[BITList] release

[HUGH]

Colin,

At least they know the name of the country now. My daughter watched a US TV programme featuring selected bits of MacAskill's statement about his reasons, etc, for releasing Megrahi - they subtitled it !!  Subtitles ?? What in God's name are they at?  But it shows the gulf in understanding. The Wall Street Journal printed a balanced article on it, so there's no excuse for rubbish elsewhere. On TV just before I came upstairs a few minutes ago a there were pictures of people in Libya getting excited.  The voice over alleged people here are very excited about Libyans getting excited.  I had a quick look along our street.  Exciting it wasn't.  Pissing down and not a soul in sight.  We're all indoors listening to ourselves being hyped up as excited.  All we have to do is watch the pictures on TV, go to bed, wake up, and get on with life.  Excited? No.  There was another news item that people really should get excited about - yet more bodies of poor soldiers brought home from Afghanistan. But no excitement over that, just the same pictures, could be the last ones, or the ones before that, who can tell.

My opinion, for what it's worth, is that the truth about Lockerbie will never come out.  All this song and dance is because someone thinks the release of Megrahi introduces a faint chance that it might.  It's all hall of mirrors stuff.  The man's trial in the Netherlands under a mickey mouse version of Scots law was a farce.  A normal criminal trial under Scots law would have had 15 on the jury - his had none.  It was a fit up from start to finish.  In the early 1800s a bunch of Paisley weavers were up for treason, "encompassing the death of the King", at the court in Paisley.  Their trial was to be under English law, God alone knows why.  The jury, led by a local Laird, Shaw-Stewart (who owned half the country), resolutely refused to countenance the charge, despite haranguing from the bench, and the men were set free.  Without a jury, even a 12 man jury, they'd have been hung.  Megrahi's trial was not justice, even if he'd done the thing he was accused of.  If he didn't do it, that would only compound the injustice. I believe he didn't do it, and my view is as valid as Hillary Clinton's.

Hugh.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.bcn.mythic-beasts.com/pipermail/bitlist/attachments/20090821/f458f7fd/attachment-0001.shtml