on Aug 31, 2009 13:39:31 GMT -5
But he wasn't a terrorist?
|
|
l41n09
Madferrit Fan
Posts: 80
|
Post by l41n09 on Sept 8, 2009 18:55:57 GMT -5
We need the days of Bush and Blair to return ASAP No.
|
|