[leewgrant]

Nice to see that some people will profit by this.

$1:

Lockerbie: now it's payback time

Prospect of lucrative trade deals fuels anger at Megrahi's release

British trade leaders said the release of the man convicted of the Lockerbie bombing was a major breakthrough in relations between the two nations, which have progressed at breakneck speed since Tony Blair met the former pariah leader Muammar Gaddafi in a bedouin tent outside Tripoli in 2004....

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/ho ... 75805.html

[EyeBrock]

meee223 meee223:

Brenda Brenda:

$1:

Why do people want to make a mountain out of a molehill? Get a life and squawk about something that actually matters in the world.

Excuse me? Who the fuck are you to tell the rest of the world what matters to them?

I apologize for my choice of words. I was trying to say that I personally don't understand why this issue matters to people. That's all. So, again, sorry for the poor choice of words. I'm sorry you felt the need to swear. We can differ in opinion at any time, but swearing doesn't really belong in a forum. BTW, is there a moderator here and are there forum rules?

It matters because 270 people were killed by terrorists.

It matters because it's another show of weakness in the face of islamic murderers.

It matters because this shite encourages other terrorist wankers to kill more innocents.

And regardless of your opinion, this decision has pissed a lot of people off.

This is a mountain, not a molehill.

[leewgrant]

And this year's winner of "Shutting the Barn Door after the Horse has Bolted" award:

The Parliament of Scotland.

$1:

The Scottish Parliament has been called back from its summer recess to debate the matter, and on Monday Justice Minister Kenny MacAskill will appear before it in Edinburgh to explain why he made the decision to free Mr. al-Megrahi.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125087716365449725.html

[EyeBrock]

I listen to the BBC and there is huge backlash in Scotland and the rest of the UK on this.
It was pure politics and the SNP love to annoy Westminster, this was them making a 'sovereign' decision to prove that Scotland really is a proper country.

For those not in the know, Scotland has a similar relationship with England that Canada has with Quebec.

[Bodah]

ridenrain ridenrain:

I think Meee223 is either a hard leftie baiter, a terrorist apolgist or a A-hole from the Human Rights Nazis trolling for a lawsuit.

Since its been done before wouldn't suprise me. I wonder if Meee23 first name is Richard. lol

[leewgrant]

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

For those not in the know, Scotland has a similar relationship with England that Canada has with Quebec.

Even less so. Recently in Glasgow I picked up a Glasgow Herald to read. There was an op-ed piece on Scottish nationalism. One spokesman for the SNP was quoted as saying, "We would like a relationship between the UK and Scotland as there is between Canada and Quebec".

Well, first of all, my friend, ban all English signs.

[Brenda]

meee223 meee223:

Brenda Brenda:

$1:

Why do people want to make a mountain out of a molehill? Get a life and squawk about something that actually matters in the world.

Excuse me? Who the fuck are you to tell the rest of the world what matters to them?

I apologize for my choice of words. I was trying to say that I personally don't understand why this issue matters to people. That's all. So, again, sorry for the poor choice of words. I'm sorry you felt the need to swear. We can differ in opinion at any time, but swearing doesn't really belong in a forum. BTW, is there a moderator here and are there forum rules?

What is the poor choice of words that you appologize for? The "mountain - molehill", the personal "get a life" or the "squawk about something that actually matters in the world"?
Because to me, all 3 were personal attacks.

(Do you really think that my us of "fuck" once in this sentence, will give me a warning? You can try and report, see what happens, but I think your personal attack would get a warning sooner than my "fuck", if I bothered to report it. But hey, to spare your sweet pure little soul, next time I will use "hell" or "f*ck", just to accomodate you. You are welcome )

[meee223]

Well, so much for trying to apologize. Apparently there is no point. No one is entitled to any difference of opinion on these forums and I don't think there is any moderator. I tried to explain the reasons I feel the way I do, but no one read the post, not that I can see. I feel the same way you all do about terrorists. Take the Mumbai massacre, for instance. That sole surviving terrorist is guilty. We all know that. He admits to it. No question about it. He deserves to be hated and I don't give a crap what they do to him. But I can't say the same thing about this so-called bomber because I don't know if he did it or not. THAT'S WHY I DON'T FEEL THE SAME WAY YOU DO. He was convicted and that's all good enough for most of you. The courts are always right, aren't they? Does anyone ever read the news nowadays? In Canada, there have been quite a few people who have languished in jail for years, even decades, and are now being released because DNA evidence has proven their innocence. It's happened a lot lately. Court convictions have been wrong sometimes and people have paid dearly for those wrong convictions. In this bomber case, so many people have doubts as I've stated. It doesn't mean he isn't guilty, but it raises some red flags. For most people, it's sad, but when a court says someone is guilty, then it's automatically true. I hate terrorists just the same as you do, but I'm not going to spew out hate at someone unless I know he's really guilty, and I don't know that.

But one thing I do know. It's useless to post on some of these threads. A difference of opinion, no matter what reasons you give, are not tolerated. Apologies in choice of words are not accepted and bring even more condemnation. And there is no moderation on these boards at all. It does not exist.

I will not swear to anyone. That is not my nature. You won't care, of course, but I will, in the future, ignore and not reply to any posts from individuals here who have shown their immaturity and truly hateful nature. Thankfully, there are many other members who can make insightful posts and tolerate any difference of opinion, no matter what the issue may be.

So, go on and spew out all the hate you want. I really don't care since I won't be in this thread.

[ridenrain]

Seems Mr Dyer is taking his usual position.
Note: No implied support, I'm just posting this.

$1:

Gwynne Dyer: Al-Megrahi is free because the case was so weak

Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi was an intelligence agent. Since he worked for the Libyan government, he probably did some bad things. But he probably did not do the specific bad thing for which he was sentenced to 27 years in prison in Scotland.
He only served eight years. He was released on compassionate grounds last Thursday by the Scottish Justice Secretary, Kenny MacAskill, and flew home to Libya.
He is dying of cancer, but his release outraged the Americans whose relatives died aboard Pan Am Flight 103 in December 1988. They believe that Al-Megrahi is a mass murderer who should die in jail–but that is not necessarily so.
There were also British victims of the attack, and almost none of their relatives think that al-Megrahi should have been in jail at all. As their spokesman, Jim Swire, put it, "I don't believe for a moment that this man was involved (in the bombing)."

THE PRIME SUSPECT
Back in 1988 and 1989, western intelligence services saw the bombing of Pan Am 103 as an act of revenge. The U.S. warship Vincennes had shot down an Iranian Airbus five months before, killing all 290 passengers, and the Iranians were getting even. (The U.S. was then secretly backing Saddam Hussein’s war against Iran, and the Vincennes, operating illegally in Iranian territorial waters, shot down the airliner thinking that it was an Iranian fighter.)
There was some evidence for this “Iranian revenge” theory. In 1989 German police found the same kind of bomb that brought down Pan Am 103 in a house in Frankfurt that were used by the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command. The PFLP-GC was based in Syria, and Syria and Iran were allies, so maybe....

THE SWITCHEROO
But then, in 1990, Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait. Washington needed Arab countries like Syria to join the war against Saddam so that the liberation of Kuwait looked like a truly international effort. Syria’s price for sending troops was removal from America’s most-wanted list.
Suddenly Syria was no longer the prime suspect in the Pan Am case–and if Syria was out, so was Iran.
But more Americans died on Pan Am 103 than in any other terrorist attack before 9/11. Somebody had to take the fall. Libya was the obvious candidate, because it had supported various terrorist attacks in the past.
Soon new evidence began to appear. It pointed to al-Megrahi, who had been working as a security officer for Libyan Arab Airlines in Malta in 1988. A Maltese shopkeeper identified him as the man who bought children’s clothing like that found in the suitcase that contained the bomb that brought down Pan Am 103.
It was pretty flimsy evidence, but Colonel Moammar Gadhafi, Libya’s ruler, was desperate to end the Western trade embargo against his country. He never admitted blame in the Pan Am affair, but he handed al-Megrahi and a colleague over for trial in a Western court.

THE KANGAROO COURT
Al-Megrahi’s trial took place in 2001. His colleague was freed, but he was jailed for 27 years (in Scotland, because Pan Am 103 came down in Lockerbie). As time passed, however, the case began to unravel.
The Maltese shopkeeper who had identified al-Megrahi, Tony Gauci, turned out to be living in Australia, supported by several million dollars that the Americans had paid him for his evidence.
The allegation that the timer for the bomb had been supplied to Libya by the Swiss manufacturer Mebo turned out to be false. The owner of Mebo, Edwin Bollier, revealed that he had turned down an offer of $4 million from the FBI in 1991 to testify that he had sold his MST-13 timers to Libya.
One of Bollier’s former employees, Ulrich Lumpert, did testify at al-Megrahi’s trial that MST-13 timers had been supplied to Libya–but in 2007 he admitted that he had lied at the trial.
And this year it was revealed that Pan Am’s baggage area at London’s Heathrow airport was broken into 17 hours before Pan Am 103 took off on its last flight. (The police knew that 12 years ago, but kept it secret at al-Megrahi’s trial.) The theory that the fatal bag was put on a feeder flight from Malta became even less likely.
All of which explains why the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission announced in 2007 that it would refer al-Megrahi’s case to the Court of Criminal Appeal in Edinburgh because he "may have suffered a miscarriage of justice".

THE DEAL
The Review Commission’s decision caused a crisis, because a new court hearing would reveal how shoddy the evidence at the first one was. Happily for London and Washington, al-Megrahi was now dying of cancer, so a deal was possible. He would give up his plea for a retrial, no dirty linen about the original trial would be aired in public, and he would be set free.
A miserable story, but hardly a unique one. A man who was probably innocent of the charges against him, a loyal servant of the Libyan state who was framed by the West and hung out to dry by his own government, has been sent home to die.
Gwynne Dyer’s latest book, Climate Wars, was published recently in Canada by Random House.

[DrCaleb]

meee223 meee223:

Frankly, I can't understand how swearing can be used in any way other than a personal attack.

[youtube]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NADgR0SEX4o[/youtube]

[martin14]

meee223 meee223:

So, go on and spew out all the hate you want. I really don't care since I won't be in this thread.

BYE

[Brenda]

meee223 meee223:

Well, so much for trying to apologize. Apparently there is no point. No one is entitled to any difference of opinion on these forums and I don't think there is any moderator. I tried to explain the reasons I feel the way I do, but no one read the post, not that I can see. I feel the same way you all do about terrorists. Take the Mumbai massacre, for instance. That sole surviving terrorist is guilty. We all know that. He admits to it. No question about it. He deserves to be hated and I don't give a crap what they do to him. But I can't say the same thing about this so-called bomber because I don't know if he did it or not. THAT'S WHY I DON'T FEEL THE SAME WAY YOU DO. He was convicted and that's all good enough for most of you. The courts are always right, aren't they? Does anyone ever read the news nowadays? In Canada, there have been quite a few people who have languished in jail for years, even decades, and are now being released because DNA evidence has proven their innocence. It's happened a lot lately. Court convictions have been wrong sometimes and people have paid dearly for those wrong convictions. In this bomber case, so many people have doubts as I've stated. It doesn't mean he isn't guilty, but it raises some red flags. For most people, it's sad, but when a court says someone is guilty, then it's automatically true. I hate terrorists just the same as you do, but I'm not going to spew out hate at someone unless I know he's really guilty, and I don't know that.

First of all, this was not in Canada, but in Europe. HUGE difference, really.
Personally, I feel, that if he was not guilty, he would have apealed... Has he?

$1:

But one thing I do know. It's useless to post on some of these threads. A difference of opinion, no matter what reasons you give, are not tolerated. Apologies in choice of words are not accepted and bring even more condemnation. And there is no moderation on these boards at all. It does not exist.

A difference in opinion is fine. Just don't try to state iit as the only thruth. We all have our opinions, and we all are entitled to it.
For your apologies... WHAT exactly did you apologize for? You haven't really explained that one to me. Other than that... Are we obligated to accept apologies, no matter what? I don't think so either...

$1:

I will not swear to anyone. That is not my nature. You won't care, of course, but I will, in the future, ignore and not reply to any posts from individuals here who have shown their immaturity and truly hateful nature. Thankfully, there are many other members who can make insightful posts and tolerate any difference of opinion, no matter what the issue may be.

That is fine. Just don't expect others to follow your nature. We all have our nature. We all have our "things". Might not always be yours, but you could try to just accept it, read what is really said, instead of falling over one word.

$1:

So, go on and spew out all the hate you want. I really don't care since I won't be in this thread.

Why am I not surprised you take the easy way out?

[Guy_Fawkes]

What have you got to say to that meee223?

[raydan]

Guy_Fawkes Guy_Fawkes:

What have you got to say to that meee223?

[Guy_Fawkes]

I was hoping she would concede actually, or at least come up with an intelligent resonse, she just can’t win. I could be wrong, but not bloody likely.