Lockerbie bomber released

Originally Posted by Bri w

Chris De Burgh.......

For goodness sake man, we are talking about decency and compassion here ....

[Bri w]

Originally Posted by the white rabbit

For goodness sake man, we are talking about decency and compassion here ...

Decency and compassion for the victims?

And the paragraph does go on to say "maybe a poor analogy." It was an analogy, and perhaps should have been read in that context.


Perhaps the majority of condemnation from around the world is a better indication of how the decent and compassionate act is viewed.

Tough early morning crowd

[Bri w]

Originally Posted by the white rabbit

Tough early morning crowd

sorry matey, it comes from being a cantankerous old barsteward who is desperate for his next lot of pain meds All opinions are valid, its what makes up a balanced society

Convicted through political expediency. Released through political expediency.

Though release one person because they're on the way out - does that mean you release everyone?

at least we stop paying for his interpretor his chef and all his other finery he got while he was incarcerated. I did feel sorry until the American on the news last night who told us that every Scot should be disgusted and disgraced at the decision. that interview changed my whole outlook
he served more than most convicted of murder and i still believe hes was a fall guy. has the precedent be set i don't think so. when Life means life, and 5 years does not mean 2.5 becuase he s was a good little boy inside - thats when we can all start debating on whether he should have been let out or not.
and to be honest - i'm glad he's gone - we should never have been expected to keep him anyway - he should be sent back years ago.
as for the americans - i sympathise with their families (as i do with the UK families) but please don't tell us that all the scots are siding with terroists and we are as good as they are.

The best head scratcher I've read in teh last few pages of this topic has been Milky Bar's comment to the effect of:
Every person in prison in Scotland who has or develops a terminal illness must now be released. The desicion makers dont have a leg to stand on, what ever your crime it wasnt worse than this one so you should simply be free to go. How can they argue against it after letting this guy free.

A question though for the avaiators amoung us, how long does it take to organise a charter flight?
oh and when was the desision made to free him?

I just wonder because hours after he was free he was back in Libya getting off a charter flight on a libyan plane that'd obviously had to fly to Glasgow to get him in the first place. Just seems a little sus does that.

[northwind]

Originally Posted by Sid Squid

We're better than the people that would do terrible things. Revel in it.

Yep. This. I see a lot of people say "What compassion did he show the victims?" I say "Stop comparing us to murderers and terrorists".

Originally Posted by timwilky

If he was truly innocent he should have continued the appeals process.

As he's said himself, he was pursuing the appeals process til it turned out he'd be dead before the next appeal could be brought. That put a bit of a damper on that plan really. Proving his innocence isn't an option for him.

Originally Posted by vannus

He was found guilty by a court of law for the murder of 270 people. He has never shown any compassion for the families of the people whoe died

This is the irony though... If you protest your innocence, you get treated worse than you do if you admit guilt- how can you show compassion for your victims if they're not your victims?

Originally Posted by MiniMatt

And I'd say it was the opposite of a political decision - the political thing to do would be to appease the red neck yanks and keep him locked up.

Yup. People keep saying it shows weakness, I totally disagree, weakness would have been to make the easy decision and refuse him. I don't know if this is the right decision but it's certainly not the easy one. Macaskill's just proved himself to be a very unusual thing these days, a politician who'll make an unpopular decision and stick to it because he thinks it's the right thing to do.

I don't know whether this guy was really guilty or not. But if he was then life is or should be life. Let him die in prison. People are way to soft these days.

Turning the other cheek and all that crap doesn't help when it boils down to it. In general terms there can be no other line than the hard line when it comes to terrorists. You can't reason with them and you shouldnt. If found guilty and thats 100% guilty they should be finished off otherwise all you end up with is them infecting other peoples minds and spreading their cause.

If you were on a plane with a terrorist you wouldn't bother trying to talk them around. Its dog eat dog.

[northwind]

Life in this country has never meant life. The expectation was never that he'd die in prison.