Prudence Stays Silent
Gordon Brown has said nothing so far about the Megrahi affair.
Is he being Prudence?
I think though it is interesting to look at reactions on both sides of the Atlantic. Here we put the emphasis on justice and as I said in a previous post, I don’t think anybody got that. But a lot of the comment in the US seems to ignore the truth and put the emphasis a lot more on vengeance.
Megrahi for Oil?
I said in the previous post, that according to The Times, that Megrahi might be being released to improve relations.
Now in this piece from the BBC, Gaddafi’s son has said that was true.
Of course Gordon Brown has denied it. Let’s hope that Prudence is the biggest casualty.
Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi
Whatever view you think about this man, the whole affair doesn’t seem to be a very good example of justice.
I am very much a believer in the rule of law. Could I be anything otherwise, with my late wife being a barrister and one of my son’s a solicitor? I count lots of lawyers and quite a few judges amongst my friends.
So for a start, I don’t think the victims of Lockerbie and their families have got by any means a satisfactory result. I don’t think they even got one in the trial, as although al-Megrahi was found guilty, I have my doubts that he would have been judged so by a jury in an English court. According to Reevel Alderson, a respected BBC correspondent, al-Megrahi may just have been “A Convenient Scapegoat”.
One important piece of evidence was clothes that he was alleged to have bought in Malta wrapped around the bomb. This is from Alderson’s article.
There were question marks too over Tony Gauci, a Maltese shopkeeper who was the only man to identify Megrahi.
His evidence was that the Libyan, who he picked out at an identity parade, had bought the clothes at his shop.
But his police statements are inconsistent, and prosecutors failed to tell the defence that shortly before he attended an identity parade, Mr Gauci had seen a magazine article showing a picture of Megrahi, and speculating he might have been involved.
Mr Gauci now lives in Australia, and according to defence claims is believed to have been paid several million dollars by the Americans for his evidence.
We also have the views of some of the relatives, that Megrahi was not guilty.
Whatever, you think, his trial was not very satisfactory.
His appeal was interesting, in that it would have asked the British Government to disclose a lot of secret information. Again from Alderson.
Secret documents before the Appeal Court – which even the defence has not seen – might have provided new information.
They will now remain undisclosed, after the foreign secretary issued a Public Information Immunity certificate stating that to publish them would be to the detriment of UK national security.
Was it just too convenient, that they found a way to release him before the appeal and they had the Scottish Government to blame? Make up your own mind.
But whatever Megrahi was, it would be very unlikely that he acted alone.
So now we are cow-towing to Gaddafi, who it is true to say has the oil we want. Or at least our two-faced government wants. Read any history of Gaddafi and the two make excellent bed-fellows.
Megrahi was just an unfortunate obstacle in the path to good relations, so he had to be removed one way or the other. Here’s what The Times said.
I don’t think anybody got justice in this tragedy. Especially those that ordered the destruction of PanAm 103. They remained completely untouched and free to plan other acts of terrorism and mayhem.
The Anonymous Widower 