View Full Version : Now we know why the alleged Lockerbie Bomber was freed
Because of BP's fear that his continued imprisonment would seriously affect a $20billion oil deal. Story here (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1294928/BP-stops-oil-leaking-Gulf-Mexico-time-3-months.html)
BP has now admitted that it lobbied the UK government with regards the transfer of prisoners to Libya, but denies that it was "directly" involved in the release of Abdelbaset Al Megrahi.
A BP spokesman then went onto say that "..BP told the UK Government that we were concerned about the slow progress that was being made in concluding a Prisoner Transfer Agreement with Libya.. "like many others we were aware that a delay might have negative consequences for UK commercial interests.."
So now we know
I see he's "got better" since being released as well.:roll:
Shabbychic
16-Jul-10, 14:13
Because of BP's fear that his continued imprisonment would seriously affect a $20billion oil deal. Story here (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1294928/BP-stops-oil-leaking-Gulf-Mexico-time-3-months.html)
BP has now admitted that it lobbied the UK government with regards the transfer of prisoners to Libya, but denies that it was "directly" involved in the release of Abdelbaset Al Megrahi.
A BP spokesman then went onto say that "..BP told the UK Government that we were concerned about the slow progress that was being made in concluding a Prisoner Transfer Agreement with Libya.. "like many others we were aware that a delay might have negative consequences for UK commercial interests.."
So now we know
Must be true then. Here's a wee song (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eBT6OSr1TI) just for you.:D
Thursolass
16-Jul-10, 14:39
I'm a wee bit confused about the title of this thread, was he not tried and convicted of the bombing and was serving time for it? He would therefore not be the "accused" any more.
Because of BP's fear that his continued imprisonment would seriously affect a $20billion oil deal. Story here (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1294928/BP-stops-oil-leaking-Gulf-Mexico-time-3-months.html)
BP has now admitted that it lobbied the UK government with regards the transfer of prisoners to Libya, but denies that it was "directly" involved in the release of Abdelbaset Al Megrahi.
A BP spokesman then went onto say that "..BP told the UK Government that we were concerned about the slow progress that was being made in concluding a Prisoner Transfer Agreement with Libya.. "like many others we were aware that a delay might have negative consequences for UK commercial interests.."
So now we know
I'm interested in the moral issue here. There are many side plots to the whole Al Magrahi thing and taking one facet out of context like the BP thing is probably a little unjust.
The whole situation is a complete shambles, from start to finish. Al Megrahi was only ever a token prisoner.
The alleged issue with BP is just a load of mud slinging from some quarters of the US politicos / business peeps that want to see the end of BP in the US.
The whole situation is a complete shambles, from start to finish. Al Megrahi was only ever a token prisoner.
The alleged issue with BP is just a load of mud slinging from some quarters of the US politicos / business peeps that want to see the end of BP in the US.
Agree that Al Megrahi was just a token prisoner, but BP have admitted that they lobbied "British" Government to speed up Prisoner Transfer Agreement, so I don't think it is a case of USA mud slinging
I'm interested in the moral issue here. There are many side plots to the whole Al Magrahi thing and taking one facet out of context like the BP thing is probably a little unjust.
The moral issue that I have problems with is how a commercial company can put pressure on the government purely for financial gain.
John Little
16-Jul-10, 18:54
It's only a moral question if you choose to make it one.
Now me - I'm a pragmatist. The guy was a token and as Jim Swire thought, his conviction was not altogether safe. He's the tip of a large iceberg.
But if setting him free pays British salaries, feeds and clothes British kids, pays British mortgages, creates British jobs and adds to our economy in a significantly huge way then I would say the greater morality is the one that does the most good to our community.
It's fine to have principles.
It's also fine to be able to give our own folk the best we can.
I'd say a Megrahi at home is a price that I would pay if I had any power.
The moral issue that I have problems with is how a commercial company can put pressure on the government purely for financial gain.
Not the first time and wont be the last.
Sara Jevo
16-Jul-10, 20:04
The decision to release was Kenny Macaskill's.
BP may well have urged the UK Government to accelerate the prisoner transfer agreement, which would create a legal international framework to enable Megrahi to be transferred.
But Macaskill rejected the request to transfer him in accord with this agreement. He was released on compassionate grounds, i.e. unconnected with the prisoner transfer agreement.
He returned to Libya a free man, not as a prisoner.
The moral issue that I have problems with is how a commercial company can put pressure on the government purely for financial gain.
That isn't a moral issue, it is the job of government to listen to all the arguments and then take a decision, and it is the job of all parties to lobby Government on different issues whether that it is for financial gain or otherwise.
I don't pretend to be an expert on middle eastern affairs but it seems to me that the Al Magrahi/BP issue is being flippantly used by third parties for their own reasons. One thing is for certain is that easing of international tensions has to be a good thing and Al Magrahi was used as a bargaining chip in the building of bridges between the UK and Libya. Essentially, I see nothing wrong with this. And it was very obvious that Al Magrahi was in prison due to those same tensions. Things have thawed and it seems to me to be silly to continue to hold and punish him further regardless of his illness whilst at the same time doing deals with the government that sent him on his mission to kill passengers.
It is therefore not so surprising that one of the main belligerent parties towards Libya is stirring things again for political gain in an war of media words against the UK in the USA.
In a sentence, BP's position with Al Magrahi is nothing new and purely coincidental and is only in the news again because of the Gulf disaster.
how a commercial company can put pressure on the government purely for financial gain.
What else do you expect?
While BP, and others, may have lobbied to speed up a PTA I doubt they would have been shoving thick envelopes inside of Kenny Macaskill's suit.
Sara Jevo
16-Jul-10, 21:36
I wouldn't trust anything an american tells about this whole saga.
It is a very murky business that may have started when the US shot down an Iranian airliner over the Gulf with the deaths of 200+ innocent passengers. No-one was ever punished for that and no apology ever made.
So it's a bit rich for the Americans to whinge about Scots showing compassion to someone who may well have been on the fringes on this but few believe was at the centre of it.
It was Iran the US fingered and then Syria was implicated. But Saddam invades Kuwait, the US stops yelling abuse at Iran and Syria and points the finger at Gaddafi instead, and Iran and Syria stay neutral when Bush invades Kuwait to give Saddam a bloody nose.
Megrahi was the fall guy, the token terrorist to satisfy public opinion in the west.
Must be true then. Here's a wee song (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eBT6OSr1TI) just for you.:D
Ha ha ha!! That's made my day. I hate the Daily Mail and everything/one associated with it. Cheers for that.
Ha ha ha!! That's made my day. I hate the Daily Mail and everything/one associated with it. Cheers for that.
Why do you hate the Daily Mail and everyone associated with it? :eek:
If you need to ask then there's no point in explaining it.:eek:
If you need to ask then there's no point in explaining it.:eek:
Well I just don't read News media that annoys me. I don't waste hate on them :lol:
Read my news on UK Tabloid. They cover topics that are too PC for the MSM
Well I just don't read News media that annoys me. I don't waste hate on them :lol:
Neither do I! Still hate them though.
John Little
18-Jul-10, 20:04
"Why do you hate the Daily Mail and everyone associated with it?"
Because it conjures up a daily vision of Hell for all who read it. It feeds their fears, reinforces their prejudices and inveighs against any sort of change because it is afraid of it. It shows the worst of society and claims that it is a mirror of reality.
It should be called the Daily Hell which would be more accurate than Mail.
Ha ha ha!! That's made my day. I hate the Daily Mail and everything/one associated with it. Cheers for that.
Whilst the Mail is not my newspaper of choice, I wonder what it is that you "hate" so much?
I dislike the Sun for the lies they printed about Hillsborough, and some of the more sensationalist headlines and slanderous stories they print, but I do not "hate" everything about it.
The Mail was the first newspaper which cast doubts over the conviction of Michael Stone (http://www.scandals.org/michaelstone/index.html), who is still in gaol for a crime he did not commit.
I wouldn't trust anything an american tells about this whole saga.
It is a very murky business that may have started when the US shot down an Iranian airliner over the Gulf with the deaths of 200+ innocent passengers. No-one was ever punished for that and no apology ever made.
So it's a bit rich for the Americans to whinge about Scots showing compassion to someone who may well have been on the fringes on this but few believe was at the centre of it.
It was Iran the US fingered and then Syria was implicated. But Saddam invades Kuwait, the US stops yelling abuse at Iran and Syria and points the finger at Gaddafi instead, and Iran and Syria stay neutral when Bush invades Kuwait to give Saddam a bloody nose.
Megrahi was the fall guy, the token terrorist to satisfy public opinion in the west.
i agree with you especially "the token terroirst to satrisfy public opinion in the west."
i am glad that he has been freed. he did not do it. i hope he forgivbes uus for what we in the west did to him
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.