Airline bomber getting out of prison

If the law would have allowed the minister to make him serve out his court sentence, then we're back to the wisdom of releasing a mass murderer.

“I was conscious that there are deeply held feelings, and that many would disagree whatever my decision,” MacAskill told the Scottish Parliament in Edinburgh today. “However a decision had to be made. It was based on the law of Scotland, and the values I believe we seek to uphold. It was not based on political, diplomatic or economic considerations.”

Brandon9000 wrote:

are you claiming that society has no right to punish criminals?

Are you claiming that American "society" has some right to influence the laws in another country?

Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill has faced questions from opposition party leaders in the Scottish Parliament, following his statement on the release of Lockerbie bomber Abdelbaset al-Megrahi on compassionate grounds.

Scottish Labour leader Iain Gray described Mr MacAskill's decision as the "wrong decision made in the wrong way, with the wrong consequences".

Mr Gray claimed the silent majority in Scotland had been "angered" by Megrahi's release.

"Does he understand how ashamed we were to see our flag flying to welcome a convicted bomber home?" he said.

He added: "The cabinet secretary has mishandled this whole affair from start to finish.

"Between the scenes of triumph in Tripoli and the pain and anger at home and abroad, is there nothing Mr MacAskill now regrets about his decision and the way it was reached?"

Scottish Tory leader Annabel Goldie said she would never forget her "disbelief and horror" at the time of the bombing.

She commented: "I want to make clear that the decision to release Mr Megrahi was not done in the name of Scotland or in the name of this Parliament or in my name.

"It was a decision made by Mr Salmond's SNP Government and Mr Salmond's minister."

She asked why Megrahi could not have been released to a "secure house or a hospice or a hospital".

"Is this SNP government seriously suggesting that our Scottish police who coped so admirably with security arrangements for G8 leaders could not adequately protect Mr Megrahi?"

She said that using 48 police officers to look after Mr Megrahi for a few weeks would be a "small price to pay" to protect Scotland's international reputation.

"Compassion and justice would have been better served by that approach than by a convicted terrorist being feted as a hero in Libya to a backdrop of waving saltires," Ms Goldie added.

But Mr MacAskill said the suggestion that Mr Megrahi may have gone to a hospice was "ludicrous"

Residents of hospices are looking for "dignity in their last few moments" Mr MacAskill said but would have been faced with a "travelling circus" if Megrahi had been admitted.

Mr MacAskill said he had to follow the security advice from Strathclyde Police.

Scottish Liberal Democrat leader Tavish Scott said Scotland's international reputation was "failing not growing" as a result of the decision.

He said: "This Parliament has been recalled too late to influence the justice secretary.

"That is wrong."

Mr Scott said that the Justice Secretary did not need to visit Megrahi in Greenock Prison and that a "written representation" was all that was needed.

The Lib Dem leader added: "How many more can elect to have the Minister visit them in their cell, even if they have a well-paid and well-equipped set of lawyers perfectly able to help them write a letter?

"And doesn't Kenny MacAskill's comment on the need for Scottish compassion mean that no prisoner - however bad their crime - will ever have a request turned down?"

But Mr MacAskill said former Lib Dem justice minister Jim Wallace had released a "child killer" from a life sentence on compassionate grounds.

He also quoted former Lib Dem leader Lord Steel who came out in support of the decision to release Megrahi.

There could be no vote over the matter in Holyrood due to the emergency nature of the debate.

The Scottish Parliament returns in a week, and the Lockerbie case is likely to remain on the agenda.




Last updated: 24 August 2009, 16:40

What 's the difference,
if he 's as good as dead already ?

without extortion of the Scotch.

Brandon9000 wrote:

are you claiming that society has no right to punish criminals?

Are you claiming that American "society" has some right to influence the laws in another country?

Brandon9000 wrote:

When you say, "vengeance is mine, saith the lord," are you claiming that society has no right to punish criminals? Because if society does have that right, it should punish them in proportion to their crimes. And if that's so, then a person who puts a bomb on an airliner and murders hundreds, including children, should receive the severest possible punishment.

This guy is about to receive the ultimate penalty and depending on your beliefs, the ultimate judgement. You are spending a lot of emotional units on something that will be concluded shortly. I see your point about law and order, but letting someone who is about to die off a couple of months early is not going to lessen the deterent effect of a life sentence. I do think that to the average Lybian and more generally to the wider Mid-East, seeing an act of compassion from a Western country will do more to stem terrorism than letting a prisioner rot in jail. If you want to wield the stick, you have to have a few carrots and in the big picture, this is a cheap carrot.

Where is S-glass and her riveting description of your mentalist medium cat, I wonder

So, do you advocate letting every murder with a fatal disease out of prison, no matter how horrible or numerous the murders he committed? I certainly do not. There simply have to be some acts s0 cruel and evil that they merit a severe government punishment.

You really should force other countries to use US-law, just and only US-law.