# Terminally ill Libyan bomber in '88 Lockerbie Pan Am bombing to be released



## CougarKing (19 Aug 2009)

A concession on the part of the UK government to the Libyan government?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090819/ap_on_re_eu/eu_britain_lockerbie



> Decision in Lockerbie case Thursday
> By BEN McCONVILLE, Associated Press Writer Ben Mcconville, Associated Press Writer
> Wed Aug 19, 5:46 pm ET
> 
> ...


----------



## FishOuttaWater (20 Aug 2009)

> "I'm totally against it. He murdered 270 people," *said Paul Halsch of Perinton, New York, who lost his 31-year-old wife in the attack.* "This might sound crude or blunt, but I want him returned from Scotland the same way my wife Lorraine was ... and that would be in a box."





> "The interest of big oil should not be the basis of a miscarriage of justice to let a murderer of 270 people be released," *Peter Sullivan of Akron, Ohio, whose friend and college roommate Mike Doyle died at Lockerbie, said.* "If he's released on compassionate grounds, who would provide comfort and compassion to the family members?"



Exactely... Where is the victims compassion...? :


----------



## Good2Golf (20 Aug 2009)

If this is based on Scottish law that someone deemed to be dying (within 3 months?), then does the corollary mean that as he approaches the end of month 3 in Libya, if he hasn't died yet, the law supports his life being ended?  that would be fair...wouldn't it?


----------



## FishOuttaWater (20 Aug 2009)

If he is truely guilty of the crime, 3 minutes would be too long to set him free.

Even if it was only in a wheelchair or on a strecther...  :-X


----------



## tomahawk6 (20 Aug 2009)

Compassion for a man who was responsible for 281 deaths ? Disgusting.


----------



## Larkvall (21 Aug 2009)

His release was disgusting. His reception was disgusting.

Sometimes I get too pissed off and I don't know how to express myself.


----------



## mariomike (21 Aug 2009)

Good2Golf said:
			
		

> If this is based on Scottish law that someone deemed to be dying (within 3 months?), then does the corollary mean that as he approaches the end of month 3 in Libya, if he hasn't died yet, the law supports his life being ended?  that would be fair...wouldn't it?



Good question! Like the shelf life of a perishable item?
I have a question. If someone like Paul Bernardo or Clifford Olsen's "use by" date was fast approaching, should they too receive early parole? 
Personally, I wouldn't give any of them three seconds of freedom. They don't deserve it.


----------



## HollywoodHitman (21 Aug 2009)

3 more breaths would be 3 too many for a man guilty of the crime he was involved in. Justice perverted?


----------



## 1feral1 (21 Aug 2009)

Like many, I've watched this unfold over the past 48 hrs, and to sum up, its the most sickening thing which has happened.

In Libya, he's a hero, and was greeted as such.

Thanks to some do-gooders in Scotland, again we are precieved weak and pathetic.

Truly, there is no justice whatsoever, and I feel much sorrow for the families of the victims of those murdered on the flight, and those who perished on the ground.

What message is this sending?

OWDU


----------



## Edward Campbell (22 Aug 2009)

There is a counter argument, well presented in this letter to the editor which is reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from today’s _Globe and Mail_:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/letters-to-the-editor/scottish-mercy/article1261078/


> Scottish mercy
> 
> Fraser Laschinger
> Ottawa
> ...



The Bard gave us an example, from _Portia’s_ mouth:



> The quality of mercy is not strain'd,
> It droppeth as the gentle rain from heaven
> Upon the place beneath. It is twice blest:
> It blesseth him that gives and him that takes.


The Merchant Of Venice Act 4, scene 1, 180–187

Retributive justice and the search for “a pound of flesh” are long serving relics of our culture but they are not *wholly* representative of it.


----------



## Larkvall (22 Aug 2009)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> There is a counter argument, well presented in this letter to the editor which is reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from today’s _Globe and Mail_:



Well if the Scots want to be soft on terrorists as part of their culture so be it. Just don't expect me to ever travel to Scotland. Perhaps a travel advisory is in order also.


----------



## mariomike (22 Aug 2009)

Editorial from today's Toronto Sun:
"An insult to all victims of terror":
http://www.torontosun.com/comment/editorial/2009/08/22/10560211-sun.html

"FBI director says Lockerbie bomber's release 'gives comfort to terrorists' all over the world":
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/090822/world/us_lockerbie_fbi


----------



## Franko (22 Aug 2009)

An absolute sickening display yesterday. I can't imagine the families going through this.

Wonder how long the Brown government will last because of this debacle?

Regards


----------



## Edward Campbell (22 Aug 2009)

Der Panzerkommandant.... said:
			
		

> ...
> Wonder how long the Brown government will last because of this debacle?
> 
> Regards




I don't think this has much impact on Brown's government, on way or the other. His problems are broader and deeper.

In this case, I suspect most Brits understand this is a _Scottish_ decision, taken by its new, _devolved_ "provincial" government. If anything Brown may be able to lay off some of the blame on to the Scottish Nationalist Party, thereby helping Labour in a few Scottish ridings.


----------



## Edward Campbell (22 Aug 2009)

Here, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provision (§29) of the Copyright Act from today’s _National Post_, is yet another view on the matter:

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2009/08/22/david-frum-why-so-little-outcry-from-washington-on-al-megrahi.aspx


> *David Frum*: Why so little outcry from Washington on al-Megrahi?
> 
> August 22, 2009
> 
> ...




For information/consideration, without comment.


----------



## Edward Campbell (23 Aug 2009)

Here, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from today’s _Ottawa Citizen_ is yet another _point of view_ on the “compassionate release” of Abdel Basset Ali al-Megrahi, this one with comment because I find it a little less coherent than many others:

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/columnists/grave+injustice/1921237/story.html


> A grave act of injustice
> 
> By David Warren, The Ottawa Citizen
> August 23, 2009 5:01 AM
> ...




This columnist goes _waaaaay_ of the intellectual track when he tries to tie justice to religion. Justice is a _universal_ value which exists completely and totally free of any and all religious _interference_. No religion is more or less “just” than any other; religion and justice are unrelated.

There is a famous story from the Algerian War. The French had captured a rebel leader – a man they knew, with about 99.99% certainty, had led a donkey laden with explosives into a Algiers square filled with (mostly) Europeans and then exploded his bomb. They were equally sure he organized other similar attacks; they were pretty sure one was planned for that very day, a Sunday. As they were about to subject him to some pretty “firm” interrogation he asked: _“How are we different? Your airplanes bombed the village of ________; their point of aim was the market square; dozens of women and children were killed. I have no bombing planes; I only have donkeys. But I also use the square as my point of aim. So how – except that you are rich and I am poor – how are we different?”_

Warren says: _”The man who intentionally kills many unknown to him, in order to make a political statement, has committed a grave act of injustice.”_ Perhaps that’s true. If it is then it may say something about, of I don’t know, Winston Churchill and FDR and Barak Obama. I think Warren is out to lunch.

Finally, justice is totally manmade – just like the gods in whose “names” it is too often dispensed. Justice, *equal* justice, consistently and lawfully administered justice, is one of those _institutions_ that I insist are more important to democracy than elections.


----------



## Larkvall (25 Aug 2009)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> There is a famous story from the Algerian War. The French had captured a rebel leader – a man they knew, with about 99.99% certainty, had led a donkey laden with explosives into a Algiers square filled with (mostly) Europeans and then exploded his bomb. They were equally sure he organized other similar attacks; they were pretty sure one was planned for that very day, a Sunday. As they were about to subject him to some pretty “firm” interrogation he asked: _“How are we different? Your airplanes bombed the village of ________; their point of aim was the market square; dozens of women and children were killed. I have no bombing planes; I only have donkeys. But I also use the square as my point of aim. So how – except that you are rich and I am poor – how are we different?”_



I think the critical difference with the story above and the Lockerbie case is that no one has ever claimed responsibility for the act. Was it Libya or Iran or a host of other possibilities. It is like punishing a dog without the dog understanding what it did wrong. It is not about making a statement on how a richer country unjustly killed some other citizens. The silence means it was only about revenge killing.


----------



## mariomike (26 Aug 2009)

Larkvall said:
			
		

> I think the critical difference with the story above and the Lockerbie case is that no one has ever claimed responsibility for the act. Was it Libya or Iran or a host of other possibilities. It is like punishing a dog without the dog understanding what it did wrong. It is not about making a statement on how a richer country unjustly killed some other citizens. The silence means it was only about revenge killing.



I agree. I wanted to reply to the donkey anecdote, but I think you summed up my opinion nicely.


----------



## tomahawk6 (27 Aug 2009)

al Megrahi may not have been terminally ill after all ......


----------



## dustinm (27 Aug 2009)

tomahawk6 said:
			
		

> al Megrahi may not have been terminally ill after all ......



Care to elaborate? He was seen by British doctors in a British prison. No Intelligence Service in the world can fake an X-ray taken by someone else


----------



## GAP (27 Aug 2009)

Neo Cortex said:
			
		

> Care to elaborate? He was seen by British doctors in a British prison. No Intelligence Service in the world can fake an X-ray taken by someone else



Isn't it just amazing what politics can do?


----------



## tomahawk6 (29 Aug 2009)

Proof that the deal to release al Magrahi was all about oil - $15b to be exact. Magrahi wasnt even examined by an oncologist. The fix was in.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article6814974.ece#cid=OTC-RSS&attr=797084

DURING the past year a small ship bristling with computers and seismic equipment has been crisscrossing the Gulf of Sidra, in the Mediterranean off the Libyan coast. Its mission: to help to find BP’s next offshore oilfields. 

The company’s search for oil off Libya and in a 20,000-mile area in the west of the country potentially offers as much as £15 billion in new revenue. But less than two years ago it was feared that the deal could founder — and the reason was wrangling over Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi, the jailed Lockerbie bomber. 

BP was finally given the go-ahead six weeks after a volte-face by the British government to include Megrahi in a prisoner transfer agreement with Libya under which prisoners could serve out sentences in their home countries. Jack Straw, the justice secretary, revealed this decision in a letter to his Scottish counterpart. He cited “wider negotiations” and the “overwhelming interests of the United Kingdom”. 

Sources in the UK and Tripoli said last week that those wider interests included BP’s hoped-for share of Libya’s untapped oil and gas reserves. The decision to include Megrahi in the prisoner transfer arrangement was seen by Libyan officials as paving the way for his release — and BP’s much-coveted deal was finally ratified. 

BP last week denied the agreement was influenced by talks over prisoner transfers and specifically Megrahi. But other sources insist the two were clearly linked. Saad Djebbar, an international lawyer who advises the Libyan government and who visited Megrahi in jail in Scotland, said: “No one was in any doubt that if alMegrahi died in a Scottish prison it would have serious repercussions for many years which would be to the disadvantage of British industry.” 

Lord Mandelson, the business secretary, said last weekend: “The idea that the British government and the Libyan government would sit down and somehow barter over the freedom or the life of this Libyan prisoner and make it form part of some business deal ... it’s not only wrong, it’s completely implausible and actually quite offensive.” 

The detailed correspondence seen by The Sunday Times confirms that the Lockerbie bomber’s fate was regarded by the UK government as pivotal to relations with Libya. It also shows how anxious the government was to curry favour with Colonel Muammar Gadaffi by being seen to open the way for Megrahi’s release. 

The government now faces new questions over its exact role in trade talks and whether or not it favoured Megrahi. William Hague, the shadow foreign secretary, is calling for full disclosure of whether commercial contracts for oil were discussed as part of the negotiations for the Libya-UK prisoner transfer treaty. 

In the 1980s — after the shooting of a British policewoman outside the Libyan embassy in London and the Lockerbie bombing which claimed 270 lives — Libya was an international outcast. But the past decade has seen a remarkable transformation, with the country dismantling its weapons of mass destruction. 

Tony Blair helped with Gadaffi’s diplomatic rehabilitation, taking high-profile trips to Libya in 2004 and 2007. At the second meeting, when an unkempt and unshaven Gadaffi met Blair in a tent in the desert, it was announced that the two countries had agreed a memorandum of understanding covering civil and criminal legal co-operation, extradition and prison transfer. 

Questions were immediately asked whether the arrangement would cover Megrahi, who was convicted in 2001 for taking part in the bombing and sentenced to life imprisonment. Downing Street insisted the agreement would not lead to his release. “The memorandum of understanding agreed with the Libyan government does not cover this case,” said a spokesman at the time. 

During Blair’s 2007 visit, BP signed its exploration deal with Libya’s National Oil Corporation. “This is a welcome return to the country and represents a significant opportunity for both BP and Libya to deliver our long-term growth aspirations,” said Tony Hayward, BP group chief executive, who signed the contract with Blair looking on. 

The prisoner transfer agreement — and specifically the fate of Megrahi — were inextricably linked with the BP deal. Six months after Blair’s trip, and with Gordon Brown in No 10, the Libyans were frustrated that the prisoner transfer agreement had not even been drafted. The BP contract was also waiting to be ratified. 

The key reason for the delay in the prisoner transfer agreement was Megrahi. Lord Falconer, who was Blair’s justice secretary, had told the Scottish government in a letter on June 22, 2007 that “any prisoner transfer agreement with Libya could not cover al-Megrahi”. 

Straw, appointed justice secretary by Brown, set out his favoured option for excluding Megrahi in another letter the following month. 

The Libyans were furious and the BP deal — in which £545m would be spent on exploration alone — was an ace in their hand. 

“Nobody doubted that Libya wanted BP and BP was confident its commitment would go through,” said Sir Richard Dalton, a former British ambassador to Libya and a director of the Libyan British Business Council. “But the timing of the final authority to spend real money on the ground was dependent on politics.” 

The Libyans insisted that Megrahi must be covered by the prisoner transfer agreement. The government relented and Straw was forced into a U-turn. “I have not been able to secure an explicit exclusion,” he wrote in a letter to Kenny MacAskill, his Scottish counterpart. 

“The wider negotiations with the Libyans are reaching a critical stage and in view of the overwhelming interests for the United Kingdom, I have agreed in this instance the [prisoner transfer agreement] should be in the standard form and not mention any individual.” 

Six weeks later BP announced its deal had been ratified. 

Negotiations over the release of Megrahi had been spearheaded by Gadaffi’s son, Saif. He was also courting influential figures and financiers in Russia, America and the UK to improve his country’s image and forge new business links. 

Brown Lloyd James, a public relations firm with offices in London and New York, has opened an office in Tripoli. It is reported to have placed articles by Colonel Gadaffi in American newspapers. The firm would not comment last week. 

One of the firm’s founders is Peter Brown, an old friend of Mandelson. The business secretary, who has stayed with Brown on the Caribbean island of St Barts, said this weekend that he could not recollect discussing Libya with anyone from Brown Lloyd James. 

It is perhaps inevitable that the high-powered and wealthy figures who mix with Saif Gadaffi also pass through Mandelson’s orbit. Mutual associates include Lord Rothschild, his son Nat, and the Russian billionaire Oleg Deripaska, whose company Rusal has interests in Libya. 

To Deripaska and Nat Rothschild, Saif Gadaffi is an invaluable business contact. They were invited to his 37th birthday party in Montenegro, where they are both investors in a new marina development. 

There is some bafflement in Tripoli that British ministers are not talking up the possible business opportunities of an even more cordial relationship. 

Djebbar said: “Britain can continue with this political absurdity [of recriminations] or get their businesses to take advantage of the goodwill towards them.” 

Megrahi said public focus should be on identifying the perpetrators of the Lockerbie bombing. In an interview published yesterday, Megrahi, who insists he is innocent, said: “We all want to know the truth. I support the issue of a public inquiry. ”


----------



## PMedMoe (29 Aug 2009)

Not shocked at all.


----------



## 1feral1 (30 Aug 2009)

Looks like the Pommy government sold their own people out.

Shame on them all.

Perhaps some justice will come in the next election, but the damage has been done, and there has been NO justice for the souls murdered by this coward and his peers.

OWDU


----------



## Edward Campbell (30 Aug 2009)

Here, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from today’s _Scotsman_, is yet more:

http://scotlandonsunday.scotsman.com/latestnews/MacAskill-defied-rules-on-release.5601215.jp


> MacAskill defied rules on release
> *Lockerbie bomber’s length of sentence ignored*
> 
> Published Date: 30 August 2009
> ...




This appears to confirm the “Megrahi for oil” side of the story but it and other reports fail to confirm the “not seen by a specialist” charge.

I suppose the only thing to do, now, is count down the days until:

•	Ali al-Megrahi dies – maybe with some “help” from the Libyans; and/or

•	Profits actually accrue to British shareholders from the BP deal. 

I’m not sure “sold out” is the right word. I think this sort of rather _underhanded_ dealing is about par for the course by most Western governments – ours and the US included – when dealing with countries like Libya, specifically, or, more broadly, three quarters of the countries on earth.


----------



## theoldyoungguy (31 Aug 2009)

I'm not sure if many of you follow Eric Margolis' column's however I find his most recent very interesting.

http://www.edmontonsun.com/comment/columnists/eric_margolis/2009/08/30/10673121-sun.html


----------



## tomahawk6 (31 Aug 2009)

I dont agree with his conclusion that Iran was responsible for the destruction of the Pan Am flight. We got the mastermind but he should have stood trial in the US and would be in a US prison today. I dont know if this was a deliberate attempt to get back at Obama for his treatment of the UK but the result is the same. Obama looks weak. Britain gains an advantage in the oil game. The real losers are the families of the dead.


----------



## 1feral1 (2 Sep 2009)

tomahawk6 said:
			
		

> The real losers are the families of the dead.



Exactly, their pain will continue for the rest of their lives.

OWDU


----------



## a_majoor (3 Sep 2009)

This is part of a larger pattern across the West, with many negative consequences:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/09/01/suicide_of_the_west_98112.html



> *CIA Interrogators Did Not Cross the Line*
> By Thomas Sowell
> 
> Britain's release of Abdel Baset al-Megrahi-- the Libyan terrorist whose bomb blew up a plane over Lockerbie, Scotland in 1988, killing 270 people-- is galling enough in itself. But it is even more profoundly troubling as a sign of a larger mood that has been growing in the Western democracies in our time.
> ...


----------



## mariomike (3 Sep 2009)

"There was a time when everybody understood this. German soldiers who put on American military uniforms, in order to infiltrate American lines during the Battle of the Bulge were simply lined up against a wall and shot-- and nobody wrung their hands over it. Nor did the U.S. Army try to conceal what they had done" 

They ( we ) didn't hesitate to bomb German and Japanese city centres either. Any hand wringing occurred after VE and VJ Days. 
I think the comparison is relevant because, in this case and again on 9/11, nations had their own aircraft infiltrated to be used against them as bombers by an enemy.


----------



## mariomike (4 Jul 2010)

Sun July 4, 2010
"Expert: Lockerbie bomber could live much longer LONDON - A cancer expert whose medical assessment of the Lockerbie bomber helped lead to his early release has been quoted as saying the Libyan could live for another 10 years.":
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/100704/world/eu_britain_lockerbie


----------



## Larkvall (24 Aug 2010)

Well it is now over a year after his release.....


----------



## 57Chevy (23 Feb 2011)

I realize that this is an old thread but sometimes it takes years for the truth to finally surface on certain matters.
______________________
Gadhafi ordered Lockerbie bombing, says ex-Libya minister

STOCKHOLM — Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi personally ordered the Lockerbie bombing in 1988, former justice minister Mustapha Abdeljalil told Swedish daily Expressen, the paper reported on its website Wednesday.

"I have proof that Gadhafi gave the order on Lockerbie," said the minister, who stepped down Monday to protest the ongoing violence in Libya.

Libyan national Abdelbaset Ali Mohmet al-Megrahi was in 2001 convicted of the bombing of Pan AM Flight 103 over the Scottish town of Lockerbie on December 21, 1988 that killed 270 people, most of them Americans.

But Scottish authorities, who have power over their own judicial affairs, released Megrahi, 58, on compassionate grounds in August 2009 after doctors said he was suffering from terminal cancer and had three months to live.

His release and subsequent hero's return to Tripoli drew a furious response from many, and outrage in the U.S. has been stoked by the fact that he remains alive almost a year and a half after his release.

According to Abdeljalil, Gadhafi "ordered Megrahi to do it (the bombing)," and had worked hard to secure his release to ensure that his role in the plot remained secret.

"To hide it, he did everything in his power to get Megrahi back from Scotland," the former minister said.

                              (Reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act)


----------



## The Bread Guy (29 Aug 2011)

An update:  CNN has apparently found him, and is sharing video looking like he may be on his last legs.....


> Lockerbie bomber Abdel Basset al-Megrahi is comatose, near death and likely to take secrets of the attack on Pan Am Flight 103 to his grave.
> 
> CNN found al-Megrahi under the care of his family in his palatial Tripoli villa Sunday, surviving on oxygen and an intravenous drip. The cancer-stricken former Libyan intelligence officer may be the last man alive who knows precisely who in the Libya government authorized the bombing, which killed 270 people.
> 
> "We just give him oxygen. Nobody gives us any advice," his son, Khaled al-Megrahi, told CNN ....


----------

