♫anna♫
Global Moderator
Aug 18 2017 - Always In Our Hearts
The Federal Reserve Act is the Betrayal of the American Revolution!
e x a l t | s m i t e
karma:
Posts: 11,769
|
Post by ♫anna♫ on Jul 26, 2010 3:11:38 GMT
I think Kenny MacAskill must be a muslim. Don't be too hard on Obama on this. He has an increasingly hostile media breathing down his neck, many of whom do not even consider him a 'rea'l American and more than a few think he is the anti christ, so he is playing to his populace. He is the President of a backward race of people with a backward culture who are too stupid to understand complex issues. A race of people who cannot get their head round the fact that British and English mean different things are unlikely to get the idea of our legal system. Don't blame obama for that. He has an IQ double most of the Nation and he has to dumb down to their level. Dearest RV! You are obviously guilty of hypocrisy! Any post portraying Muslims like this, which i would also disapprove of would get you hopping mad! And YES! You are the only poster to date who posts about a "backward stupid race" and identifies a particular nationality with this concept of a "backward stupid race" !
This post is just too ridiculous to take seriouly and move to the V zone. Maybe Lin and others think differently, but i'll give you the chance to apologize and delete your muck and i'll delete this post!
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on Jul 26, 2010 7:14:16 GMT
www.scotland.gov.uk/News/This-Week/Speeches/Safer-and-stronger/lockerbiedecisionHere is the text of Kenny Macaskill's statement made last summer when the guy was released. As is clear, the advice came from the Scottish Prison Service. If you think he's lying, tell me which part you think he's lying about? If not, then I suggest you file away your silly conspiracy theories alongside the Duke of Edinburgh killing Princess Di. This has to be one of the most amusing threads ever on this board. Do keep it up. Alternatively, you could check out.... Vincent Cannistraro and Dr Thomas Hayes.
|
|
|
Post by riotgrrl on Jul 26, 2010 7:22:28 GMT
Come on Ned, that is straightforward rubbish. The ‘most advanced’ Nation on Earth? Who are you trying to kid? Americans have banned the teaching of evolution in many places and replaced it with creationism Is this true? I thought there was US caselaw banning the teaching of creationism, at least as a science. Riot, I have read that link you posted, and still feel uneasy that Magrahi withdrew his right to appeal at the same time as getting compassionate release. I understand that many people in America, including families of the victims, have misgivings about his conviction; how are we now to find out the truth? The truth about his release or the truth about his 'crimes'? If you want the truth about his release, you'll have to ask the US and UK Governments. The Scottish Government has already made public all relevant documentation that it is permissible to do so. The UK and US Governments have told the Scottish Govt not to publish their documents. www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-10754690If you want the truth about the Lockerbie bomb itself and how the US pressured the Scottish courts to fit Megrahi up, etc. etc. then I don't think you ever will. The Scottish Criminal Cases Review Board was looking at the case but his release means that all their files, etc. are locked now.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 26, 2010 8:33:12 GMT
Riot, I meant the truth about the crimes. The fact that the review (I incorrectly described it as an appeal) will never be heard is what frustrates so many, including - and maybe especially - the families of victims. It is bound to give rise to the kind of speculation we see here....even I (the epitome of miserable old sceptics ) have a niggling suspicion that there is more to this than is revealed in Kenny Macaskill's statement.
|
|
|
Post by riotgrrl on Jul 26, 2010 9:44:46 GMT
Skylark
As Fret is mysteriously alluding to, of course anyone with half a brain cell is pretty much in doubt that Megrahi was the guilty man, or even that Libya was the guilty country. It would be good to get to the truth, wouldn't it? But we never will I'm afraid, as it would be too embarassing for both the USA and for Scotland. Journalists here have sought to get information declassified, put in FOI requests, etc., but to no avail.
Which is just one of the reasons I'm so annoyed at the USA's arrogance in demanding Scottish Government Ministers travel to their shores to take part in their kangaroo court. We fitted the guy up in the first place to keep them happy!
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 26, 2010 10:08:15 GMT
Until a court says otherwise, Al-Megrahi is guilty. Kenny MacAskill, whose statement you quoted, says he has no problems with the conviction or sentence (well, he would, wouldn't he?).
If (as you corrected me), the review wasn't an appeal as such, could it not go ahead without the presence of Al-Megrahi ? Is his consent even necessary?
|
|
|
Post by riotgrrl on Jul 26, 2010 11:08:25 GMT
Until a court says otherwise, Al-Megrahi is guilty. Kenny MacAskill, whose statement you quoted, says he has no problems with the conviction or sentence (well, he would, wouldn't he?). If (as you corrected me), the review wasn't an appeal as such, could it not go ahead without the presence of Al-Megrahi ? Is his consent even necessary? Sorry if I've misled you. I believe there was an appeal AS WELL as the investigation by the organisation set up to look into potential miscarriages of justice. But the appeal had to be dropped for compassionate release; you have to admit that you are guilty before you can be released on compassionate grounds. (Or at least, stop denying you're innocent.) But all the balls were taken out of play by the compassionate release decision. I don't doubt there's been strange things afoot in this case. But these strange things do NOT include BP lobbying the Scottish Govt. As I've said already, Blair seemed to have been quite surprised to learn that the release of Megrahi was not in his gift (such is his arrogance and lack of constitutional understanding.)
|
|
|
Post by randomvioce on Jul 26, 2010 11:16:02 GMT
Hold on a minute, lets not make mountains out of molehills. This man was released through compassionate grounds. The prison doctor produced this prognosis and this was later confirmed by an oncology specialist. Kenny MacAskill released the man entirely on this advice. If some people here wish to look for other specialists who think different, fine. This is not an exact science, many factors can cloud the issue, and I accept that.
Once he was diagnosed with a terminal cancer and he was also given three months to live, he was never going to die in prison, let us at least acknowledge that. His next move would have been to a hospice, somewhere in Scotland. Let us think about that for a second to what that would actually imply.
That would imply that the highest profile prisoner in Scotland would have taken a place in a hospice supported by charity and causing disruption to the other patients and their relatives. A whole media circus, high level of security etc is not really what we expect hospices to be. Somehow people have lost sight of that fact.
For some reason, there are people here and in the Country at large and this forum who feel the need to invent more and more convoluted conspiracy theories as to why he was released and who organised it. Well sometimes fact is stranger than fiction, but in this case, the fact is a dying man was released to die at home, and at a pragmatic level, at the Libyans’ expense too. Not BP, not Tony Blair, Jack Straw or Colonel Gaddiffi, but the Justice Minister of Scotland, given the job of deciding a case of a terminally ill man and the poisoned chalice of that decision. That man made the ruling, not on public or World opinion, but on the facts and the rule law. Yes, he made the ruling and yes many people where appalled by it. However, Kenny MacAskill, can hold his head held high for having the courage to make the decision. A decision, By the way, that the current PM and at least one potential leader of Her Majesty’s Opposition are seemingly incapable of making or understand the issues involved.
|
|
|
Post by randomvioce on Jul 26, 2010 11:19:54 GMT
RV - You are truly a piece of work. I believe the word Hypocrite must have been invented just for you. Looking at this thread is was YOU that introduced the question on whether or not I would like to comment on Muslims. You attempted to hijack this thread.
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on Jul 26, 2010 11:25:15 GMT
For some reason, there are people here and in the Country at large and this forum who feel the need to invent more and more convoluted conspiracy theories as to why he was released and who organised it. Oh do wake up at the back. Nothing has been invented. The appeal had to be stopped one way or another. You are a politician's wet dream.
|
|
|
Post by randomvioce on Jul 26, 2010 11:30:01 GMT
By the way, I would like to point out that the Lybians could somehow manage to wave the correct flag at his homecomming (albeit for the wrong reasons).
|
|
|
Post by randomvioce on Jul 26, 2010 12:23:32 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 26, 2010 12:40:14 GMT
Sorry if I've misled you. I believe there was an appeal AS WELL as the investigation by the organisation set up to look into potential miscarriages of justice. But the appeal had to be dropped for compassionate release; you have to admit that you are guilty before you can be released on compassionate grounds. (Or at least, stop denying you're innocent.) But all the balls were taken out of play by the compassionate release decision. Kenny MacAskill said "Mr Al-Megrahi has since withdrawn his appeal against both conviction and sentence. As I have said consistently throughout, that is a matter for him and the courts. That was his decision." So that was sa bit mileading too, wasn't it? He didn't have a great deal of choice, from what you said. But the review of guilt could presumably still go ahead...perhaps those victim's families who have also begun to doubt the conviction have the locus to revive it? I know there are some in the US who no longer believe he was guilty, and presumably there are also some in Scotland who share this view?
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on Jul 26, 2010 12:46:45 GMT
Sorry if I've misled you. I believe there was an appeal AS WELL as the investigation by the organisation set up to look into potential miscarriages of justice. But the appeal had to be dropped for compassionate release; you have to admit that you are guilty before you can be released on compassionate grounds. (Or at least, stop denying you're innocent.) But all the balls were taken out of play by the compassionate release decision. Kenny MacAskill said "Mr Al-Megrahi has since withdrawn his appeal against both conviction and sentence. As I have said consistently throughout, that is a matter for him and the courts. That was his decision." So that was sa bit mileading too, wasn't it? He didn't have a great deal of choice, from what you said. But the review of guilt could presumably still go ahead...perhaps those victim's families who have also begun to doubt the conviction have the locus to revive it? I know there are some in the US who no longer believe he was guilty, and presumably there are also some in Scotland who share this view? Jim Swire
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 26, 2010 13:15:38 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Ben Lomond on Jul 26, 2010 13:38:42 GMT
www.scotland.gov.uk/News/This-Week/Speeches/Safer-and-stronger/lockerbiedecisionHere is the text of Kenny Macaskill's statement made last summer when the guy was released. As is clear, the advice came from the Scottish Prison Service. If you think he's lying, tell me which part you think he's lying about? If not, then I suggest you file away your silly conspiracy theories alongside the Duke of Edinburgh killing Princess Di. I rather favour the approach of Count Bismark, when he said, "never believe anything in politics until it has been officially denied". He has a point! But really, there is little to be gained by trying to develop this argument any further. One either accepts the "official" line, or one one does not. Perhaps I am too cynical. Perhaps there are simply a large number of genuine coincidences that have raised my hackles. Who knows? A politician might actually be telling the truth. But in the case under discussion, I still have serious reservations. And that is my last word on the dsubject.
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Jul 26, 2010 13:44:57 GMT
what ever the rights and wrongs...the scots are still not acountable to the americans
|
|
|
Post by DAS (formerly BushAdmirer) on Jul 26, 2010 14:05:54 GMT
RV - You are truly a piece of work. I believe the word Hypocrite must have been invented just for you. Looking at this thread is was YOU that introduced the question on whether or not I would like to comment on Muslims. You attempted to hijack this thread. As I suggested earlier, you should go to page 1 of this very thread. I counted the word 'Muslim' appearing there 17 times with the first post containing the word being by RV. I did not add any post during page 1 of this discussion. Once again, RV, I say to you: "Give me a Break"
|
|
|
Post by randomvioce on Jul 26, 2010 14:25:15 GMT
Random Voice - ahem - (clears throat)... Oh, we have idiots in our Country, too. The difference is we do not let them dominate our culture. You cannot really imagine a senerio where such people would be in charge of what our children learned in science classes. You are unlikely to have a vote on the age of the universe, for example.
|
|
|
Post by randomvioce on Jul 26, 2010 14:32:44 GMT
As I suggested earlier, you should go to page 1 of this very thread. I counted the word 'Muslim' appearing there 17 times with the first post containing the word being by RV. I did not add any post during page 1 of this discussion. Once again, RV, I say to you: "Give me a Break" A more mature person would see that the first mentions of the word 'muslims' where meant as mere jokes and perhaps comments regarding the way the board is going. It was you that made a feeble attempt to introduce a bit of Muslim baiting and hijack the thread.
|
|