Lockerbie Bomber Freed From Prison on Compassionate Grounds

[Charles Stucker]

For the record, there's more than a little doubt about whether he actually committed the crime.

TRULY?
I am one of the first to give doubt in favor of the defendant, but the case against this thug was quite clear. Do try to recall he was tried in the Netherlands, and if it was under Scottish law, that is what might be expected for a plane which was blown up over Scotland. The Dutch are renowned for their jurisprudence and only the dissatisfied are apt to condemn it. Like the terrorist sympathizers who support this animal.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

For the record, there's more than a little doubt about whether he actually committed the crime.

TRULY?
I am one of the first to give doubt in favor of the defendant, but the case against this thug was quite clear. Do try to recall he was tried in the Netherlands, and if it was under Scottish law, that is what might be expected for a plane which was blown up over Scotland. The Dutch are renowned for their jurisprudence and only the dissatisfied are apt to condemn it. Like the terrorist sympathizers who support this animal.

Yes, truly. Let's not forget the allegations against the U.S. government of putting pressure on Scotland to convict Megrahi, and allegations that some of the evidence was wrong or fake. Not to mention he was set to get an appeal upon the referral of the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission before he was released.

"The Commission is of the view, based upon our lengthy investigations, the new evidence we have found and other evidence which was not before the trial court that the applicant may have suffered a miscarriage of justice."

http://www.sccrc.org.uk/ViewFile.aspx?id=293

 

[Charles Stucker]

For the record, there's more than a little doubt about whether he actually committed the crime.

TRULY?
I am one of the first to give doubt in favor of the defendant, but the case against this thug was quite clear. Do try to recall he was tried in the Netherlands, and if it was under Scottish law, that is what might be expected for a plane which was blown up over Scotland. The Dutch are renowned for their jurisprudence and only the dissatisfied are apt to condemn it. Like the terrorist sympathizers who support this animal.

Yes, truly. Let's not forget the allegations against the U.S. government of putting pressure on Scotland to convict Megrahi, and allegations that some of the evidence was wrong or fake. Not to mention he was set to get an appeal upon the referral of the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission before he was released.

"The Commission is of the view, based upon our lengthy investigations, the new evidence we have found and other evidence which was not before the trial court that the applicant may have suffered a miscarriage of justice."

http://www.sccrc.org.uk/ViewFile.aspx?id=293

I see the word MAY have suffered an injustice by a Scottish commission undoubtedly under pressure from militant radical Islamic elements in Britain to put the most pro-Islamic spin on the data possible.
If the data was such fakery why did Qaddafi pay ~2.5 million to the families of EACH of the victims? Certainly he was not under indictment in the Netherlands.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

TRULY?
I am one of the first to give doubt in favor of the defendant, but the case against this thug was quite clear. Do try to recall he was tried in the Netherlands, and if it was under Scottish law, that is what might be expected for a plane which was blown up over Scotland. The Dutch are renowned for their jurisprudence and only the dissatisfied are apt to condemn it. Like the terrorist sympathizers who support this animal.

Yes, truly. Let's not forget the allegations against the U.S. government of putting pressure on Scotland to convict Megrahi, and allegations that some of the evidence was wrong or fake. Not to mention he was set to get an appeal upon the referral of the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission before he was released.

"The Commission is of the view, based upon our lengthy investigations, the new evidence we have found and other evidence which was not before the trial court that the applicant may have suffered a miscarriage of justice."

http://www.sccrc.org.uk/ViewFile.aspx?id=293

I see the word MAY have suffered an injustice by a Scottish commission undoubtedly under pressure from militant radical Islamic elements in Britain to put the most pro-Islamic spin on the data possible.
If the data was such fakery why did Qaddafi pay ~2.5 million to the families of EACH of the victims? Certainly he was not under indictment in the Netherlands.

So if something is in his favor then it's only because there was pressure from "militant radical Islamic elements," but you're willing to ignore the many allegations of pressure from the U.S. to convict Megrahi in the first place regardless of the evidence? As for the word "may" in their analysis, they make it clear that it is up to a court to make a final determination in whether Megrahi is innocent or guilty, but that they are of the opinion that there is significant evidence to show that another trial is necessary to carry out true justice.

I can't say exactly why Qaddafi paid the families of the victims, maybe to appease the British and American governments who were threatening Libya with a massive oil boycott.

 

[Charles Stucker]

I can't say exactly why Qaddafi paid the families of the victims,

Than can you tell us why he received a heroes welcome when returning home? That only happens for successful mass murderers in Islamic countries. Or did you fail to notice that trend.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

I can't say exactly why Qaddafi paid the families of the victims,

Than can you tell us why he received a heroes welcome when returning home? That only happens for successful mass murderers in Islamic countries. Or did you fail to notice that trend.

Maybe they were happy to have their fellow countryman who they perceived to a victim of an unfair trial back home, or maybe they simply wanted to try to "stick it" to the west. Regardless, that event has no bearing on the actual case itself.

 

[Charles Stucker]

Regardless, that event has no bearing on the actual case itself.

So based on a bunch of "maybe's" another 100+ million should be spent on a new trial. One which, should it again find him guilty will again be called "unfair" by the Islamic militants because they flat out REFUSE to accept the validity of anything except Sharia law which would exonerate them on the basis of "Jihad" against infidels. That sure is a valid litmus test of fairness, whether Islamic radicals call a trial of terrorists which gets a guilty verdict fair.
Do I need to add a sarcasm smiley?

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Regardless, that event has no bearing on the actual case itself.

So based on a bunch of "maybe's" another 100+ million should be spent on a new trial. One which, should it again find him guilty will again be called "unfair" by the Islamic militants because they flat out REFUSE to accept the validity of anything except Sharia law which would exonerate them on the basis of "Jihad" against infidels. That sure is a valid litmus test of fairness, whether Islamic radicals call a trial of terrorists which gets a guilty verdict fair.
Do I need to add a sarcasm smiley?

Well you're asking me questions which would require me to know the inner workings of the mind of the people of Libya, and of Qaddafi, so yes "maybe's" are the best I can give you. Entirely plausible maybe's, however. Whereas you are simply making up excuses for an unfair trial based on some imagined Islamic militant extremists.

 

[Charles Stucker]

Regardless, that event has no bearing on the actual case itself.

So based on a bunch of "maybe's" another 100+ million should be spent on a new trial. One which, should it again find him guilty will again be called "unfair" by the Islamic militants because they flat out REFUSE to accept the validity of anything except Sharia law which would exonerate them on the basis of "Jihad" against infidels. That sure is a valid litmus test of fairness, whether Islamic radicals call a trial of terrorists which gets a guilty verdict fair.
Do I need to add a sarcasm smiley?

Well you're asking me questions which would require me to know the inner workings of the mind of the people of Libya, and of Qaddafi, so yes "maybe's" are the best I can give you. Entirely plausible maybe's, however. Whereas you are simply making up excuses for an unfair trial based on some imagined Islamic militant extremists.

Who do you think blew up that plane, the Easter Bunny?

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

So based on a bunch of "maybe's" another 100+ million should be spent on a new trial. One which, should it again find him guilty will again be called "unfair" by the Islamic militants because they flat out REFUSE to accept the validity of anything except Sharia law which would exonerate them on the basis of "Jihad" against infidels. That sure is a valid litmus test of fairness, whether Islamic radicals call a trial of terrorists which gets a guilty verdict fair.
Do I need to add a sarcasm smiley?

Well you're asking me questions which would require me to know the inner workings of the mind of the people of Libya, and of Qaddafi, so yes "maybe's" are the best I can give you. Entirely plausible maybe's, however. Whereas you are simply making up excuses for an unfair trial based on some imagined Islamic militant extremists.

Who do you think blew up that plane, the Easter Bunny?

The Guardians of the Islamic Revolution claimed responsibility for the incident in retaliation for the U.S. shooting down an Iranian plane. Now I certainly don't know whether they did it or not, but that's why we needed a real investigation into it rather than this show trial designed to demonize Qaddafi and Libya.

 

[Charles Stucker]

The Guardians of the Islamic Revolution claimed responsibility for the incident in retaliation for the U.S. shooting down an Iranian plane. Now I certainly don't know whether they did it or not, but that's why we needed a real investigation into it rather than this show trial designed to demonize Qaddafi and Libya.

I'm so sorry. If you included your membership in "Society of Apologists for Islamic Terrorists" I would have never been under the impression you were seeking information rather than just spouting more of the Islamic militant party line. Do forgive that oversight, you actually sounded like a rational human being for a while.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

The Guardians of the Islamic Revolution claimed responsibility for the incident in retaliation for the U.S. shooting down an Iranian plane. Now I certainly don't know whether they did it or not, but that's why we needed a real investigation into it rather than this show trial designed to demonize Qaddafi and Libya.

I'm so sorry. If you included your membership in "Society of Apologists for Islamic Terrorists" I would have never been under the impression you were seeking information rather than just spouting more of the Islamic militant party line. Do forgive that oversight, you actually sounded like a rational human being for a while.

Yeah it's a shame some of us believe even Muslims deserve a fair trial.

 

[Charles Stucker]

The Guardians of the Islamic Revolution claimed responsibility for the incident in retaliation for the U.S. shooting down an Iranian plane. Now I certainly don't know whether they did it or not, but that's why we needed a real investigation into it rather than this show trial designed to demonize Qaddafi and Libya.

I'm so sorry. If you included your membership in "Society of Apologists for Islamic Terrorists" I would have never been under the impression you were seeking information rather than just spouting more of the Islamic militant party line. Do forgive that oversight, you actually sounded like a rational human being for a while.

Yeah it's a shame some of us believe even Muslims deserve a fair trial.

News flash - he GOT a fair trial. End of story. Unless you are some Islamic wackjob or one of their apologists.
Which did you claim to be?

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

I'm so sorry. If you included your membership in "Society of Apologists for Islamic Terrorists" I would have never been under the impression you were seeking information rather than just spouting more of the Islamic militant party line. Do forgive that oversight, you actually sounded like a rational human being for a while.

Yeah it's a shame some of us believe even Muslims deserve a fair trial.

News flash - he GOT a fair trial. End of story. Unless you are some Islamic wackjob or one of their apologists.
Which did you claim to be?

Well I'm sorry the facts don't correspond to your bold exclamations.