[This is the headline over a report on the BBC News website. It reads in part:]
The US Ambassador to the UK has stressed that good relations with Scotland will survive the row over the release of the Lockerbie bomber.
But during his first official visit to Scotland Louis Susman also highlighted America's disappointment.
Mr Susman said the relationship with the UK was like a marriage but also strong enough to thrive. (...)
The ambassador is known to be a close confidant of the President and said America had fully expected the Lockerbie bomber to remain in prison in Scotland.
He told BBC Scotland that America might have sought to have al Megrahi extradited at an early stage, if they had thought that the Libyan would end up being released.
He said: "We never anticipated his release, I think if we ever thought he would be released we probably would have asked for extradition early on."
He continued: "Good friends disagree, I compare it sometimes to a marriage, you have a little fight, you are a little mad but you don't get divorced."
[ "... I think if we ever thought he would be released we probably would have asked for extradition early on."
If the ambassador is talking about the period before Zeist, the US did ask Libya to extradite Megrahi and Fhimah. But there was no extradition treaty between the US and Libya and never the slightest possibility that extradition would be effected voluntarily. That, indeed, was the very reason why the neutral venue scheme was thought up and recommended by the US and the UK jointly to the United Nations Security Council, which then adopted it unanimously.
If the ambassador is talking about the period after Mr Megrahi's conviction at Zeist, his comment is arrant nonsense. The United States Government was well aware that repatriation was a real possibility: indeed, two US Cabinet officers - the Attorney General of the United States and the Secretary of State - made representations to the Scottish Cabinet Secretary while he was pondering his decision. If, at that stage, (or any other stage while Mr Megrahi was in Scottish custody as a convicted prisoner) the United States had requested his extradition, the Scottish courts would have rejected the application as totally lacking in legal justification.]
The American diplomats and the people behind them must be very nervous that some sort of independent and public inquiry could be introduced into the Lockerbie case. How else could one explain that they are still trying to ride that spent horse (or rather donkey)?
ReplyDeleteYes, the US, UK and Libya must be feeling the heat!
ReplyDeleteA resolution is about to be introduced at the UN General Assembly calling for a United Nations Inquiry into the murder of Pan Am Flight 103's most prominent victim UN Commissioner for Namibia, Bernt Carlsson (see http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/opinion/Michael-McGowan-The-best-tribute.5612963.jp ).
Stand by your beds: retired Scottish police detectives Stuart Henderson and John Crawford; former Scottish Lord Advocate Colin Boyd; retired Fort Halstead forensic laboratory operatives Alan Feraday and Thomas Hayes; retired FBI agent Richard Marquise; retired FBI laboratory operative Thomas Thurman and current FBI Director, Robert Mueller!
You can all be expected to be called to account for yourselves before the forthcoming United Nations inquiry.
Maybe the judges should hold onto their wigs and skirts in case all is revealed
ReplyDeletehttp://news.scotsman.com/latestnews/Stretched-to-the-limits.5473729.jp :
ReplyDelete"[If released on compassionate grounds] Megrahi would be deemed to have served his sentence in terms of Scots law."
If so, then
a) Mr Susman's idea of extradition to the US is as absurd as Mr Obama's idea of house arrest in Libya;
and
b) one might ask whether legal advice to the President and Ambassador has been in these cases incompetent, absent, accidentally overlooked or wilfully overridden.
I wonder if such matters are covered by US Freedom of Information law.
It's good to know divorce is being mentioned. Oh honey, I let that dog, that one you swore killed all our chickens and locked in the garage til death... yeah, he's almost dead and his owner wanted to at least..."
ReplyDeleteDad cuts her off "That was within your right, honey. I just really wish you hadn't." He keeps repeating both phrases in an eerily intense way. Mommy's acting nervous. They manage to drop the issue. Time to think passes, chances for remorse for ever locking the dog up, maybe... Dad's a good guy, surely seeing the light and he calls us all in for a talk
"kids, don't worry your Mom and I aren't; getting a divorce." Divorce? We just didn't want you acting so rude and making mommy upset. "Now usually people would get divorced in a case lke this, those were my chickens. But we love each other very much... So instead, Mommy's going to live in the wood shed for a while. She was in her right letting the dog go, but it's in my right to send her away for a while... when you're older you'll understand."