A commentary on the case of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, convicted of the murder of 270 people in the Pan Am 103 disaster.
Tuesday 2 February 2010
Interview with Dr Swire
The BBC Radio 4 programme Taking a Stand today featured a 29-minute interview with Dr Jim Swire by Fergal Keane. The programme synopsis can be read here; and the interview can be listened to on the BBC iPlayer here.
Today is a commemorable day: Today we got the clear evidence that there is something very rotten in the British judicial system. It was at the Iraq-war-inquiry when Claire Short explained how the Attorney General, Lord Goldsmith, deceited the British public after a trip to the USA where he had obvious been "persuaded" to maintain that the Iraq war was lawfull which it wasn´t. When that happened in the Iraq case then why should that not have happened in the Lockerbie case? It has happened, sure. So where is the inquiry here?
I thought Jim's interview particularly effective and he kept his points to a broad level, and so did not become too involved in detail, which is often the Heffalump trap of anyone who gets too deep into Lockerbie.
The BBC is a deeply cautious organisation about Lockerbie, and it knows it can't allow the likes of Jim an entirely free run against the Government. He was hauled up over the matter of the American relatives, none of whom I have ever heard express a single iota of regret for the parallel Iranians who died on the Airbus brought down by an American missile fired from a USN vessel or their relatives. He was also cautioned by Keane over his attitude to the police and Scottish legal system, both of whom in the end behaved so abominably over Lockerbie, though the police at least thought they were doing an ordinary and thorough investigation in the early days.
They met their match in the CIA.
Jim sticks to his own theory which I think of as being 90% right, but he cannot grasp the importance of qesas to the Iranian mind. Revenge is sweet to an Iranian, but it is necessary for it to the brought to the Great Satan by an Iranian hand. No other will do. The CIA realised this early on, and set up a plot in which an Iranian, (name guessable) did his bit. That's why all the specially spun CIA cant about Iranian millions poured into the PFLP GC, and if you will have it poured from them into Libyan pockets is so much specious rubbish, and a typical CIA fairy story. They are quite esay to spot, once you know how. The Iranians did not pay anybody because revenge under the qesas condition was their right, not something to be purchased.
Today is a commemorable day: Today we got the clear evidence that there is something very rotten in the British judicial system.
ReplyDeleteIt was at the Iraq-war-inquiry when Claire Short explained how the Attorney General, Lord Goldsmith, deceited the British public after a trip to the USA where he had obvious been "persuaded" to maintain that the Iraq war was lawfull which it wasn´t.
When that happened in the Iraq case then why should that not have happened in the Lockerbie case?
It has happened, sure.
So where is the inquiry here?
I thought Jim's interview particularly effective and he kept his points to a broad level, and so did not become too involved in detail, which is often the Heffalump trap of anyone who gets too deep into Lockerbie.
ReplyDeleteThe BBC is a deeply cautious organisation about Lockerbie, and it knows it can't allow the likes of Jim an entirely free run against the Government. He was hauled up over the matter of the American relatives, none of whom I have ever heard express a single iota of regret for the parallel Iranians who died on the Airbus brought down by an American missile fired from a USN vessel or their relatives. He was also cautioned by Keane over his attitude to the police and Scottish legal system, both of whom in the end behaved so abominably over Lockerbie, though the police at least thought they were doing an ordinary and thorough investigation in the early days.
They met their match in the CIA.
Jim sticks to his own theory which I think of as being 90% right, but he cannot grasp the importance of qesas to the Iranian mind. Revenge is sweet to an Iranian, but it is necessary for it to the brought to the Great Satan by an Iranian hand. No other will do. The CIA realised this early on, and set up a plot in which an Iranian, (name guessable) did his bit. That's why all the specially spun CIA cant about Iranian millions poured into the PFLP GC, and if you will have it poured from them into Libyan pockets is so much specious rubbish, and a typical CIA fairy story. They are quite esay to spot, once you know how. The Iranians did not pay anybody because revenge under the qesas condition was their right, not something to be purchased.
So where is the inquiry here, Adam asks?
ReplyDeleteThere are four types of inquiry:
1. The good;
2. The not so good
3. The ongoing and,
4. The non-starter.