Tuesday 27 July 2010

Senate interested in trade group letter urging Megrahi release

[This is the headline over an article on the US Politico website. It reads in part:]

Senate aides looking into the release of Abdulbaset Al-Megrahi are focusing on a letter from the chairman of a British Libyan trade group that includes British Petroleum warning that not releasing him from a Scottish prison before his death would cause serious harm to UK-Libyan relations and for its business members.

The letter was written to the Scottish justice secretary in July, 2009 by Lord David Trefgarne, a peer in the British House of Lords and chairman of the trade group, the Libyan British Business Council. (...)

BP has said that it never lobbied either the UK or Scottish government for Megrahi’s release.

BP told Politico Tuesday it knew nothing about the letter until it appeared in the press.

Among the LBBC's members, according to its website, are BP, Shell, Exxon Mobil, HSBC, Barclays Bank, the British Arab Commercial Bank, DLA Piper UK LLP, KPMG, and the Wood Group Engineering International.

[The article completely fails to mention Kenny MacAskill's reply to Lord Trefgarne, which contains the sentence "I have said quite clearly that my decision will be one based on judicial grounds alone and that economic and political considerations have no place in the process."

Is what we are now hearing from the USA the sound of the bottom of a barrel being scraped?]

8 comments:

  1. And the prize for predicting the sun will rise in the morning goes to.... Patrick! :)

    ReplyDelete
  2. MISSION LOCKERBIE:
    computer translation, german/english

    The letter was written to the Scottish justice secretary in July, 2009 by Lord David Trefgarne, a peer in the British House of Lords and chairman of the trade group, the Libyan British Business Council, confirm a unknown deal with Mr. Al-Megrahi for withdraw his appeal and notify the Court accordingly; was made before 17 July 2009, that confirms, before the visit of Secretary of justice Kenny MacAskill on 4 August '09 ...
    Mr Al-Megrahi knew since 9 July 2009, his Appeal can be normally continued after a Transfair to Libya. What was that deal ??

    by Edwin and Mahnaz Bollier, MEBO Ltd., Switzerland
    URL: www.lockerbie.ch

    ReplyDelete
  3. The Senate have successfully conflated the Lockerbie bomber release with the BP oil disaster - you can't read about one without the other being mentioned. They'll be calling the Justice Secretary, Abdul Baset Al MacAskill next.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Maybe the senators know Mr MacAskill did a deal with BP because they alone know his real title -

    Scottish Commerce Secretary for Justice.

    http://www.scotland.gov.uk/News/Releases/2010/07/26141356

    ReplyDelete
  5. Hey, Mr. Berkley - it's an honor. I'm intrigued by your work on MacAskill's two-track decision. I've been reading that PDF of collected "representations" and meeting, where you pop up frequently and ask incisive questions. You even warned MacAskill against letting Megrahi become confused by this into surrendering his appeal!

    Anyway, I was wondering about that article you posted part of in the other comments section. Do you plan to have that published somewhere? I think it's a fascinating angle that hasn't been explored much yet, and deserves to be widely read.

    If nothing else, I'll write my own clumsy version at the Lockerbie Divide (middling readership). But if it helps in any way, my e-mail is caustic_logic@yahoo.com

    Otherwise, just accept an expression of gratitude for your well-placed moves so far. I'm heartened to learn (belatedly) of your presence relative to this case.
    ---

    ReplyDelete
  6. I sent a letter the the Herald today on that subject, essentially accusing Kenny MacAskill of keeping Megrahi in the dark and feeding him shit (the mushroom analogy!) to pressurise him into withdrawing the appeal. And a bit more besides.

    We'll see if they publish it.

    ReplyDelete
  7. It´s an honour to be honored.

    In one of the published documents, George Burgess talks about intending to agree notes of meetings with the relatives. That didn´t happen, so what is published are purely the Department´s notes.

    The Department asked relatives on 31 August for permission to publish our written submissions , and still hasn´t done so.

    I´ve now put my letter to Kenny MacAskill of 6 July 2009 at www.mattberkley.com/warningmacaskill.htm .

    ReplyDelete