Lockerbie Bomber Set Free

[Peikko 1,575]

I'm in trouble, my views are more or less in line with those of the Daily Telegraph Just read one of their pieces...

Link

Edited August 20, 2009 by Madame Cleo

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Better the Telegraph than the Daily Mail, I guess. Those people are as bad as the folks who listen to Rush.

[Peikko 1,575]

I was reading the Mail earlier, but didn't get have the courage for their take on the Lockerbie release

[Peikko 1,575]

OK, here's the Mail's version of events:

Lockerbie bomber flies home to a hero's welcome as Obama vents his fury at decision to free him

Link

[Ban Hammer 13,338]

england is soft on terrorism.

[Peikko 1,575]

That's a nice drive by one liner there Charles, right up there with the best.

[_Simpson_ 250]

Why cant we just admit this was a horrible decision with out all the high road overtones. Stupid is stupid regardless.

[Peikko 1,575]

I don't agree that the release on compassionate grounds was a horrible decision. I personally thought it was the right decision. The reasoning is a little too sophisticated for those who beat their chests when heinous crimes are involved however, so I don't expect you to understand how I arrived at this conclusion.

Edited August 20, 2009 by Madame Cleo

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Why cant we just admit this was a horrible decision with out all the high road overtones. Stupid is stupid regardless.

I only skimmed the speech - but it seems that the Secretary was legally obligated to grant the compassionate release - though he rejected the Prisoner Transfer Request by the Libyan Government.

[Peikko 1,575]

Why cant we just admit this was a horrible decision with out all the high road overtones. Stupid is stupid regardless.

I only skimmed the speech - but it seems that the Secretary was legally obligated to grant the compassionate release - though he rejected the Prisoner Transfer Request by the Libyan Government.

That's the bit I wasn't quite sure of - he was certainly obliged to consider the request seriously but I am not certain that he is obligated to release even if all criteria are met - however, the criteria for release were met that's certain.

[_Simpson_ 250]

Why cant we just admit this was a horrible decision with out all the high road overtones. Stupid is stupid regardless.

I only skimmed the speech - but it seems that the Secretary was legally obligated to grant the compassionate release - though he rejected the Prisoner Transfer Request by the Libyan Government.

Am I to understand your saying he had no legal wiggle room and was more or less forced to make this decision. BRB I will look at it

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Why cant we just admit this was a horrible decision with out all the high road overtones. Stupid is stupid regardless.

I only skimmed the speech - but it seems that the Secretary was legally obligated to grant the compassionate release - though he rejected the Prisoner Transfer Request by the Libyan Government.

Am I to understand your saying he had no legal wiggle room and was more or less forced to make this decision. BRB I will look at it

The speech doesn't really indicate his personal feelings towards the guy at all. Just that the release was made solely on compassionate release grounds (and not per the Prisoner Transfer Agreement negotiated between the UK and Libyan Governments).

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I don't agree that the release on compassionate grounds was a horrible decision. I personally thought it was the right decision. The reasoning is a little too sophisticated for those who beat their chests when heinous crimes are involved however, so I don't expect you to understand how I arrived at this conclusion.

I think a lot of people would feel easier about the release if the guy had served more than 8 years. Cancer isn't exactly a fun way to end your life, but I can certainly see why someone would feel that justice was somehow cheated - especially given how long it took to secure a conviction in the first place.

[_Simpson_ 250]

I don't agree that the release on compassionate grounds was a horrible decision. I personally thought it was the right decision. The reasoning is a little too sophisticated for those who beat their chests when heinous crimes are involved however, so I don't expect you to understand how I arrived at this conclusion.

Well maybe you can explain this sophisticated reasoning to me, I will do everything I can to wrap my little American brain around it.

From what I read he could of chose not to release him, so like I said from the get go what a stupid decision.*Beats chest*

Edited August 20, 2009 by looking_up

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I was actually more PO'd about the release of IRA prisoners in NI, even though that was necessary to securing the subsequent peace.