Notwithstanding his alleged illness, Megrahi’s release is such an affront to common sense that the British could only have released him for the same reason the Americans invaded Iraq: oil…
I am sensible enough to appreciate that incurring the moral wrath of the Americans for releasing him was a small price to pay for sweetheart oil deals with Libya…
I just wish British authorities did not insult our intelligence by citing compassion as their justification for releasing this mass murderer; especially since they have refused to show similar compassion for many other convicts who are (or were) relatively more worthy…
Also, don’t be surprised if Megrahi lives well beyond the three months he purportedly has to live … all praise be to Allah!
(Release of Lockerbie bomber: compassion v. justice, The iPINIONS Journal, August 24, 2009)
Abdelbaset al-Megrahi was the only person convicted in 2001 for the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland on December 21, 1988. Two hundred and seventy people, two-thirds of them Americans, were killed; Megrahi was sentenced to life in prison.
Despite all this he was released in 2009, which incited me to write the above in a commentary challenging the compassionate grounds the Scottish government proffered to justify his release.
Much to my consternation and dismay, however, a number of legal and political experts from Britain responded to my challenge by asserting that I did not know what the hell I was writing about. Their main argument was that something called devolution meant that the British government could have had no hand in Megrahi’s release whatsoever. They also laced their fulminations with accusations about me being just another dumb American who knows nothing about the British legal and political system.
(For the record, I grew up in a UK Overseas Territory and have been either studying or working within its political system for over 30 years. I also happen to be licensed to practice law in the UK. So, given how proud the British are of the barriers to entering their legal profession, there can be no gainsaying my knowledge of their legal system.)
In any case, less than a year later (on July 15, 2010), Reuters reported a BP executive admitting the following:
BP told the UK Government that we were concerned about the slow progress that was being made in concluding a Prisoner Transfer Agreement with Libya. We were aware that this could have a negative impact on UK commercial interests, including the ratification by the Libyan government of BP’s exploration agreement.
This put a lie to representations by the British government that economic considerations had no bearing on Megrahi’s release. It also compelled me to reiterate publicly what I argued in private exchanges with my British critics; namely, that:
The UK government has taken pains to explain that the decision to release Megrahi was made by Scottish authorities. But whatever the nature of devolution between England and Scotland, when it comes to international matters like this, it was, and is, always the case that foreign governments deal with England, not Scotland or Wales – no matter how much these two former kingdoms are implicated.
(BP involved in release of Lockerbie Bomber? The iPINIONS Journal, July 16, 2010)
Unfortunately, even though the Reuters report gave them pause, they were still not convinced that the British government was as venal as I posited. Specifically, these patriotic experts insisted that, whatever shenanigans BP engaged in to secure this prisoner-for-oil quid pro quo, it involved Scottish authorities, not the British government.
Well, now comes a report commissioned by the new Conservative-Liberal British government which affirms exactly what I posited; namely, that:
The last Labour government did all it could to help release the Libyan convicted of the Lockerbie bombing to secure a BP oil deal and strengthen its political ties with Libya.
(London Guardian, February 7, 2011)
The cover up in this case was unearthed by studying “hundreds of confidential papers by the Cabinet office,” which revealed that a number of Labour ministers acted not just as advisers to, but as facilitators between Scottish and Libyan officials to seal this deal.
I trust this latest report will finally remove the scales from the eyes of my British critics. But they don’t have to take my word for it; because here, in part, is the aggrieved indignation the first minister of Scotland, Alex Salmond, vented at English politicians for using Scottish authorities to execute their foreign-policy sleight of hand:
I suppose the issue I would raise is when Mr. Megrahi was released according to due process in Scotland, not regarding any of these matters but on judicial principles, [UK Prime Minister] Gordon Brown was absolutely silent and the Labour party in Scotland mounted a series of vicious attacks on the SNP government.
My point is the extraordinary position of the Labour party in Scotland attacking the SNP government for doing according to judicial principles what the Labour government in London were wanting to do, if not saying it openly, for economic and political reasons.
It seems to me the biggest example of organised political hypocrisy that I’ve ever seen in my time in politics.
Hear, hear! I rest my case. (And, yes, Megrahi is still very much alive….)
Related commentaries:
Release of Lockerbie bomber…
BP involved in release…
Lockerbie bomber still alive
Legacy Note: With over 5,600 posts spanning 20 years, I am easily the most prolific blogger on the most eclectic array of topics on the web. That makes The iPINIONS Journal an unparalleled archive of informed political and cultural commentary. Visit the ARCHIVES section in the sidebar or search by topic. You won’t find a more consistent, independent voice on world affairs.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.