20 August 2009
19:2727645#1
So they did it. They released Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi because he has cancer, calling it compassionate grounds. Scottish Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill has probably caused an international incident today. The US government, families on both sides of the Atlantic, and most sane people all over the world have been against this release. As such, a mass murdering Islamic terrorist, responsible for murdering 270 innocent people, has been released for the sake of one man's private conscience - that of MacAskill. He seems to be utterly alone in his views of "justice and humanity". Where's the justice and humanity for the hundreds of victims or their families?
MacAskill has today shown the world what a fluffy, inappropriate, PC, idiot he is and offended just about every westerner in the process. I'm sure this will be hailed as a sort of moral victory for the Islamic terror groups around the world who now see us as a bunch of soft-hearted sentimental morons.
I hope MacAskill becomes the most unpopular human on the planet - he has done a pretty good job of cementing that outcome.
The big question now is should we always release terminally ill prisoners on compassionate grounds, and what possible crime can we NOT accept to consider for this privilege given that we've just released one of the worst mass murderers on record?
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
20 August 2009
20:0627646#2
rick,sorry you feel that way,but as stated on the early evening news he will be dead with in 3 months.in this case i cant see him reverting to terrisim or any other activaty.i personly wouldnt call it pc either.also the british goverment are keeping well away from this.to be honest i dont give two monkys what the yanks have to say about it,or anybody else .i have found that the americans are paranoid about this subject since 9/11.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
20 August 2009
21:0427648#3
This is as much a foreign policy issue as anything else and foreign policy is not a devolved power so Brown could intervene.
The big questions here are...
So why not? Why the silence? Where is the Gordon Brown's backbone?
Guest 674- Registered: 25 Jun 2008
- Posts: 3,391
20 August 2009
23:1927652#4
Barryw
Why turn this into a political labour bash? its to serious for that.
RICK
Have to say on this subject im with you, im afraid theres no way should that man be released
BRIAN
Im afraid you have this completely wrong, lots of American families lost loved ones because of this terrible man.
The Scottish Secretary made a major mistake today, and will live to regret it
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
21 August 2009
05:0927660#5
Because it is political Keith, a decision made by a politician.
21 August 2009
06:5427661#6
I posted this on another thread, but wanted to wade into this thread so have cut and paste. Hope that's ok?
I haven't changed my opinion about the death penalty (opposed), but I have revised my opinion about this Lockerbie fella, having listened onthe radio to a very articulate and distressed Mother of one of the victims. I realise that people say his conviction is unsafe - a good reason not to have the death penalty - but there are and should be appeals processes. If they are not used properly or if they fail, they need to be challenged properly. So: he has been convicted of murdering 270 people. I doubt if we would have released Harold Shipman or Myra Hindley, so why should we release this man? I believe in the compassionate approach, but it cuts both ways, and I realise we have lost sight of the compassion needed for the victims. Is it a coincidence that Libya has influence in the oil world?
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
21 August 2009
07:2627667#7
I agree that this man should never have been released - being terminally ill doesn't excuse it.
It makes that Scottish minister weak-minded and he should be removed from office. I wouldn't be surprised if there are repurcussions because of this - some very loud pleas to keep him in gaol came from the USA, even Obama himself.
Whether his conviction is unsafe or not, he has gone through the due process of law and found guilty.
I don't know if oil played a part - it wouldn't affect Scotland, but maybe Brown did have a word in his ear and we may hear of future contracts being signed with Libya.
Anger has been compounded by claims that the release was brokered by Tony Blair during a meeting with Gaddafi two years ago - just hours before BP unveiled a £500million oil contract.
The former Prime Minister has been accused of a 'blood money' deal to protect Britain's oil interests.
Crime and punishment, not weakness, should be the order of the day.
Roger
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
21 August 2009
08:2027669#8
in that case are we americans lap dogs.are we to be told what we can or cant do.and when have we been subject to american policy on terraism,theres me thinking we were an independant country subject to our rules aregulations as is scotland.
to answer barrys question,browns goverment is keeping a low profial to keep the pease with america.
Guest 640- Registered: 21 Apr 2007
- Posts: 7,819
21 August 2009
08:2127670#9
I myself have grave doubts as to the guilt of this man. Im not a fan of the death penalty as I have seen irish persons convicted wrongly before who may well have been dead by now, but are now living a free life, having suffered massively due to expedient law solutions that were totally wrong.
This chap fitted in with the usual legal expediency of the quick arrest. Lets arrest someone very fast to satisfy the media/public frenzy. That, many of you will have noticed, is the standard practice. Arrest somebody after a day or two and then release them some time later when the fuss has died down. In some cases the unfortunates are not released, some indeed may be the guilty ones, but in many cases they are not the perpetrators and anyone with the right accent or look will be fastracked towards 'justice', guilty by stereotypical association.
I know the verdict on Megrahi was painstakingly arrived at but nevertheless even this morning the Scotsman newspaper is calling for a search for the real truth. Huge doubts linger.
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
21 August 2009
08:2427671#10
apart from that he has a death sentance from terminal cancer,what more do you want.
21 August 2009
09:3027680#11
PaulB, I share those thoughts. We were part of the Birmingham 6 campaign. If the conviction is unsafe it should have been, and now must be, explored and scrutinised more than ever. His release should not impede that.
Guest 674- Registered: 25 Jun 2008
- Posts: 3,391
21 August 2009
10:2527683#12
BRIAN
Nowt to do with being lapdogs, as the Scottish Secretary totally ignored the USA anyway.
If we feel this man was/is guilty then prison is where he should have stayed, terminal illness or not.
n ythiung
ROGER/BARRYW
We have no truth on what Blair or GB may or may not have done in the past and certainly knowing National local sensation story lines wouldnt believe to much wot they say anyway.
Moving away from Barrys attempt as usual to blame LABOUR for anything that moves, I believe this man ill or not should remain in prison.
The only time this can be looked at is an appeal or evidence showing he wasnt guilty none of which has been produced so far.
Just look at the publicity gained when he was released on his return homre, he was treated like saint
all the wrong signals
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
21 August 2009
16:3227696#13
kieth,thats my point if the scotish minister can ignore what the americans want,why cant the british goverment.no is only a word,ignorace is bliss.
Ross Miller
- Location: London Road, Dover
- Registered: 17 Sep 2008
- Posts: 3,709
21 August 2009
20:1527710#14
The conviction of this man in the first place was dubious, many of the British relatives felt this to be the case hence the endless calls for a full and proper enquiry.
Part of the issue here is the different views of the point and purpose of the penal system each side of the Atlantic, thankfully we do not hold the American view that it is about retribution and revenge. Holding this view of course leads to the reaction we have seen when someone who is terminally ill is released early, irrespective of how safe or otherwise his original conviction was.
"Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today." - James Dean
"Being deeply loved by someone gives you strength,
While loving someone deeply gives you courage" - Laozi
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
21 August 2009
22:2127712#15
I totally agree with the Americans, criminals should be punished and punished severely, we are much too soft here in the UK. Our so called justice system is a total farce and encourages more law breaking.
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
22 August 2009
07:1427720#16
I agree that criminals must be punished and crimes of violence be punished severely.
Whether you call it retribution or revenge, it matters not (to me); some of our silly, soft sentences does nothing to stop these people from committing heinious crimes against their fellow man - woman or children.
Some people just need to be put down.
Roger
Guest 674- Registered: 25 Jun 2008
- Posts: 3,391
22 August 2009
08:3627734#17
I do fully understand where everyone is coming from.
But until there is a re trial or appeal or whatevr happens he has been found guilty, and im afraid just because hes ill himself is NO REASON to release him.
Look at how hes now being glorified in his country, making a mockery of everything.
Whilst the justice system at times may fall short of our desires, we have to bear in mind two things
1; The prisons are full and overcrowded so i have no doubt judges have that in
mind.
2; Is prison the right answer in a lot of these cases, maybe not
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
22 August 2009
08:4527736#18
Agree with pint 2, Keith - a rope in some cases is the better answer.
Guest 674- Registered: 25 Jun 2008
- Posts: 3,391
22 August 2009
08:4727738#19
Barry unless your indicating you want to buy me a pint, I presume you mean point?
Never agree with the rope im afraid thats where we differ
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
23 August 2009
06:3227793#20
Well, there's always the firing-squad, a lethal injection, or maybe an end similar to that inflicted by them, on their victim - doesn't always have to be the rope.
Roger