Are they kidding???

[dismom2]

I meant no ill will towards the people of Scotland, however if someone in my government would have done the same thing. I would no longer want to be a citizen, that is just my opinion. I had several friends and family members die on September 11th so I have certain feelings in regard to letting a man such as this go because he is terminally ill.

I would hope that the people of Scotland would be just as outraged as those of us on here.

I just pray that this man does not go into remission because then all bets are off and now those of us who will be traveling anywhere will be thinking in the back of our heads.....will it happen again?

It is such a shame.

RE: The bolded part above:

There are decisions every government makes that are unpopular, but people can't just up and move to another country for every decision they don't agree with. And I'm pretty sure not everyone within the government agreed with the decision to release the terrorist, either.

I think most of the citizens of Scottland are unhappy, just as we are here in the U.S.

I also don't believe every single person in Libya thinks this loser is a hero. The group we see on TV does not represent everyone. Have they interviewed anyone from Libya with an opposing view yet, on TV? I know that in some of the middle eastern countries, people are afraid to speak their true feelings. You just can't do that in some countries.

 

[orlandothebeagle]

In Carly's defense, I couldn't tell what you were trying to convey in that post and had assumed that it was that you were a family member.Actually, it's better to leave that decision to the Justice Minister. Allowign the family of those killed to make decisions regarding punnishment is no way to run a justice system.Ummm, are either of those terms in any way inflamatory?

I meant decide to forgive.

So you wrap speculation up as fact and then insult me when I ask for a link? Interesting.

While it might certainly be true that once he arrives in Libya that some will give him the so-called 'hero's welcome', it does not follow that this will happen merely because he flew home on a government plane. After all, John Yettaw left Myanmar on a government plane, but he's still a putz.

Plenty links and pictures now though?

Maybe we should wait with this discussion until he really dies.

I would not be surprised if he recovered magical and lives happily ever after.

My little girl just asked that very q, didnt look that terminal to me.

Jesus has no place in a criminal justice system. Not everyone believes in Jesus and we have the right to expect criminals to do the time to fit the crime.

There were also 11 innocent people sitting in their homes who were killed when part of the plane landed on them! My uncle was invloved in the recovery process, finding body parts in trees etc, absolutely horrific stuff, he has never flown since.
It was Kenny McAskill who made the decision NOT the people of Scotland. One man made the decision not the country so please don't tar us all with the same brush. Personally, I don't know anyone who agrees with his release.

Your poor uncle, I know of ANYBODY who agrees.

I actually feel quite sick reading some of the posts and the glib comments about Sotland (about child molesters being freed etc). I'm Scottish and am horrified by the way this whole episode has been handled and seeing the 'heroes' welcome just made me sick to my stomach.

Please do not tar all Scottish people with the same brush -I don't know anyone who agrees with this decision. Reading between the lines there has been murmurings that the conviction was 'unsafe' doesn't mean he wasn't guilty - I think there is more to this than meets the eye and it's a poor reflection on how thie whole trial was handled. As a nation we are tough on crime and this is NOT a popular decision - a decision I think will cost the current government dearly.

I understand that feelings are high but one man's decison is not the voice of a whole nation.

It will cost them dear I think, certainly I will not vote for them again.

I meant no ill will towards the people of Scotland, however if someone in my government would have done the same thing. I would no longer want to be a citizen, that is just my opinion. I had several friends and family members die on September 11th so I have certain feelings in regard to letting a man such as this go because he is terminally ill.

I would hope that the people of Scotland would be just as outraged as those of us on here.

I just pray that this man does not go into remission because then all bets are off and now those of us who will be traveling anywhere will be thinking in the back of our heads.....will it happen again?

It is such a shame.

Trust me we(me and family and friends) are disgusted and outraged.

 

[orlandothebeagle]

RE: The bolded part above:

There are decisions every government makes that are unpopular, but people can't just up and move to another country for every decision they don't agree with. And I'm pretty sure not everyone within the government agreed with the decision to release the terrorist, either.

I think most of the citizens of Scottland are unhappy, just as we are here in the U.S.

I also don't believe every single person in Libya thinks this loser is a hero. The group we see on TV does not represent everyone. Have they interviewed anyone from Libya with an opposing view yet, on TV? I know that in some of the middle eastern countries, people are afraid to speak their true feelings. You just can't do that in some countries.

You are ofcourse correct, I dont know but I would think they are not alowed views?

I have to turn the news off now, every time I see them waving the scottish flag.

 

[#1MMFan]

Can I just say that there is a large spectrum of prognoses with Prostate Ca. I am a medical doctor and the reason screening for prostate cancer is not without problem/controversy is due in part to the fact that on lots of occasions a person is asymptomatic and ultimately does not die from the prostate cancer itself. However, I have seen numerous people with metatstatic, invasive prostate cancer (who may well look similar to megrahi with just three months to live) who do die in the same way as cancer of another origin. Our medical professionals are not going to gain by saying megrahi is terminal when he is not.

Overall this is a huge topic over here. But ultimately this was one man's decision and his alone. Not everyone else's. People all over the world did not agree with various US policies but they still continued to go to the US on holiday and could recognise that it was not the people as opposed to simply a few politicians who made these decisions.

There is a theory (which I have not researched, but have simply been told about by various people) that the bombing of the PanAm flight was a tit-for-tat, agreed with the Libyan and US authorities which apparently explains why various individuals were pulled from the flight prior to its take-off, allowing others to get seat cancellations. If this is true (and we'll probably never know) I think the people of Scotland should be incredibly angry that this was allowed to take place in our airspace, killing our people, forever scarring one of our towns and using our rescue services etc. I would hold this against those politicians involved in such a decision, but not against Americans as a whole.

 

[orlandothebeagle]

Can I just say that there is a large spectrum of prognoses with Prostate Ca. I am a medical doctor and the reason screening for prostate cancer is not without problem/controversy is due in part to the fact that on lots of occasions a person is asymptomatic and ultimately does not die from the prostate cancer itself. However, I have seen numerous people with metatstatic, invasive prostate cancer (who may well look similar to megrahi with just three months to live) who do die in the same way as cancer of another origin. Our medical professionals are not going to gain by saying megrahi is terminal when he is not.

Overall this is a huge topic over here. But ultimately this was one man's decision and his alone. Not everyone else's. People all over the world did not agree with various US policies but they still continued to go to the US on holiday and could recognise that it was not the people as opposed to simply a few politicians who made these decisions.

There is a theory (which I have not researched, but have simply been told about by various people) that the bombing of the PanAm flight was a tit-for-tat, agreed with the Libyan and US authorities which apparently explains why various individuals were pulled from the flight prior to its take-off, allowing others to get seat cancellations. If this is true (and we'll probably never know) I think the people of Scotland should be incredibly angry that this was allowed to take place in our airspace, killing our people, forever scarring one of our towns and using our rescue services etc. I would hold this against those politicians involved in such a decision, but not against Americans as a whole.

Very,very interesting point from a dr,thanks for posting.
I can only go from life experiances and from my fav saying of all time"normal things happen normally" he just doesnt look that ill, and ofcourse even as a dr(as you well know!) It is sometimes a crystal ball you need and not medical knowledge.

I have never heard of seat cancellations or stuff. Can you post a link so I can read about it.

 

[#1MMFan]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...36/Lockerbie-and-the-conspiracy-theories.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/777589.stm

Sorry, it got mixed up and the theory was Iran, not Libya. I can't find the articles on the officials being removed.. but it was someone else who told me verbally so I'll have to do some hunting about for the info.

 

[Scurvy]

There is a theory (which I have not researched, but have simply been told about by various people) that the bombing of the PanAm flight was a tit-for-tat, agreed with the Libyan and US authorities which apparently explains why various individuals were pulled from the flight prior to its take-off, allowing others to get seat cancellations. If this is true (and we'll probably never know) I think the people of Scotland should be incredibly angry that this was allowed to take place in our airspace, killing our people, forever scarring one of our towns and using our rescue services etc. I would hold this against those politicians involved in such a decision, but not against Americans as a whole.

I'm not sure I'm understanding this part of your post - Are you saying there are actually people who believe that the US knew about and approved of the bombing of the flight before it occurred?! It's incredible to me that people can believe such ridiculous things - it never ceases to amaze me. I guess it just goes to show that there are conspiracy theorists everywhere.

 

[rie'smom]

Can I just say that there is a large spectrum of prognoses with Prostate Ca. I am a medical doctor and the reason screening for prostate cancer is not without problem/controversy is due in part to the fact that on lots of occasions a person is asymptomatic and ultimately does not die from the prostate cancer itself. However, I have seen numerous people with metatstatic, invasive prostate cancer (who may well look similar to megrahi with just three months to live) who do die in the same way as cancer of another origin. Our medical professionals are not going to gain by saying megrahi is terminal when he is not.

Overall this is a huge topic over here. But ultimately this was one man's decision and his alone. Not everyone else's. People all over the world did not agree with various US policies but they still continued to go to the US on holiday and could recognise that it was not the people as opposed to simply a few politicians who made these decisions.

There is a theory (which I have not researched, but have simply been told about by various people) that the bombing of the PanAm flight was a tit-for-tat, agreed with the Libyan and US authorities which apparently explains why various individuals were pulled from the flight prior to its take-off, allowing others to get seat cancellations. If this is true (and we'll probably never know) I think the people of Scotland should be incredibly angry that this was allowed to take place in our airspace, killing our people, forever scarring one of our towns and using our rescue services etc. I would hold this against those politicians involved in such a decision, but not against Americans as a whole.

There's also a story that Israel was behind 911 and that Jewish people who worked in the Towers were told to stay home that day. People make up idiotic rumors to explain things that are hard to understand.

 

[#1MMFan]

The post about Israel and 9/11 seems ridiculous, although I've heard that before. The one about a US ship blowing up an Iranian plane with Gadafi's daughter on-board would be a slightly more plausible reason for blowing up a US plane. And it's not a rumour, as the iranian plane really was shot down by the US; fact. I don't know what I think about it overall though.
I do think that the way the US reports its news is far from objective. I'm always amazed at how little world news is reported, so it's not fair to expect Americans to have the full facts to take an informed overview. I come home from a few weeks' vacation in the States and find out numerous world events have happened that haven't been reported by CNN/NBC/Fox etc etc.

 

[Scurvy]

I do think that the way the US reports its news is far from objective. I'm always amazed at how little world news is reported, so it's not fair to expect Americans to have the full facts to take an informed overview. I come home from a few weeks' vacation in the States and find out numerous world events have happened that haven't been reported by CNN/NBC/Fox etc etc.

Most Americans I know don't rely on CNN/NBC/Fox etc for the bulk of their news and they are quite able to gather the facts in order to have an informed overview. I'm sure you aren't trying to imply that the fact that Americans don't believe a ridiculous conspiracy theory means that we are uninformed.

 

[#1MMFan]

Oh no, not at all. I'm not implying that because you don't believe a conspiracy theory that you are uninformed. Just that your news channels are far from objective in reporting world events (as a side issue). There are many views on this particular subject and the subject is not black and white, and at the end of the day it was a Scottish legal matter solely (whether I agree with the outcome or not matters not).

 

[Sanchez]

The post about Israel and 9/11 seems ridiculous, although I've heard that before. The one about a US ship blowing up an Iranian plane with Gadafi's daughter on-board would be a slightly more plausible reason for blowing up a US plane. And it's not a rumour, as the iranian plane really was shot down by the US; fact. I don't know what I think about it overall though.
I do think that the way the US reports its news is far from objective. I'm always amazed at how little world news is reported, so it's not fair to expect Americans to have the full facts to take an informed overview. I come home from a few weeks' vacation in the States and find out numerous world events have happened that haven't been reported by CNN/NBC/Fox etc etc.

Sounds like you may the one who is uninformed. The basis of of your conspiracy theory was not gained through research (as you admitted), but rather though conversations with "various people." Is that how you get news in Scotland?

 

[rie'smom]

Oh no, not at all. I'm not implying that because you don't believe a conspiracy theory that you are uninformed. Just that your news channels are far from objective in reporting world events (as a side issue). There are many views on this particular subject and the subject is not black and white, and at the end of the day it was a Scottish legal matter solely (whether I agree with the outcome or not matters not).

How do you know that the news you get is more objective?

 

[islandmum]

How do you know that the news you get is more objective?

having lived both sides of the pond the quality and depth of world news available on US TV is realisitcally quite pitiful. Compared to the major UK news stations (ITV, BBC, Sky) the coverage is extremely poor and very much targeted towards only covering world news which directly affect the US - e.g. Israel, Iraq, Afganistan at the moment.

Unless CNN does a special there really is no information from anywhere else in the world.

 

[Scurvy]

Oh no, not at all. I'm not implying that because you don't believe a conspiracy theory that you are uninformed. Just that your news channels are far from objective in reporting world events (as a side issue). There are many views on this particular subject and the subject is not black and white, and at the end of the day it was a Scottish legal matter solely (whether I agree with the outcome or not matters not).

I don't disagree that the US television news sources aren't the best place to get world news. Of course they don't really claim to cover much world news - we get local and state news on our local channels. We get national news on the networks and on the news channels such as CNN, Fox News, MSNBC, etc. There is some world news included, but it is mostly things that either involve the US in some way or that people in the US will find particularly interesting. Of course they do also cover large world events that don't involve the US, but certainly not to the extent that they cover national news - which I find reasonable. While I would love to have a 24 hour news channel that only shows stories from other countries, we don't have anything like that.

As for the objectivity of the US news sources - I think that all news outlets have their own bias, but I think it's easy to get a well rounded view of the news by watching several different news channels and reading news online.


Fortunately we do have access to the internet, which means most of us are still well informed about all sorts of news that doesn't get covered by our news channels.

Regarding the Scottish legal matter - of course you are correct and I wouldn't argue that, but that isn't the conspiracy theory I was talking about. The conspiracy theory that I was referring to was the idea that the US was aware of and approved of the bombing of the Pan Am flight. I think that is a ridiculous notion on par with the conspiracy theories that surround the events of 9/11.

 

[Kickapoo Joie Juice]

I've worked for/with the media, and seriously, between them and the government (take your pick as to which one), most are not smart enough to come up with, much less carry out, most of the conspiracy theories I've read.

It takes more imagination than all of them put together to come up with the theories...

 

[sbell111]

I've worked for/with the media, and seriously, between them and the government (take your pick as to which one), most are not smart enough to come up with, much less carry out, most of the conspiracy theories I've read.

It takes more imagination than all of them put together to come up with the theories...

Not to mention the fact that the sheer number of people involved in the conspiracy would guarantee that no secrecy would be achieved for long. Then you have the transient nature of high level government employees and media types and their natural desire to make themselves important by blabbing everything they know...

 

[dcentity2000]

Compassionate grounds would be releasing him to a secure home, not sending him back to a hero's welcome.



Rich::

 

[#1MMFan]

I agree you guys have the internet and are informed that way.

Regarding to releasing to a secure house, I suppose part of the "compassion" is allowing his family to see him before he dies which I agree did not happen to those affected in Lockerbie but I don't see the overall benefit in releasing to a house in Newton Mearns (one of the up-market parts of Glasgow) where he will get the same medical treatment as we are already giving him in prison, versus sending him back to his family. I know there were suggestions about letting his family come over and visit him but honestly, is that not just asking for trouble? What if one of his family decides to do a little suicide mission whilst they're over here (and given the fact he protests his innocence I'm sure his family could hold a grudge)? I don't think there's a brilliant solution to this problem ultimately. Our law obviously allows those with 3 months to live compassionate release provided they meet the criteria, (and you can't go cherry-picking in law otherwise they start going to the European court of human rights, God forbid!), but equally a release was always going to bring about strong feelings. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

 

[Sanchez]

Just reading this thread one year later. The convicted bomber remains alive. It appears that recent reporting puts BP in the middle of the release negotiations.