|
Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today. |
9th July 2010, 04:09 AM | #201 |
In the Peanut Gallery
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 54,892
|
Edit: Not worth it.
|
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject. Sir Winston Churchill |
|
9th July 2010, 04:11 AM | #202 |
In the Peanut Gallery
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 54,892
|
|
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject. Sir Winston Churchill |
|
9th July 2010, 04:20 AM | #203 |
Adult human female
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 50,594
|
That was roughly the consensus of the Question Time panel. The politicians on the panel (except Nicola, obviously) disagreed with the decision to release Megrahi. Some of this may of course be retrospective, from people who would have had no problem with it if Megrahi had had the decency to die on schedule. However, none of them thought there was any point in an enquiry into it. They know on what basis the decision was made, it was transparent, and although they disagreed, they could see no point in further enquiry. Rolfe. |
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012. |
|
9th July 2010, 11:56 AM | #204 |
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 28,209
|
|
11th July 2010, 10:30 PM | #205 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,494
|
I feel a little bad not joining in here, but there are many many many discussions about Megrah's "new lease on life," a friggin immortal now. Most do not have Rolfe and a higher than average average member IQ going for them,so I've been needed around.
Thanks for bringing that video here. I thought the worst thing he said was that there was unamymity anong all the U.S family members about Megrahi's guilt. I don't mind that he can't cite the number of families he represents, but that he's able to smugly say all those unknown number of people believe what he does is just slimy as all hell. True, I've heard nothing to contradict that. The American side seems completely brainwashed. But he doesn't really know what they all think. He's paid, first by the White House to rally all the families behind the official Libya line, and now to represent the united families as 100% in line with the previous alignment. Frank Duggan was put up for election and elected to lead this sacrosanct group, to harness their emotional outrage and embody them to the point where the Daily Fail calls HIM "families of the 270 Lockerbie victims". This happened when? Some time in 2008, don't have the date. Check it out relative to Megrahi's impending release. I'd wager he was sent down to replace Kara Weipz to circle the wagons more effectively. |
11th July 2010, 10:38 PM | #206 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,494
|
Dedicated thread, and I started it, so "bam" here's the spot.
I have a question, which I'll maybe find reading the thread later anyway-but WHO was responsible for the relevant "three-months" assessment? Everyone in the United States- EVERYONE (it seems) - says it was Dr.Sikora's call and nothing else that produced this. Amb. Sheinwald says it was a panel of people besides Sikora. Can anyone give me an awesome explanation to share over here, and save me some time? Is one side right, wrong, both a little wrong, what? |
12th July 2010, 12:41 AM | #207 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,494
|
Do you have a citation handy for that?
Word up. Alive after X months and political interests goes here. The release decision and prognosis behind it is I think at the heart of the whole new wave of American anger. Sorry for picking the wrong spot at first. I get confused sometimes. See above. The American indignation and brainwashing angle would best be captured by a thread better formulated around just that. If anyone else beats me to it, I'm not going to jump on starting that one. Dude, that's the coolest comment I've yet gotten [ed - seen - Rolfe scored it]. Can't speak for Rolfe or anyone else, but I aim to disturb. On the rest, I can see both sides of the compassion debate. If I felt there was even a 50% chance he were actually guilty on inspection - which means there is a darn good case - I'd have a hard time getting very riled up. In this case, I'm having a hard time scraping up a generous single digit possibility. It's worth further study. cont'd... |
12th July 2010, 01:18 AM | #208 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,494
|
MSNBC's fast-talking smart British guy disagrees.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38084497/
Quote:
Believe it or not, he's representing the view held by pretty much the whole American media establishment. At the link above, MSNBC, the subtext was that Megrahi's whole sickness is faked. Because Sikora said something, mostly. ETA: Rolfe, your post#184 seems to be at least part of what I'm looking for. Thanks. |
12th July 2010, 02:12 AM | #209 |
Adult human female
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 50,594
|
I can't watch that at work. The accompanying article is just another run through the usual stuff. Well, that's just ridiculous. You can't fake something like that, right in the middle of the NHS, where there are dozens of people involved with a patient, and sharing records and results of investigations and so on. It's a CT on a par with the 9/11 no-planers. What may have happened is that the most pessimistic prognosis possible was latched on to by a convergence of interests who all had good reason to want Megrahi on the next plane home. Even excluding the consideration that the guy probably didn't do it in the first place, I can't see what all the fuss is about. Could I repeat what I said in a different thread? There's a lot of serious hypocrisy going on here. The US commentators (up to and including Obama) because they completely fail to acknowledge that it was in the interests of America just as much as anyone else to release Megrahi. The USA wants Gadaffi friendly and on-side, because of all that oil, just as much as anyone else, and Megrahi in jail was an obstacle to that. If you believe Libya blew up Pan Am 103, then it was Gadaffi who was the prime mover anyway, and it's a bit peculiar to be demanding Megrahi's head on a platter while sucking up to Gadaffi. So wht not go the whole hog? The UK Labour, Conservative and Liberal parties are all busy lambasting the SNP over Megrahi's release, because it suits them. They're political opponents, of course they're going to take any chance they can get to put the boot in. This is hypocritical, because none of them wanted Megrahi to stay in jail either, for much the same reasons. We need Gadaffi as a friendly ally, and this is most certainly not going to be facilitated by keeping Megrahi in jail. And if they can be best pals with the guy they believe masterminded the Lockerbie bombing, then what's the big problem about releasing a relatively junior operative? And finally, the whole bloody boiling of them, headed up by the SNP, is being massively hypocritical about the primary reason for the release happening when it did. It was the optimum moment to use the prospect of release to persuade Megrahi to abandon his on-going appeal. That appeal had been dragging on for years, with astonishing government back-flips to try to keep certain material from the defence lawyers. It was a huge no-no for two reasons. One is that it was almost certain to have been successful, because Tony Gauci's evidence had been fatally undermined, and without that evidence there was simply nowhere near enough left to sustain Megrahi's conviction. So they were going to have to release him, and find themselves in the embarrassing position of not having solved the biggest mass murder in Scottish history, and have to start all over again looking for the culprit. Oops. The undermining of Tony Gauci's evidence was bad enough, in that part of that undermining was the revelation that he and his brother had been paid $3 million by the CIA for their evidence, and are now living in luxury in Australia on the proceeds. However the other bit which is a lot more hazy is that there were further grounds for appeal that weren't to do with the Gaucis, and in some way involved revelations the UK and US governments did not want in the public domain. Would it have been possible to get right through the appeal while keeping this secret? Well, they were trying, but far better to abandon the appeal, given the chance. Megrahi was pressurised while in jail to give up the appeal, being told that it would help his chances of getting home. So he did that, although previously, before his illness, he had insisted he preferred to stay in jail to fight to clear his name. Now we have Nicola Sturgeon, deputy First Minister, insisting that he gave up the appeal voluntarily, and that he really didn't have to do that. This is a downright lie, frankly. So it's all quite complex really, but the bottom line is that it was in the US interest as much as the UK interest to keep Gadaffi sweet and let his human sacrifice go. Recognise political point-scoring when you see it, people! Finally, so Megrahi's dad hopes he'll make a full recovery. Yeah right. You know how? Alternative medicine, that's how. Apparently they're trying some woo-woo snake oil, now the doctors have said there's no more conventional medicine can do. Rolfe. |
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012. |
|
12th July 2010, 02:39 AM | #210 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,494
|
I notice you didn't have much to say, here or there, to support the contents of this article. At the moment, one comment only:
Quote:
Gaddurbitz1!!1 Libyans, and there it is for the world to see... ETA:And thanks, Rolfe. You should check out that video when you can. It's ever so annoying. ETA again: http://lockerbiedivide.blogspot.com/...ol-sikora.html |
12th July 2010, 02:50 AM | #211 |
Adult human female
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 50,594
|
Who knows? There are a lot of US families. Most of them probably want to move on now - it's been over twenty years, after all. One has to remember that these people are all now millionnaires as a result of the huge sums in compensation paid out first by Pan Am when they lost the civil action for liability, and secondly by Gadaffi when he obliquely accepted responsibility and paid up in order to put an end to the sanctions and allow Libya to rejoin the international community. All that money was predicated on the version of the story where Megrahi put the bomb on the plane at the behest of Gadaffi being true. There's no question of anyone asking for it back if Megrahi's conviction were to be quashed, but I think the people involved might find it a tad embarrassing. So, I can understand it if a lot of the relatives are now just keeping out of it, getting on with their well-heeled lives, and letting Frank Duggan say what he likes. Yes, Frank Duggan was the US government place-man within the US families group, and his nice little sinecure depends on him continuing to insist that Megrahi is guilty. He's not very good at it though. I could make a better case for Megrahi having done it than he can! (And I'd still get shredded by anyone with a real grasp of the evidence, but that's the way it goes.) If Jim Swire, Martin Cadman and Pamela Dix were aware of the Daily Mail saying that, they'd go through the roof. Oh, and Father Keegans as well, who was within about 50 feet of being a Lockerbie victim. You may think his insistence on the unanimity of the relatives is the worst thing he said - for me it's the appalling ignorance of the specifics of the evidence. To say that Megrahi lied under oath when he didn't even take the witness stand, to say that each of Gauci's statements was given to a different jurisdiction because of the number of different nationalities involved in the disaster - it's unbelievable, from someone who is being paid to know about this. The day has not yet come when I would regard Beerina as cool. He's not known for taking on board arguments contrary to his prevailing viewpoint. I suppose for him even to acknowledge the possibility that Megrahi is innocent, after having steadfastly ignored posts to that effect for close on a year, is quite an advance. There's no question that Megrahi should never have been convicted. The conviction couldn't possibly have stood without Gauci's evidence, and Gauci's evidence wasn't worth a hill of beans. He did sell the clothes that were packed round the bomb in the suitcase, apparently, but who he sold them to is anyone's guess. His eventual, tentative, identification of Megrahi as "looking a little bit exactly like" the purchaser (no more!) was the result of years of training and suggestion and leading the witness, aided by heavy hints of eye-popping amounts of money to come if Megrahi were to be convicted. The question is, if you take away Gauci's evidence, is what's left sufficient to suggest that Megrahi was guilty anyway, even if it's not enough to stand up in court? I would say not. There are a number of weird coincidences surrounding this case, and the coincidence which might be taken to suggest he put the bomb on the plane is thistledown compared to the weight of evidence that he really couldn't have done it and someobody else did. This isn't something many people (especially in the USA) want to confront. It's just too embarrassing, over 20 years down the line, to confront the fact that we don't know who carried out that atrocity, and we certainly didn't manage to bring them to justice. Rolfe. |
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012. |
|
12th July 2010, 02:52 AM | #212 |
Adult human female
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 50,594
|
Originally Posted by Caustic Logic
Iranians, me old sport, Iranians.... Rolfe. |
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012. |
|
12th July 2010, 12:36 PM | #213 |
diabolical globalist
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 10,017
|
|
12th July 2010, 01:31 PM | #214 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,494
|
You make it sound like Rolfe was suggesting the families actually sold their loved ones across the river Styx to get that money. I think the facts of many million payouts is relevant in why American families haven't spoken up. It can't be the whole picture,as British relatives I think got their share of Libya's money as well.
And that 15 minutes things is not an option anyway, so... they'll probably be keeping it and the complexity that would arise if they ever had to admit Libya wasn'tat fault after all. Can you see how that might be awkward at least? |
12th July 2010, 01:35 PM | #215 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,494
|
This is how behind I am. It took me an hour of stumbling around to find Fraser's name, which rings me back to something I remember now from last year.
The Times, 28 August It emerged that the prognosis that Abdel Baset Ali al-Megrahi had a life expectancy of only three months or less was supported by an unnamed doctor who had no expertise in terminal prostate cancer. The final report on al-Megrahi's condition, which went to Kenny MacAskill, the Justice Secretary, was drawn up by Dr Andrew Fraser, director of health and care with the Scotttish Prison Service. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle6812427.ece Guardian, 20 November At the time of his release MacAskill was at pains to say the three-month lifespan was an estimate. But he relied entirely on a report by Dr Andrew Fraser, the head of medical services for the Scottish prison service, stating that Megrahi's health had declined significantly in the weeks before his release. "The clinical assessment therefore is that a three-month prognosis is now a reasonable estimate for this patient," Fraser sai http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009...ckerbie-bomber Telegraph, 4 July The Scottish government insists Kenny MacAskill, the justice minister who took the final decision to release Megrahi, based his ruling on a medical report by Dr Andrew Fraser, director of health and care at the Scottish Prison Service (SPS). A spokesman said Professor Sikora’s advice to Libya “had no part to play in considerations on the Megrahi case”. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...s-or-more.html So...who's been telling the American mediathat Dr. Sikora's Libyan-paid 3 months prognosis that was responsible? Who has created a situation where one comment I saw described this as 'letting one terrorist diagnose another?' |
12th July 2010, 02:02 PM | #216 |
Dreaming of unicorns
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: UAE
Posts: 11,938
|
|
__________________
Stundie - Avoided like the plaque, its a scottish turn of phrase. |
|
12th July 2010, 02:08 PM | #217 |
Adult human female
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 50,594
|
I imagine that's true for the majority of the relatives - especially those who lost members of their nuclear families, and I'm thinking particularly of the parents of the Syracuse students. There are also, probably, a number of people who lost more distant relatives - quite a few entire nuclear families were wiped out on that plane, as parents and children were travelling togather. It's not a homogenous group. Just to put it into perspective. In the early 1990s, each family got about £2 million from a civil action for damages against Pan Am. In 2003 Libya agreed to pay a total of £1.7 billion to the relatives. I think the £1 billion handed over in 2008 was the final installment of that. Each family is said to have received about £6 million in total from Gadaffi. (That's pounds sterling, with a variety of exchange rates to the dollar I imagine - the payouts happened over a long period.) I imagine there are very few families who would prefer the money to their lost loved one. It's also questionable whether money contributes at all to coming to terms with that sort of grief. Indeed, the money could be actively destructive - the Pan An compensation alone destroyed David and Steven Flannigan, who didn't even live long enough to benefit from Gadaffi's contribution. Nevertheless it exists, and platitudes about preferring poverty with one's son or daughter alive don't change that, however true. How different is it, to lose a son or daughter to a terrorist attack, or a drunk driver, or an armed robber, or a climbing accident? I don't know. But unlike the latter categories, the Lockerbie relatives are now multi-millionaires. (Indeed, they were already multi-millionaires before Gadaffi paid out a penny.) So if we see a paid spokesman with no idea at all about the specifics of the evidence shouting down anyone who points out that the conviction was clearly unsafe and likely to have been overturned on appeal, I think it's relevant to remind ourself of the full circumstances. The families have been wealthy for nearly 20 years, and getting wealthier as further installments are paid. It doesn't go away just because thinking about it is uncomfortable. Rolfe. |
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012. |
|
12th July 2010, 02:20 PM | #218 |
Adult human female
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 50,594
|
They're a very disparate group. It's common knowledge that some of the families refused to touch a penny, either because they saw it as tainted blood money, or because they didn't believe the Official Version of what happened. Who these people are is not known, though. I imagine it would be a very difficult offer to refuse unless you were already independently wealthy. I don't think there was ever any question of the relatives having to give up any compensation even if Megrahi's appeal had been successful. But neither would the entire gross GDPs of Libya, Iran and the USA get them even 15 seconds with their lost loved one, never mind 15 minutes, so that's a pretty irrelevant comment. The money exists. The relatives are wealthy. It's a relevant factor when considering how events are unfolding at the moment. Rolfe. |
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012. |
|
12th July 2010, 02:25 PM | #219 |
Adult human female
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 50,594
|
Sorry, I could probably have found it sooner. I just can't get that aerated about the exact identity of the doctor who provided the acceptable prognosis. There was quite a bit of annoyance at the time that more specialist doctors apparently hadn't been consulted, but this wasn't about Karol Sikora, it was about Andrew Fraser being "the single doctor" whose opinion was relied on. A doctor who was part of the establishment, employed by the prison service. Karol Sikora was on TV, sounding impressive, but he was only the consultant retained by Libya, and nobody was under any obligation to listen to him. I think it was more of an ego-trip than anything. Rolfe. |
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012. |
|
12th July 2010, 02:46 PM | #220 |
Adult human female
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 50,594
|
|
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012. |
|
12th July 2010, 04:10 PM | #221 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,494
|
I think I mostly get it now. The confusion around this is noteworthy. Somehow much or most of the public has been left confused. "The one doctor" became Sikora. Hell, I wrote up half an article based on that premise, just from not knowing and being bombarded with so many repetitions of that presumption. This will need to be explained over here.
|
13th July 2010, 03:45 AM | #222 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,494
|
On a closer look, Rolfe, it seems the "one doctor" cited by Simpson, "one anonymous source" cited by Aitken, etc. is other than the non-anonymous Dr. Fraser. One source says all four docs on the panel said he wasn't sick enough to go home, but Fraser overrode them all. Most sources agree one doctor dissented. One report in the Scotsman says Sikora sided with the majority against saying three months. That'sprobablyan error. The first link, Daily Record, has this:
Quote:
FWIW The Times provides a short redacted report in PDF None of this is the biggest point, but I was annoyed at how little I knew. Better now. |
13th July 2010, 04:42 AM | #223 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,494
|
Also, these knucklehead Senators are now demanding Sec. Clinton pressures someone or other to make Megrahi go back to jail until he's dead.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/2010...t_almegr.html#
Quote:
http://lockerbiedivide.blogspot.com/...egrahi-to.html
Quote:
|
13th July 2010, 10:02 AM | #224 |
Adult human female
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 50,594
|
It's all hot air. NOBODY is going to piss off Gadaffi by demanding Megrahi's extradition. What are they going to do? Send in gunboats to get him? Because make no mistake about it, that's what they'd have to do.
They're just making noises in the hope of showing the voters how tough they are. Too bad nobody's listening. I could happily throttle Karol Sikora though. It's obvious that the "ten years" was a throwaway remark, along the lines of, well, Stephen Hawking has lived more than 40 years beyond his prognosis so anything's possible. But certain people with axes to grind have latched on to it. Which was more or less predictable. Has the man NO sense? (Answer, apparently not.) Rolfe. |
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012. |
|
13th July 2010, 12:11 PM | #225 |
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 34,918
|
Lockerbie bomber freed due to pressure from BP?????
http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_upshot...ious-terrorist
Oh man...if this is true...I am totally boycotting BP. What a disgusting public relations problem they have. "Large oil company makes hundreds of oil rig errors and violations, dumps 100 million gallons of oil into the Gulf of Mexico, and convinces the British government to release a terrorist killer in order to secure an oil contract." |
13th July 2010, 12:18 PM | #226 |
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 28,209
|
|
13th July 2010, 12:24 PM | #227 |
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 28,209
|
|
13th July 2010, 12:49 PM | #228 |
Adult human female
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 50,594
|
Well, it was the gung-ho Yanks I was talking about. Nobody in Blighty is going to fetch him, that's for sure.
They could have sent the Vincennes if it had still been in commission.... Rolfe. |
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012. |
|
13th July 2010, 12:57 PM | #229 |
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 365
|
Your posts are very informative rolfe.
I wonder what exactly the american relatives believed their 3 million in tax payers money was paid to the 2 brothers now living in australia was for. How can anyones testimony be taken seriously when they are being paid 2 million to give it. |
13th July 2010, 03:21 PM | #230 |
Adult human female
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 50,594
|
It's all very murky. The first witness who was bribed to give evidence against both Megrahi and Fhimah was a guy called Majid Giaka. He was a Libyan garage mechanic who fancied a cushy life as a CIA asset and informer. The trouble was, he didn't have a lot of useful information to give for the $1500 a month (plus benefits in kind) he was being paid by the Americans.
At first, when he was pushed for intelligence relating to Lockerbie, he had nothing to say, but later, after the CIA had threatened to dump him without a penny, he suddenly "remembered" that he'd seen both suspects making the bomb and putting it on the plane. He was the star witness who would deliver the conviction. However, during the trial, the defence was successful in having the unedited versions of a lot of CIA telexes admitted in evidence, and once the blacked-out parts were visible it was clear the US authorities had knowingly put forward a witness who was making stuff up for money. The judges disallowed his testimony, but somehow managed to convict anyway. For no reason I can see, nobody criticised the US input for this, or harboured any suspicions that perhaps other parts of the evidence had been a bit sexed-up as well. Gauci's evidence was odd, because while it seems fairly clear he really did sell the clothes that were in the bomb bag, the day he seemed most likely to have made that sale was a day Megrahi wasn't in Malta. In addition, his original description of the man didn't describe Megrahi - the face might have been a reasonable fit for him (or for about a squillion other people), but the age, height and build were way out. This from a man who was well used to judging people by what size clothes would fit them. The prosecution appear to have tortured the evidence to breaking point to make Gauci's description fit a day when Megrahi was in the town, and to get him to pick out Megrahi as the purchaser, in photo-lineups. By the time he finally saw Megrahi in the flesh, half the population of the western world could probably have picked him out, so widespread had been the publicity, but the best Gauci could manage was, “Not exactly the man I saw in the shop. Ten years ago I saw him, but the man who look a little bit like exactly is the number 5.” The judges bought it. They even said they were impressed by his uncertainty, as it showed he was genuinely trying to remember! The appeal judges said, the court was entitled to take that view, appeal dismissed. Even during the investigation, the Scottish police were offering Tony Gauci holidays in Scotland and other inducements to keep him on-side. His brother Paul, initially hostile to the investigation, began to get very interested in a reward. There have been a lot of weasel words about nobody having been promised any money before the trial, but it's now common knowledge Tony got $2 million and Paul $1 million. I thought Paul (who didn't give evidence) had been rewarded for his part in establishing the day of the purchase, but in fact he gave a clear statement at one stage (not presented to the court) that the date was the day Megrahi wasn't there. I'm not sure where to look for the link now, but the rationale for paying Paul was given as reward for his role in keeping Tony (who was a bit simple) up to scratch. In fact Paul was quite clearly coaching Tony to provide the evidence the police wanted. I can't remember exactly where this information originated, but there's no dispute the pair of them recently moved to Australia and have a very luxurious lifestyle. I don't think the US relatives have a clue about any of this. They're getting their information from Duggan, who seems simply to be making up whatever he thinks will keep the level of outrage in the USA at satisfyingly high levels. The money might even have come out of the $2.7 billion Gadaffi paid out in order for Libya to be allowed to rejoin the civilised world. But in any case, it's peanuts compared to the budget the CIA has for running informers and paying out for information received. I'm 100% sure that conviction should never have been brought, on the basis of "beyond reasonable doubt". Anyone who wants to understand this should read the judgements. I'm 99.99% sure the appeal that was abandoned would have succeeded, in the light of the new evidence that was available (including that Gauci was bribed). I'm about 95% sure Megrahi didn't do it - the 5% because I don't know who did, and not knowing that, it's hard to dismiss any possibility out of hand. I just re-watched the 2008 BBC documentary on this - The Conspiracy Files. This programme has a format where it builds up a conspiracy, then shows how it's all complete nonsense. Except it doesn't pan out that way in this episode. The half is not told in that programme, as far as the dodginess of some of the evidence is concerned (well, they only had an hour!), but in the end they conclude that the appeal hearings will reveal the real truth. The appeal Megrahi had to abandon in order to be allowed to return home to die. The appeal that would probably have been concluded by now, if he'd stayed in jail in Scotland. But he was released 11 months ago, being told he only had 3 months to live, when the date for the appeal coming back to court was 3 months from the date of his release. Frankly, the scandal here is that a dying man was told he wouldn't live to see his appeal come to court, but if he agreed to abandon the appeal he could go home to spend his last three months with his family. He's on record as saying he desperately wanted to clear his name, but given that he was terminally ill he couldn't take any more and was desperate to get home. The timing of the release was awfully convenient for the authorities who had shown every indication of not wanting that appeal to happen, who were also the authorities who had the power to grant the compassionate release. If people are wondering why it seems it might have been a bit premature, this is the aspect that might be considered. Rolfe. |
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012. |
|
13th July 2010, 03:40 PM | #231 |
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 365
|
Thanks again.
I only live in the isle of man so it wasn't far away where the plane came down really. I heard most of what you say years ago, but you provide a fuller more detailed version, and i can tell its factually correct, as you are not being bombarded with juvenile posts. Very interesting tho, but most americans will never buy it that the Good ol Guys of the CIA were behind setting him up, rather than direct confrontation with Iran at the time. Clearly revenge on Irans part, but still an act of war, if what you say is/turns out to be absolutely true, they are brainwashed with the patriotism gig, and their government doesn't lie to them, so they will never buy it. eta most. |
13th July 2010, 03:48 PM | #232 |
Adult human female
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 50,594
|
Well, in a way, who cares? I live about 50 miles from where the plane went down. Nobody is talking about this on a daily basis. A pretty high proportion of people don't think Megrahi did it anyway, so aren't inclined to foaming outrage about it all.
It doesn't matter what the Americans think. Nobody is going to Libya to re-arrest Megrahi. A bunch of loud-mouth Yank politicos spouting off a lot of nonsense to make themselves look tough to the voters doesn't even register in Scotland. Rolfe. |
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012. |
|
13th July 2010, 04:03 PM | #233 |
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 365
|
Aye.
Good stuff rolfe. Proper interesting read this thread turned out to be. Be lucky. |
13th July 2010, 04:50 PM | #234 |
Adult human female
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 50,594
|
The threads in CT where we're trying to figure out what the hell did happen are more interesting really, though long-winded as we brainstorm ideas that don't really gel, and completely ignore good points for six months before getting back to them.... And far too few people taking an interest, too, even though there's lots of time to dedicate to debunking "9/11 was an inside job" or "the moon landings were faked" and similar fish-in-a-barrel arguments.
I've got my brain round the actualite of much of the evidence now (there's a lot out there that's just plain wrong, from misreporting over the years), with the notable exception of the Frankfurt baggage records part, which is just surreal. What I can't decide is, did the investigators just see the physical evidence they had, decide that there were enough coincidences that could be milked to make a case for Megrahi having done it, then bribe a couple of people to make sure of a conviction, or was some of the actual physical evidence fiddled with? I don't know, but there are a few serious pointers to the latter, which is a whole other can of worms. Rolfe. |
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012. |
|
13th July 2010, 07:38 PM | #235 |
Up The Irons
Tagger
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 34,458
|
|
__________________
i loves the little birdies they goes tweet tweet tweet hee hee i loves them they sings to each other tweet twet tweet hee hee i loves them they is so cute i love yje little birdies little birdies in the room when birfies sings ther is no gloom i lobes the little birdies they goess tweet tweet tweet hee hee hee i loves them they sings me to sleep sing me to slrrp now little birdies - The wisdom of Shemp. |
|
13th July 2010, 08:49 PM | #236 |
Infidel Defiler
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,191
|
I really didn't know much about this case when he was released but from participating in various threads at the time I came to the conclusion that rolfe has stated. As far as I have seen hardly anyone in the US (and just about no one in the media here) knows any details about the case except that Megrahi was convicted so that means he's guilty. There haven't been any programs like that one on the BBC that really looks into the whole story. No one really thinks there is a conspiracy here except about the recent revelations such as Megrahi living longer than expected and that BP got him released. The government hasn't brainwashed anyone. People seemed to accept the verdict and there was no further discussion. He was found guilty so he's a mass murdering terrorist. Period. That's how he's referred to in most news stories. I don't think people are aware of all the shenanigans involved in the prosecution. If anything it's the fault of the US media which never dug in and did an extensive investigation of the whole saga.
|
14th July 2010, 12:14 AM | #237 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,494
|
That's too true. I live over here on the big island. Fightin from the inside. It's a bricks wall. Originally they had an attack brought on by their own military's recklessness in the Persian Gulf, an embarrassing airport security failure at Heathrow, supposed assets implicated in the crime, a nation as large as Iran behind it, with escalation of the usual sort being - erm, problematic.
What makes America great is innovation and enterprise. Invent something new, bold audacious. A descendent of Italian immigrants (with some history re: lLibya I hear) named Vincent cannistraro decided swiftly that the embarrassing case COULD be re-wired up as the ultimo boom box to blast Libyan guilt for propaganda and leverage purposes. By now, they've got the fact that they made that decision, carried it out, and have actually bluffed it through til the present. NO FRIGGIN WAY can that be allowed to come to light, says the center, and lo and behold it does not. Hope that answered your - wait,you didn't ask a question. That's just howwe are here, suckers for legal rulings. If a judge says O.J. is innocent, by golly, America celebrates the clearing of a sports legend. It's in our red ol' blood.
Quote:
Quote:
|
14th July 2010, 01:42 AM | #238 |
Adult human female
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 50,594
|
I hope the mods can do a merge on this, because the idea of starting this extremely complex discussion again from the beginning in doing my head in. Any connection between BP and Megrahi's release is tenuous and at arm's length. The release is a CT all of its own, for completely different reasons. The principal one being that he was pressurised to withdraw his appeal against the conviction in order to be granted release - an appeal which would probably have been concluded by now if he'd stayed in jail and let it go forward. An appeal he'd almost certainly have won, to the huge embarrassment of everybody else concerned. The fact that the Westminster government was fairly keen on him being released because they'd made some promises they couldn't actually deliver on to that effect while negotiating an oil deal relating to BP in 2007 just facilitated the process. And yes, he was Libyan security officer. Who knows what he did. He says he didn't kill anyone, that he was involved in sanctions-running - acquiring aviation parts for LAA against the sanctions that were in force against Libya at that time. What he almost certainly didn't do was put the bomb on the plane that blew up over Lockerbie. Rolfe. |
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012. |
|
14th July 2010, 02:49 AM | #239 |
Adult human female
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 50,594
|
I don't think this current furore linking the Lockerbie affair to BP is worth wasting electrons on. It's been whipped up out of almost nothing, in the wake of the gulf oil leak. Like most baseless publicity-mongering, it's likely to be a nine-day wonder that fizzles out when the world moves on.
This morning the radio news in Scotland reported that al-Megrahi is off all chemotherapy and is only receiving palliative care. This usually describes a cancer patient in the terminal stages. We've heard similar stories before, but not so officially. It could be that this is again Libya manipulating the news to take the heat off, but let's face it, the guy has aggressive metastatic carcinoma of the prostate. This story probably has a relatively short shelf-life. (Cue the CT that says they announced his death and held a funeral with a substitute corpse to let Megrahi go off and start a new life with a new identity.... you heard it here first, folks!) Rolfe. |
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012. |
|
14th July 2010, 12:09 PM | #240 |
Adult human female
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 50,594
|
Too busy posting here to read my newspaper!
Megrahi is so ill he could die if he gets a cold
Originally Posted by Lucy Adams
And the lead editorial. Decision to release Megrahi was correct
Quote:
This is the reporting of journalists actually familiar with the evidence and the issues in this case. Lucy Adams has travelled to Tripoli to interview Megrahi. It's a pity the Channel 4 news item I just watched hadn't done a bit more probing. That was just US senators making baseless accusations, with a couple of actual US Lockerbie relatives as Male and Female Chorus. Though to be fair, some penetrating questions were asked and nothing came back but bluster. Rolfe. |
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012. |
|
Thread Tools | |
|
|