[This is the headline over a report in yesterday's edition of The Sunday Times. It reads in part:]
The Lockerbie bomber is expected to die “within four weeks” of the terminal cancer that led to his release from a British prison.
Karol Sikora, a British cancer specialist who advised the Scottish government on Abdul Baset Ali al-Megrahi’s illness before he was freed, said that the convicted terrorist was spending his final days bed-ridden and on morphine.
He dismissed claims that the seriousness of the Libyan bomber’s condition had been exaggerated to secure his release.
Mr Sikora, who is being regularly updated by a doctor in Tripoli, said that al-Megrahi’s cancer had spread from his prostate to his kidneys, liver, pelvis and lymph nodes.
“I say he will be dead within four weeks. My understanding is that he’s bed-bound, at home, not going to the hospital, receiving palliative care and no active treatment at all,” he added.
Doctors have stopped al-Megrahi’s hospital visits in the past few weeks after he ceased responding to chemotherapy and other treatments.
Mr Sikora, medical director of CancerPartnersUK and dean of Buckingham University medical school, was one of three doctors who gave advice before al-Megrahi’s release on compassionate grounds last August from Greenock prison. (...)
MSPs have questioned Mr Sikora’s position. Bill Aitken, justice spokesman for the Scottish Conservatives, said: “I’m not a clinician, but Karl Sikora’s previous prognosis has been shown to be wildly inaccurate.
“I suppose we will just have to wait and see what happens, but even still, there is immense anger and bitterness that the biggest mass murderer in UK history has been released and survived for a period of almost eight months when he was supposed to be at death’s door.”
Mr Sikora said that al-Megrahi’s life may have been extended by the “psychological boost” he received from being surrounded by his family.
The cancer specialist is understood to be updated by Ibrahim Sherif, al-Megrahi’s British-trained doctor in Libya.
Abdurrhman Swessi, the Libyan consul general in Glasgow, a post established to deal with al-Megrahi’s case, said that the bomber’s health was rapidly deteriorating: “It’s much, much worse.” (...)
Commercial considerations were key to his release. In 2007 Jack Straw, the Justice Secretary, wrote to Mr MacAskill that it was “in the overwhelming interests of the United Kingdom” to make him eligible for return to Libya.
[A similar report is published today in The Scotsman. It can be read here.]
Monday, 5 April 2010
Surely Mr Marquise should know the answer?
[What follows is a response by Dr Jim Swire to a comment by Richard Marquise on the article "Taking Another Look at the Destruction of Pan Am 103" that recently appeared in the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs. The article, and Mr Marquise's comment, can be read here.]
How remarkable that a man of your stature, Mr Marquise, should publish a comment which starts by claiming that those who wrote this article and those who do not believe that the Megrahi verdict was correct 'Have no knowledge other than what they have read in blogs on the internet offering an "opinion" of the evidence at Lockerbie....'
I sat, Mr Marquise, in the court at Zeist throughout the main trial and the first appeal: were you there? Frequently I still refer to the full set of transcripts to try to ensure that I make as few mistakes as possible. But I would add that it is what is not there that is often so interesting.
I presume you know, sir, that the trial judges were forced to report that it was 'a difficulty for the prosecution case that no evidence was led as to how Megrahi breached security in Malta'. Perhaps with your resources Mr Marquise, you can tell me, why was it that the break-in the night before Lockerbie at Heathrow airport was concealed from the main trial? It only emerged after 12 years: too late for the trial court to use.
Why was that? If you were indeed in charge of the case, presumably you know the answer. The Crown Office tell me they didn't know about it during that time either, what do you think? Did you know about it yourself? You were in charge you say of the investigation. If you knew, why didn't you tell, if you didn't know then it can't have been a very careful investigation can it? One or the other must be true. Did you know or not?
You must know by now that the break-in gave an unknown intruder access to Heathrow airside close to where the PanAm baggage container (later shown in court evidence to have contained the IED) had stood unguarded the following evening. Where the man loading that container gave evidence at Zeist that he had seen an unauthorised bag which he failed to remove, and that he'd seen it before the Frankfurt feeder flight (PA103A) had even landed at Heathrow.
What verdict do you think their Lordships at the main trial would have reached had they been required to compare the evidence from Luqa airport with the break-in evidence at Heathrow? Would they really then have been able to surmount the hurdle of 'reasonable doubt'? Their Lordships in the trial knew from the evidence led that terrorists had access to IEDs stable at ground level for days or even weeks, but designed always to explode around 40 minutes after take off, courtesy of their air pressure sensitive switches. No human intervention required in airside, except to get one into the target airplane. What if the Heathrow intruder brought one of those in with him? What if he left it with a message in the IranAir facility nearby?
So many queries because there was no scrap of evidence that the break-in was responsibly investigated at the time, that was not your fault, sir, because proper investigation, to be effective, would have had to start before the disaster had occurred, would it not?
Yes, I know that President Bush was trying back-channel negotiations with the Iranians in those days, despite the embarrassing shoot-down of an Iranian airbus by the US Cruiser Vincennes six months before, for which Iran had sworn revenge. That attempted negotiation wouldn't be a legitimate reason for interfering with a criminal trial would it? Not unless one was working in intelligence on one's country's behalf rather than as a criminal investigator.
Might not that break-in be the reason why my daughter's life was snuffed out in an explosion over Lockerbie 38 minutes after take-off from Heathrow with its now proven failed security perimeter?
Before you say 'Ah, but despite the Heathrow evidence, the first appeal failed' let me point out that Megrahi's defence had decided they would not challenge the 'sufficiency of evidence' led in the main trial. That extraordinary decision meant that their Lorships of appeal had no obligation to sift through that main trial evidence. That in turn meant that their belief that the 16 hours between the break-in and the take-off meant that it might be too long for it to be relevant may have been reached without the detailed knowledge of the nature of the available IEDs of which the main trial knew so much.
Did you know about the Heathrow break-in while the trial was in progress Mr Marquise, or did you not?
Do not fear, we are only after the truth, and I don't blog on the internet either. The fact that other well informed people do, makes it very difficult to conceal things for ever these days, doesn't it?
How remarkable that a man of your stature, Mr Marquise, should publish a comment which starts by claiming that those who wrote this article and those who do not believe that the Megrahi verdict was correct 'Have no knowledge other than what they have read in blogs on the internet offering an "opinion" of the evidence at Lockerbie....'
I sat, Mr Marquise, in the court at Zeist throughout the main trial and the first appeal: were you there? Frequently I still refer to the full set of transcripts to try to ensure that I make as few mistakes as possible. But I would add that it is what is not there that is often so interesting.
I presume you know, sir, that the trial judges were forced to report that it was 'a difficulty for the prosecution case that no evidence was led as to how Megrahi breached security in Malta'. Perhaps with your resources Mr Marquise, you can tell me, why was it that the break-in the night before Lockerbie at Heathrow airport was concealed from the main trial? It only emerged after 12 years: too late for the trial court to use.
Why was that? If you were indeed in charge of the case, presumably you know the answer. The Crown Office tell me they didn't know about it during that time either, what do you think? Did you know about it yourself? You were in charge you say of the investigation. If you knew, why didn't you tell, if you didn't know then it can't have been a very careful investigation can it? One or the other must be true. Did you know or not?
You must know by now that the break-in gave an unknown intruder access to Heathrow airside close to where the PanAm baggage container (later shown in court evidence to have contained the IED) had stood unguarded the following evening. Where the man loading that container gave evidence at Zeist that he had seen an unauthorised bag which he failed to remove, and that he'd seen it before the Frankfurt feeder flight (PA103A) had even landed at Heathrow.
What verdict do you think their Lordships at the main trial would have reached had they been required to compare the evidence from Luqa airport with the break-in evidence at Heathrow? Would they really then have been able to surmount the hurdle of 'reasonable doubt'? Their Lordships in the trial knew from the evidence led that terrorists had access to IEDs stable at ground level for days or even weeks, but designed always to explode around 40 minutes after take off, courtesy of their air pressure sensitive switches. No human intervention required in airside, except to get one into the target airplane. What if the Heathrow intruder brought one of those in with him? What if he left it with a message in the IranAir facility nearby?
So many queries because there was no scrap of evidence that the break-in was responsibly investigated at the time, that was not your fault, sir, because proper investigation, to be effective, would have had to start before the disaster had occurred, would it not?
Yes, I know that President Bush was trying back-channel negotiations with the Iranians in those days, despite the embarrassing shoot-down of an Iranian airbus by the US Cruiser Vincennes six months before, for which Iran had sworn revenge. That attempted negotiation wouldn't be a legitimate reason for interfering with a criminal trial would it? Not unless one was working in intelligence on one's country's behalf rather than as a criminal investigator.
Might not that break-in be the reason why my daughter's life was snuffed out in an explosion over Lockerbie 38 minutes after take-off from Heathrow with its now proven failed security perimeter?
Before you say 'Ah, but despite the Heathrow evidence, the first appeal failed' let me point out that Megrahi's defence had decided they would not challenge the 'sufficiency of evidence' led in the main trial. That extraordinary decision meant that their Lorships of appeal had no obligation to sift through that main trial evidence. That in turn meant that their belief that the 16 hours between the break-in and the take-off meant that it might be too long for it to be relevant may have been reached without the detailed knowledge of the nature of the available IEDs of which the main trial knew so much.
Did you know about the Heathrow break-in while the trial was in progress Mr Marquise, or did you not?
Do not fear, we are only after the truth, and I don't blog on the internet either. The fact that other well informed people do, makes it very difficult to conceal things for ever these days, doesn't it?
Thursday, 1 April 2010
US relative's reaction to Megrahi's 58th birthday
The grieving mum of a Lockerbie victim has launched a fresh attack on Kenny MacAskill - ahead of the freed bomber's birthday today.
Cancer-stricken Abdelbaset Ali al Megrahi was released by the Justice Secretary last August after reports claimed he had just three months to live.
But Susan Cohen - who lost daughter Theo in the atrocity - claims the fact the killer is alive to celebrate turning 58 in Libya today proves he should have been kept in jail.
She said: "It's sickening. This shows it was a shocking decision to free him.
"This man will have a birthday party, but my daughter will never have another one.
"She only had 20 birthdays and he should have remained in jail."
The 72-year-old, of Cape May Court House in New Jersey, added: "It was obvious that he was not going to die. It was a big fraud. It had nothing to do with compassion.
"Where's the compassion for my daughter and the other people who died?
"Megrahi is a terrorist who murdered 270 people. There is no way he should have been let out."
[From a report in today's edition of The Sun.]
Cancer-stricken Abdelbaset Ali al Megrahi was released by the Justice Secretary last August after reports claimed he had just three months to live.
But Susan Cohen - who lost daughter Theo in the atrocity - claims the fact the killer is alive to celebrate turning 58 in Libya today proves he should have been kept in jail.
She said: "It's sickening. This shows it was a shocking decision to free him.
"This man will have a birthday party, but my daughter will never have another one.
"She only had 20 birthdays and he should have remained in jail."
The 72-year-old, of Cape May Court House in New Jersey, added: "It was obvious that he was not going to die. It was a big fraud. It had nothing to do with compassion.
"Where's the compassion for my daughter and the other people who died?
"Megrahi is a terrorist who murdered 270 people. There is no way he should have been let out."
[From a report in today's edition of The Sun.]
Wednesday, 31 March 2010
Scotland 'not told about Lockerbie deal'
[This is the headline over a report on the Sky News website. It reads in part:]
The UK Government has been criticised for failing to keep Scottish ministers in the loop about negotiations involving the Lockerbie bomber.
Ministers should have considered telling Scotland the bomber was included in a prisoner transfer agreement with Libya before signing the deal, a committee of MPs has said.
The lack of communication was "regretable", a new report has concluded. (...)
Ministers in Westminster agreed a prisoner transfer deal with Libya in 2007.
After initially trying to exclude Megrahi from the agreement, Jack Straw admitted in letters to the Scottish Justice Secretary that he had been unable to do so. (...)
The [House of Commons] Scottish Affairs Committee looked at relations between the administrations in London and Edinburgh.
Its report concludes that ministers in Westminster should have told their colleagues in Scotland more about the agreement before they signed it.
In future, the UK Government must consider whether Scotland has a right to know more information. (...)
Shadow Scotland Secretary David Mundell MP said the report demonstrated that Labour had not managed to maintain good relations with the Scottish government.
"It beggars belief that during both a financial and diplomatic crisis, the Prime Minister and First Minister did not meet or even seemingly pick up the phone to each other in almost a year," he said.
[The BBC News report on the matter can be read here.
The Scottish Government's response to the Report includes the following:]
We welcome this report, including the recommendations in relation to the Memorandum of Understanding and the Prisoner Transfer Agreement between the UK Government and Libya - which UK Ministers initially chose not to inform Scottish Ministers about.
"This Scottish Government is committed to constructive and positive inter-governmental relations with the UK Government and the devolved administrations in Wales and Northern Ireland.
The UK Government has been criticised for failing to keep Scottish ministers in the loop about negotiations involving the Lockerbie bomber.
Ministers should have considered telling Scotland the bomber was included in a prisoner transfer agreement with Libya before signing the deal, a committee of MPs has said.
The lack of communication was "regretable", a new report has concluded. (...)
Ministers in Westminster agreed a prisoner transfer deal with Libya in 2007.
After initially trying to exclude Megrahi from the agreement, Jack Straw admitted in letters to the Scottish Justice Secretary that he had been unable to do so. (...)
The [House of Commons] Scottish Affairs Committee looked at relations between the administrations in London and Edinburgh.
Its report concludes that ministers in Westminster should have told their colleagues in Scotland more about the agreement before they signed it.
In future, the UK Government must consider whether Scotland has a right to know more information. (...)
Shadow Scotland Secretary David Mundell MP said the report demonstrated that Labour had not managed to maintain good relations with the Scottish government.
"It beggars belief that during both a financial and diplomatic crisis, the Prime Minister and First Minister did not meet or even seemingly pick up the phone to each other in almost a year," he said.
[The BBC News report on the matter can be read here.
The Scottish Government's response to the Report includes the following:]
We welcome this report, including the recommendations in relation to the Memorandum of Understanding and the Prisoner Transfer Agreement between the UK Government and Libya - which UK Ministers initially chose not to inform Scottish Ministers about.
"This Scottish Government is committed to constructive and positive inter-governmental relations with the UK Government and the devolved administrations in Wales and Northern Ireland.
Al-Megrahi not faking cancer, says victim’s GP father
[This is the headline over a report in today's edition of The Times. It reads in part:]
Dr Jim Swire, a retired GP who lost his daughter, Flora, in the bombing, said that Megrahi appeared to have experienced a “dramatic and welcome improvement in his condition” since leaving Scotland.
But this could be explained by the benefits of returning home to his family or the treatment he has received in Tripoli since his return, he added.
Kenny MacAskill, the Scottish Justice Secretary, took the decision to free al-Megrahi, claiming at the time that he had been “judged by a higher power” and was going home to die. However, ministers have repeatedly refused to release independent medical advice they received on his condition.
Dr Swire, who believes that al-Megrahi was wrongly convicted and previously met with him in prison, said he wanted to respond to allegations that the Libyan had fabricated illness or that the doctors who saw him were “bought”.
Writing in the British Medical Journal today, he adds: “We know that a major reduction in stress will sometimes induce a major remission, even in a terrible progressive illness such as his.
“Secondly, he has undergone a course of treatment in Tripoli with one of the taxol series of drugs, together with palliative radiotherapy. These can be associated with remissions of many months. Presumably they had not been given in Scotland, for some reason.”
Professor Karol Sikora, an eminent oncologist who advised the Scottish government on the bomber’s condition, said yesterday there was no obvious reason why al-Megrahi would not previously have received Taxotere — a powerful drug that is used to combat five different types of cancer — in Scotland.
He said the rapid spread and extent of al-Megrahi’s cancer, diagnosed in October 2008, meant it was incurable and chemotherapy was discontinued last December.
“I have not seen al-Megrahi since August but I have been in contact with his doctors in Libya, and I understand he is only receiving palliative care. He is clearly seriously ill and has not made a public appearance since December. He does not leave the house.
“It is very difficult to predict when any cancer patient is going to die,” he added. “Given how rapidly the cancer has spread [al-Megrahi] has been very lucky if it’s slowed down.
“Patients can benefit when they are surrounded by loved ones and actively want to live longer to spend time with them. We [doctors] all see cases like that, where it appears to be mind over matter.” (...)
Professor Sikora added: “A lot of people believe that he’s never had cancer and that it’s all faked, but that’s not the case. The evidence was really clear-cut.
He added: “I get the odd hate mail, Jim [Swire] gets hate mail ... but I think we can fully justify the decision made to colleagues and the public.”
[Apart from the first 150 words, Dr Swire's BMJ article is available only to subscribers.]
Dr Jim Swire, a retired GP who lost his daughter, Flora, in the bombing, said that Megrahi appeared to have experienced a “dramatic and welcome improvement in his condition” since leaving Scotland.
But this could be explained by the benefits of returning home to his family or the treatment he has received in Tripoli since his return, he added.
Kenny MacAskill, the Scottish Justice Secretary, took the decision to free al-Megrahi, claiming at the time that he had been “judged by a higher power” and was going home to die. However, ministers have repeatedly refused to release independent medical advice they received on his condition.
Dr Swire, who believes that al-Megrahi was wrongly convicted and previously met with him in prison, said he wanted to respond to allegations that the Libyan had fabricated illness or that the doctors who saw him were “bought”.
Writing in the British Medical Journal today, he adds: “We know that a major reduction in stress will sometimes induce a major remission, even in a terrible progressive illness such as his.
“Secondly, he has undergone a course of treatment in Tripoli with one of the taxol series of drugs, together with palliative radiotherapy. These can be associated with remissions of many months. Presumably they had not been given in Scotland, for some reason.”
Professor Karol Sikora, an eminent oncologist who advised the Scottish government on the bomber’s condition, said yesterday there was no obvious reason why al-Megrahi would not previously have received Taxotere — a powerful drug that is used to combat five different types of cancer — in Scotland.
He said the rapid spread and extent of al-Megrahi’s cancer, diagnosed in October 2008, meant it was incurable and chemotherapy was discontinued last December.
“I have not seen al-Megrahi since August but I have been in contact with his doctors in Libya, and I understand he is only receiving palliative care. He is clearly seriously ill and has not made a public appearance since December. He does not leave the house.
“It is very difficult to predict when any cancer patient is going to die,” he added. “Given how rapidly the cancer has spread [al-Megrahi] has been very lucky if it’s slowed down.
“Patients can benefit when they are surrounded by loved ones and actively want to live longer to spend time with them. We [doctors] all see cases like that, where it appears to be mind over matter.” (...)
Professor Sikora added: “A lot of people believe that he’s never had cancer and that it’s all faked, but that’s not the case. The evidence was really clear-cut.
He added: “I get the odd hate mail, Jim [Swire] gets hate mail ... but I think we can fully justify the decision made to colleagues and the public.”
[Apart from the first 150 words, Dr Swire's BMJ article is available only to subscribers.]
Tuesday, 30 March 2010
An exchange of Easter greetings
In response to a recent post on this blog, Frank Duggan, President of Victims of Pan Am 103, an organisation representing some of the relatives of Americans killed in the Lockerbie disaster, sent the following e-mail (headed 'Swire and Black on "this quiet and dignified Muslim"!!!!') to members of the organisation, copied to Dr Swire and to me:
"He (Dr. Swire) concludes: 'When I last met this quiet and dignified Muslim in his Greenock cell he had prepared a Christmas card for me. On it he had written, "To Doctor Swire and family, please pray for me and my family." It is a treasured possession by which I shall always remember him. Even out of such death and destruction comes a message of hope and reconciliation for Easter.' Posted by Robert Black at http://lockerbiecase.blogspot.com/
"Feel free to wish Dr. Swire a Happy Easter."
Dr Swire's response, copied to me, reads as follows:
"Oh, nice to hear from you Frank,
"Thank you for copying this email to me.
"But by the exclamation marks I presume that this message is intended to be mighty sarcastic.
"Have you met Mr Megrahi too then, to inform your opinion?
"Have you researched the evidence against him with an open mind?
"As you know, having listened to all the evidence in court I am now satisfied that this man was not guilty as charged.
"Maybe it's time to ask who did do it then. They must be laughing their socks off.
"Meanwhile remember that my daughter, Flora is just as murdered as the families of those to whom you send these messages, and my grief likely as intense and also as unique as theirs.
"You are not yourself a true Lockerbie relative, so please leave room for those of us who are, to grieve in our own individual ways.
"You might like to copy to them that I regret that my conclusions re Megrahi make 'closure' more difficult for some, I have regretted that from the day at Zeist when Megrahi was not acquitted, because I knew that failure would cause avoidable suffering for all of us relatives. But hopefully until the truth is eventually exposed they probably often pity me because they think that I and so many others who have really worked on this have it totally wrong.
"Our search is for the truth, and when it does come out, try to restrain the urge, from which I am sure you will suffer, to try to rubbish it in the name of what you currently believe.
"All of us humans make mistakes from time to time, so cheer up. Sometimes the hard part is to admit it.
"Meanwhile may I send the message of love embodied in the Christian Easter message to all your recipients. I am grateful for your list of who some of them are.
"The message which Jesus left for us, before we murdered Him at that Easter long ago included the admonition to love even our enemies. He also assured us that love is stronger than any other entity in the universe. It is love that strengthens the relatives you know.
"While I would not call you an enemy, Frank, just someone who fosters a hypothesis which is incorrect, I pray that your problems when the truth does finally come out will not be too painful for either yourself, or more importantly, the other Lockerbie relatives: they richly deserve the peace that springs from Easter.
"And so do you.
"Best wishes for Easter"
"He (Dr. Swire) concludes: 'When I last met this quiet and dignified Muslim in his Greenock cell he had prepared a Christmas card for me. On it he had written, "To Doctor Swire and family, please pray for me and my family." It is a treasured possession by which I shall always remember him. Even out of such death and destruction comes a message of hope and reconciliation for Easter.' Posted by Robert Black at http://lockerbiecase.blogspot.com/
"Feel free to wish Dr. Swire a Happy Easter."
Dr Swire's response, copied to me, reads as follows:
"Oh, nice to hear from you Frank,
"Thank you for copying this email to me.
"But by the exclamation marks I presume that this message is intended to be mighty sarcastic.
"Have you met Mr Megrahi too then, to inform your opinion?
"Have you researched the evidence against him with an open mind?
"As you know, having listened to all the evidence in court I am now satisfied that this man was not guilty as charged.
"Maybe it's time to ask who did do it then. They must be laughing their socks off.
"Meanwhile remember that my daughter, Flora is just as murdered as the families of those to whom you send these messages, and my grief likely as intense and also as unique as theirs.
"You are not yourself a true Lockerbie relative, so please leave room for those of us who are, to grieve in our own individual ways.
"You might like to copy to them that I regret that my conclusions re Megrahi make 'closure' more difficult for some, I have regretted that from the day at Zeist when Megrahi was not acquitted, because I knew that failure would cause avoidable suffering for all of us relatives. But hopefully until the truth is eventually exposed they probably often pity me because they think that I and so many others who have really worked on this have it totally wrong.
"Our search is for the truth, and when it does come out, try to restrain the urge, from which I am sure you will suffer, to try to rubbish it in the name of what you currently believe.
"All of us humans make mistakes from time to time, so cheer up. Sometimes the hard part is to admit it.
"Meanwhile may I send the message of love embodied in the Christian Easter message to all your recipients. I am grateful for your list of who some of them are.
"The message which Jesus left for us, before we murdered Him at that Easter long ago included the admonition to love even our enemies. He also assured us that love is stronger than any other entity in the universe. It is love that strengthens the relatives you know.
"While I would not call you an enemy, Frank, just someone who fosters a hypothesis which is incorrect, I pray that your problems when the truth does finally come out will not be too painful for either yourself, or more importantly, the other Lockerbie relatives: they richly deserve the peace that springs from Easter.
"And so do you.
"Best wishes for Easter"
Monday, 29 March 2010
More on the refusal to release Megrahi's medical records
The man convicted of the Lockerbie bombing, Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi, has declined to allow his medical records to be made public despite growing questions about the extent of the illness which led to his release from prison. (...)
As part of the terms of his release from Greenock Prison, Megrahi must file monthly reports on his condition with East Renfrewshire Council.
These were the subject of a freedom of information request, but the council, which monitors Megrahi because his family lived in Newton Mearns during his time in jail, turned it down.
After an appeal, it agreed to approach the Libyan “in view of the public interest”, but said it would not breach the Data Protection Act by publishing documents against his wishes. It emerged yesterday that Megrahi is unwilling to hand over his records, which would detail the state of his health and the treatment he is receiving.
Lord Foulkes questioned Megrahi’s decision, relayed through the 57-year-old’s Scottish lawyer, Tony Kelly, and insisted that the public has a right to know the extent of his illness.
“If the medical evidence backed up the decision to release Megrahi, then there should be no reason why it can’t be published,” Lord Foulkes said.
“The lawyer’s refusal, and the Government’s refusal, can only mean that they both have something to hide. It is a matter of public importance.”
Mr Kelly said there was “no reason” why the records should be made public. He said: “People’s medical records are entirely private and personal. They’re not public property.
“I don’t think anybody would like their private medical records splashed all over the public domain.”
One of the doctors who assessed Megrahi before his release told The Herald last week that he was expected to die “within weeks” as his cancer spreads and affects his vital organs.
Dr Karol Sikora, who is in regular contact with Megrahi in Tripoli, said his condition had worsened dramatically since he left Scotland.
[From a report in today's edition of The Herald. A more inflammatory treatment of the issue on the New Europe website can be read here.]
As part of the terms of his release from Greenock Prison, Megrahi must file monthly reports on his condition with East Renfrewshire Council.
These were the subject of a freedom of information request, but the council, which monitors Megrahi because his family lived in Newton Mearns during his time in jail, turned it down.
After an appeal, it agreed to approach the Libyan “in view of the public interest”, but said it would not breach the Data Protection Act by publishing documents against his wishes. It emerged yesterday that Megrahi is unwilling to hand over his records, which would detail the state of his health and the treatment he is receiving.
Lord Foulkes questioned Megrahi’s decision, relayed through the 57-year-old’s Scottish lawyer, Tony Kelly, and insisted that the public has a right to know the extent of his illness.
“If the medical evidence backed up the decision to release Megrahi, then there should be no reason why it can’t be published,” Lord Foulkes said.
“The lawyer’s refusal, and the Government’s refusal, can only mean that they both have something to hide. It is a matter of public importance.”
Mr Kelly said there was “no reason” why the records should be made public. He said: “People’s medical records are entirely private and personal. They’re not public property.
“I don’t think anybody would like their private medical records splashed all over the public domain.”
One of the doctors who assessed Megrahi before his release told The Herald last week that he was expected to die “within weeks” as his cancer spreads and affects his vital organs.
Dr Karol Sikora, who is in regular contact with Megrahi in Tripoli, said his condition had worsened dramatically since he left Scotland.
[From a report in today's edition of The Herald. A more inflammatory treatment of the issue on the New Europe website can be read here.]
Father of Lockerbie victim backs Megrahi’s ‘compassionate release’
[This is the heading of a press release issued today by the British Medical Journal. It reads as follows:]
Personal View: Lockerbie – why we should be proud of Megrahi’s doctors
A retired GP and father of a Lockerbie victim is publicly supporting the medical advice given to Kenny MacAskill, the Scottish justice secretary, that led to the release of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi on compassionate grounds in August 2009.
Dr Jim Swire, who met Mr Megrahi in prison, has decided to speak out following allegations in the media that, now he has survived for seven months, this man’s illness was fabricated or at least exaggerated for some political or economic motive and that the doctors must have been “bought.”
His views are published on bmj.com today.
Mr Megrahi was convicted of the bombing of Pan Am flight 103 as it flew over Lockerbie in December 1988. After the failure of his first appeal in 2002, he was transferred to a Scottish prison, but public opinion about the verdict remains deeply divided.
By August 2009, medical advice indicated that Megrahi, who has prostate cancer, only had three months left to live, and he was granted “compassionate release” by the Scottish justice secretary to return to his home in Tripoli.
“There were shouts of fury from those who had not looked at the evidence for themselves,” recalls Swire. “Some of these were the same voices who had urged that analgesics should be withheld from the suffering prisoner; one wrote to me that he hoped Al-Megrahi’s death would be a long drawn out agony.”
But he explains that MacAskill took advice from the prison medical service in Greenock prison as well as several senior doctors who “conferred before advising MacAskill that a likely prognosis for Al-Megrahi was about three months.”
He also points out that the two major changes in Al-Megrahi’s circumstances since his release – returning home to his family and receiving drug treatment together with radiotherapy – might well explain the dramatic and welcome improvement in his condition.
“I wish to support the advice that my distinguished medical colleagues gave to MacAskill,” says Swire. “By sticking to their patient oriented professional duty, the doctors contributed to a major relief for a dying man. We should be proud of them.”
He concludes: “When I last met this quiet and dignified Muslim in his Greenock cell he had prepared a Christmas card for me. On it he had written, “To Doctor Swire and family, please pray for me and my family.” It is a treasured possession by which I shall always remember him. Even out of such death and destruction comes a message of hope and reconciliation for Easter.”
Personal View: Lockerbie – why we should be proud of Megrahi’s doctors
A retired GP and father of a Lockerbie victim is publicly supporting the medical advice given to Kenny MacAskill, the Scottish justice secretary, that led to the release of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi on compassionate grounds in August 2009.
Dr Jim Swire, who met Mr Megrahi in prison, has decided to speak out following allegations in the media that, now he has survived for seven months, this man’s illness was fabricated or at least exaggerated for some political or economic motive and that the doctors must have been “bought.”
His views are published on bmj.com today.
Mr Megrahi was convicted of the bombing of Pan Am flight 103 as it flew over Lockerbie in December 1988. After the failure of his first appeal in 2002, he was transferred to a Scottish prison, but public opinion about the verdict remains deeply divided.
By August 2009, medical advice indicated that Megrahi, who has prostate cancer, only had three months left to live, and he was granted “compassionate release” by the Scottish justice secretary to return to his home in Tripoli.
“There were shouts of fury from those who had not looked at the evidence for themselves,” recalls Swire. “Some of these were the same voices who had urged that analgesics should be withheld from the suffering prisoner; one wrote to me that he hoped Al-Megrahi’s death would be a long drawn out agony.”
But he explains that MacAskill took advice from the prison medical service in Greenock prison as well as several senior doctors who “conferred before advising MacAskill that a likely prognosis for Al-Megrahi was about three months.”
He also points out that the two major changes in Al-Megrahi’s circumstances since his release – returning home to his family and receiving drug treatment together with radiotherapy – might well explain the dramatic and welcome improvement in his condition.
“I wish to support the advice that my distinguished medical colleagues gave to MacAskill,” says Swire. “By sticking to their patient oriented professional duty, the doctors contributed to a major relief for a dying man. We should be proud of them.”
He concludes: “When I last met this quiet and dignified Muslim in his Greenock cell he had prepared a Christmas card for me. On it he had written, “To Doctor Swire and family, please pray for me and my family.” It is a treasured possession by which I shall always remember him. Even out of such death and destruction comes a message of hope and reconciliation for Easter.”
Sunday, 28 March 2010
Megrahi's lawyer blocks release of medical reports
Abdelbaset al Megrahi was released from prison seven months ago on compassionate grounds after being given only three months to live.
But just two weeks ago, the son of Libyan leader Colonel Gaddafi boasted cancer-stricken Megrahi's health has "greatly improved" now he is home.
As part of the conditions of his release, Megrahi has to provide East Renfrewshire Council with a monthly report on his medical condition.
But his lawyers have gagged the council from releasing the reports used to update the Scottish government. (...)
Labour MSP George Foulkes has called for the reports to be released under the Freedom of Information Act.
But his request has been rejected after council chiefs consulted Megrahi's lawyers.
East Renfrewshire Council monitor Megrahi because his family lived in Newton Mearns during his time in jail.
Foulkes said: "If the medical evidence backed up the decision to release Megrahi, then there should be no reason why it can't be published.
"The lawyers' refusal and the government's refusal can only mean that they both have something to hide. It is a matter of public importance." (...)
In a letter to George Foulkes, East Renfrewshire Council solicitor Anne Leonard said: "I have been advised that Mr Megrahi does not consent to the release of his personal data."
A council spokesman said: "Their release would breach the Data Protection Act." (...)
Under the terms of his release, he was to take part in a video link with council officials.
But they have had to contact him by phone because he was considered too ill to take part in video links.
[From a report in today's edition of the Sunday Mail.]
But just two weeks ago, the son of Libyan leader Colonel Gaddafi boasted cancer-stricken Megrahi's health has "greatly improved" now he is home.
As part of the conditions of his release, Megrahi has to provide East Renfrewshire Council with a monthly report on his medical condition.
But his lawyers have gagged the council from releasing the reports used to update the Scottish government. (...)
Labour MSP George Foulkes has called for the reports to be released under the Freedom of Information Act.
But his request has been rejected after council chiefs consulted Megrahi's lawyers.
East Renfrewshire Council monitor Megrahi because his family lived in Newton Mearns during his time in jail.
Foulkes said: "If the medical evidence backed up the decision to release Megrahi, then there should be no reason why it can't be published.
"The lawyers' refusal and the government's refusal can only mean that they both have something to hide. It is a matter of public importance." (...)
In a letter to George Foulkes, East Renfrewshire Council solicitor Anne Leonard said: "I have been advised that Mr Megrahi does not consent to the release of his personal data."
A council spokesman said: "Their release would breach the Data Protection Act." (...)
Under the terms of his release, he was to take part in a video link with council officials.
But they have had to contact him by phone because he was considered too ill to take part in video links.
[From a report in today's edition of the Sunday Mail.]
MPs say time to reconsider 'the special relationship'
[This is the headline over a report in today's edition of The Sunday Telegraph. It reads in part:]
The Foreign Affairs Committee says it is time to reconsider the term "the special relationship", which it complains is overused by politicians and the media, serving "simultaneously to devalue its meaning and to raise unrealistic expectations about the benefits the relationship can deliver to the UK." (...)
Heather Conley and Reginald Dale from the Centre for Strategic and International Studies told a hearing: "There is clear evidence that Europe (and thus Britain) is much less important to the Obama administration than it was to previous US administrations, and the Obama administration appears to be more interested in what it can get out of the special relationship than in the relationship itself."
The release of Lockerbie bomber Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi by the Scottish executive was strongly criticised by the US, and Hillary Clinton's call for Britain to sit down with Argentina to "resolve the issues" around the Falklands was not appreciated in London.
Sir Jeremy Greenstock, the former ambassador to the United Nations, told the Committee that when the UK has disagreements with the United States in official business, "we play out those disagreements, we argue with the United States, in private.
"We tend not to argue in public unless public explanation is necessary or we are having a great row about something that cannot be kept out of the public domain," he said.
The Foreign Affairs Committee says it is time to reconsider the term "the special relationship", which it complains is overused by politicians and the media, serving "simultaneously to devalue its meaning and to raise unrealistic expectations about the benefits the relationship can deliver to the UK." (...)
Heather Conley and Reginald Dale from the Centre for Strategic and International Studies told a hearing: "There is clear evidence that Europe (and thus Britain) is much less important to the Obama administration than it was to previous US administrations, and the Obama administration appears to be more interested in what it can get out of the special relationship than in the relationship itself."
The release of Lockerbie bomber Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi by the Scottish executive was strongly criticised by the US, and Hillary Clinton's call for Britain to sit down with Argentina to "resolve the issues" around the Falklands was not appreciated in London.
Sir Jeremy Greenstock, the former ambassador to the United Nations, told the Committee that when the UK has disagreements with the United States in official business, "we play out those disagreements, we argue with the United States, in private.
"We tend not to argue in public unless public explanation is necessary or we are having a great row about something that cannot be kept out of the public domain," he said.
Saturday, 27 March 2010
Was the Lockerbie conviction unsafe?
This is the title of a Flickr Photo Download by David McCandless which reviews the evidence that led to the conviction of Abdelbaset Megrahi. There are a number of inaccuracies, but it is a useful summary. It can be viewed here.
Calls for cartoon to be banned after Lockerbie sketch
[This is the headline over a report on the STV News website. It reads in part:]
An American cartoon show has been met with outrage after showing a sketch about the victims of the Lockerbie bombing.
The Family Guy episode, which has already been aired in the USA, includes a nursery rhyme describing babies and body parts falling from the sky.
The mother of one of the Lockerbie victims has described the sequence as “horrible and painful”. (...)
The Family Guy series is watched by millions of people around the world, and has the same cult status as The Simpsons and South Park.
Christine Grahame MSP said: “I’ve spoken to rescuers who were there at the time, and for them it’s still so horrible that they can’t talk about it.
“So I think that it’s disgraceful. It should never have been played.”
The sketch has also drawn criticism from those who live in the Dumfries and Galloway town. Lockerbie resident Maxwell Kerr said: “I think it’s disgusting.”
Amidst calls for the episode to be banned, BBC3, which airs The Family Guy in the UK, said that it is currently reviewing whether or not it would show the episode.
An American cartoon show has been met with outrage after showing a sketch about the victims of the Lockerbie bombing.
The Family Guy episode, which has already been aired in the USA, includes a nursery rhyme describing babies and body parts falling from the sky.
The mother of one of the Lockerbie victims has described the sequence as “horrible and painful”. (...)
The Family Guy series is watched by millions of people around the world, and has the same cult status as The Simpsons and South Park.
Christine Grahame MSP said: “I’ve spoken to rescuers who were there at the time, and for them it’s still so horrible that they can’t talk about it.
“So I think that it’s disgraceful. It should never have been played.”
The sketch has also drawn criticism from those who live in the Dumfries and Galloway town. Lockerbie resident Maxwell Kerr said: “I think it’s disgusting.”
Amidst calls for the episode to be banned, BBC3, which airs The Family Guy in the UK, said that it is currently reviewing whether or not it would show the episode.
Thursday, 25 March 2010
Saif-al-Islam Gaddafi on the release of Abdelbaset Megrahi
I asked him about Abdelbaset Ali Al-Megrahi, the man convicted in the Pan Am 103 atrocity, in which 270 were killed, when the flight blew up over Lockerbie, Scotland in 1988. The Scottish Judiciary released Megrahi in August on compassionate grounds [RB: the Cabinet Secretary for Justice, who released Megrahi, is a minister in the Scottish Government, not a member of the Scottish judiciary], as doctors gave him just three months to live. Seven months later he is still alive. Gaddafi said, “The Americans shouldn’t be angry because this man is innocent, I believe he is innocent. Second, it was not a Libyan decision to release him. They should go to the UK and discuss the issue with the UK and not Libya. And the third issue--he is very sick. This is a fact. But he is still alive. You should ask God about that.”
[From an interview by Amy Kellogg with Saif Gaddafi, reported in the Live Shots section of the Fox News website. In a later article on the same website, Ms Kellogg writes:]
Though Libya renounced its weapons of mass destruction program back in 2003, a U.S. Embassy didn’t open in Tripoli until late 2008. That was after Libya paid compensation for the families of the victims of Pan Am flight 103. (...)
Despite the normalization of relations, there is much historic baggage weighing on the new relationship, including painful memories of the 1988 Pan Am 103 incident, and for the Libyans, the bombing of Leader Moammar Gaddafi’s home by the Americans in 1986.
When a Scottish court released the man convicted in the Pan Am 103 bombing, Abdelbaset Ali Al-Megrahi, on compassionate grounds, as doctors determined he had just three months left to live, many Americans reacted angrily, as it brought back painful memories. U.S. Ambassador Gene Cretz acknowledges that.
“There’s no doubt that the impact of that picture of Mr. Megrahi being greeted here struck at the very heart of American sensitivities not only in Washington but throughout our country, because it was a reminder of a very very painful past and a present that continues to be painful for the families who lost relatives and friends in that incident and others.”
I asked Seif al-Islam al-Gaddafi, the son of the Libyan leader about the release of Megrahi, who is still alive seven months after his release.
"Americans shouldn't be angry because this man is innocent. I believe he is innocent. Second, it was not a Libyan decision to release him. They should go to the UK and discuss the issue with the UK not Libya. The third issue, he's very sick. This is a fact. That he is still live you should ask God."
Many Libyans make the distinction between Libya’s “accepting responsibility” for the bombing, and actually being guilty of the atrocity, considering Megrahi the fall guy. Yet a Scottish court convicted Megrahi and that fact has not changed. [RB: But an official Scottish body, the SCCRC, has said that that conviction may have been a miscarriage of justice.]
Cretz said even though it was a Scottish court that released him [RB: it was a Scottish Government minister, not a Scottish court], that act caused some damage to U.S.-Libya relations.
“It was a setback no doubt it did impact on relations and this is one of the reasons that we are trying to brick by brick , day by day, discussion by discussion, lay down a path of normalization with this country. So that after 30 years of estrangement and hostility we are able to begin to find a language to talk to each other and to also make each other aware of our cultural and political imperatives and sensitivities.”
[From an interview by Amy Kellogg with Saif Gaddafi, reported in the Live Shots section of the Fox News website. In a later article on the same website, Ms Kellogg writes:]
Though Libya renounced its weapons of mass destruction program back in 2003, a U.S. Embassy didn’t open in Tripoli until late 2008. That was after Libya paid compensation for the families of the victims of Pan Am flight 103. (...)
Despite the normalization of relations, there is much historic baggage weighing on the new relationship, including painful memories of the 1988 Pan Am 103 incident, and for the Libyans, the bombing of Leader Moammar Gaddafi’s home by the Americans in 1986.
When a Scottish court released the man convicted in the Pan Am 103 bombing, Abdelbaset Ali Al-Megrahi, on compassionate grounds, as doctors determined he had just three months left to live, many Americans reacted angrily, as it brought back painful memories. U.S. Ambassador Gene Cretz acknowledges that.
“There’s no doubt that the impact of that picture of Mr. Megrahi being greeted here struck at the very heart of American sensitivities not only in Washington but throughout our country, because it was a reminder of a very very painful past and a present that continues to be painful for the families who lost relatives and friends in that incident and others.”
I asked Seif al-Islam al-Gaddafi, the son of the Libyan leader about the release of Megrahi, who is still alive seven months after his release.
"Americans shouldn't be angry because this man is innocent. I believe he is innocent. Second, it was not a Libyan decision to release him. They should go to the UK and discuss the issue with the UK not Libya. The third issue, he's very sick. This is a fact. That he is still live you should ask God."
Many Libyans make the distinction between Libya’s “accepting responsibility” for the bombing, and actually being guilty of the atrocity, considering Megrahi the fall guy. Yet a Scottish court convicted Megrahi and that fact has not changed. [RB: But an official Scottish body, the SCCRC, has said that that conviction may have been a miscarriage of justice.]
Cretz said even though it was a Scottish court that released him [RB: it was a Scottish Government minister, not a Scottish court], that act caused some damage to U.S.-Libya relations.
“It was a setback no doubt it did impact on relations and this is one of the reasons that we are trying to brick by brick , day by day, discussion by discussion, lay down a path of normalization with this country. So that after 30 years of estrangement and hostility we are able to begin to find a language to talk to each other and to also make each other aware of our cultural and political imperatives and sensitivities.”
Sunday, 21 March 2010
Libya’s feting of Megrahi insults us all
[This is the headline over a column in today's edition of The Sunday Times by regular contributor, Gillian Bowditch. It reads in part:]
When it comes to the convicted Lockerbie bomber, Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, the quality of mercy is looking very strained indeed. Far from dropping like the gentle rain from heaven, it has become a whirlwind which looks set to wreak havoc on the career of the Scottish justice secretary Kenny MacAskill.
The only man convicted of Britain’s worst terrorist atrocity, which led to the deaths of 270 people in 1988, was released on compassionate grounds last August on the basis that he was close to death. Doctors reportedly gave him three months to live.
Like just about everything else to do with the Lockerbie disaster, this has proved unreliable. Seven months on, Megrahi is still with us — a useful propaganda tool for a Libyan government and a potent symbol in the Middle East of Britain’s wholly inconsistent approach to terrorism. (...)
Megrahi is reputed to have become a national hero in his native land. Mothers are naming their newborn children after him and 30,000 well-wishers are said to have filed past his death bed in the manner of ghoulish medieval pilgrims. Colonel Muammar al-Gaddafi’s son Saif, has said the convicted man is “in a good condition”. Treatment with the anti-cancer drug Taxotere is said to be prolonging his life and there is speculation he could live for years. (...)
With the exception of the families of the victims, nobody emerges from this saga well. The Scottish government has attempted to limp lamely onto the high moral ground, citing compassion as a reason for Megrahi’s release. But by allowing a single minister with only two years’ experience of government to take a unilateral decision on an issue which was of international importance, it has not only damaged relations with the US, it has appeared politically naive, inexperienced in international affairs and irresponsible.
It was not that long ago that the British government was portraying Gaddafi as an erratic and dangerous madman. So for the Scottish government to hand over a convicted terrorist to Gaddafi, without preconditions, defies belief. Far from the “three months to live” prognosis, based on the testimony of a single prison doctor and used by the government to justify its controversial decision at the time, Professor Karol Sikora, the cancer expert hired by the Libyan government, who saw Megrahi once, says his report stated that “on the balance of probabilities, there was a 50% chance he would die in three months”. (...)
The Scottish justice system has also been damaged by the debacle, with claims from a UN observer, among others, of a massive miscarriage of justice. Megrahi served eight-and-a-half years of his lifetime sentence handed down at a special hearing in the Netherlands. He chose not to give evidence in his own defence. He was in the middle of an appeal to clear his name at the time of his release, an appeal which had the potential to embarrass the British authorities and America’s FBI and which was dropped just before he was freed.
Had MacAskill had the best interests of Scottish justice in mind, he would have kept Megrahi in Scotland for the appeal. Had the chemotherapy offered to him there been given to him here, we would now be several months into the appeal and closer to the elusive truth. Unless the evidence is tested in a court of law, Megrahi’s protestations are worth little. A full-scale public inquiry would be costly. But justice has not been done nor has it been seen to be done.
The decision of the Scottish parliament’s justice committee last month to consider in private a revised draft report on the decision to free Megrahi, is symptomatic of a lack of transparency. If Megrahi is as well as Saif Gaddafi makes out, he should return to Scotland and clear his name properly. He has experienced mercy; it is time the dead and their relatives experienced real justice.
When it comes to the convicted Lockerbie bomber, Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, the quality of mercy is looking very strained indeed. Far from dropping like the gentle rain from heaven, it has become a whirlwind which looks set to wreak havoc on the career of the Scottish justice secretary Kenny MacAskill.
The only man convicted of Britain’s worst terrorist atrocity, which led to the deaths of 270 people in 1988, was released on compassionate grounds last August on the basis that he was close to death. Doctors reportedly gave him three months to live.
Like just about everything else to do with the Lockerbie disaster, this has proved unreliable. Seven months on, Megrahi is still with us — a useful propaganda tool for a Libyan government and a potent symbol in the Middle East of Britain’s wholly inconsistent approach to terrorism. (...)
Megrahi is reputed to have become a national hero in his native land. Mothers are naming their newborn children after him and 30,000 well-wishers are said to have filed past his death bed in the manner of ghoulish medieval pilgrims. Colonel Muammar al-Gaddafi’s son Saif, has said the convicted man is “in a good condition”. Treatment with the anti-cancer drug Taxotere is said to be prolonging his life and there is speculation he could live for years. (...)
With the exception of the families of the victims, nobody emerges from this saga well. The Scottish government has attempted to limp lamely onto the high moral ground, citing compassion as a reason for Megrahi’s release. But by allowing a single minister with only two years’ experience of government to take a unilateral decision on an issue which was of international importance, it has not only damaged relations with the US, it has appeared politically naive, inexperienced in international affairs and irresponsible.
It was not that long ago that the British government was portraying Gaddafi as an erratic and dangerous madman. So for the Scottish government to hand over a convicted terrorist to Gaddafi, without preconditions, defies belief. Far from the “three months to live” prognosis, based on the testimony of a single prison doctor and used by the government to justify its controversial decision at the time, Professor Karol Sikora, the cancer expert hired by the Libyan government, who saw Megrahi once, says his report stated that “on the balance of probabilities, there was a 50% chance he would die in three months”. (...)
The Scottish justice system has also been damaged by the debacle, with claims from a UN observer, among others, of a massive miscarriage of justice. Megrahi served eight-and-a-half years of his lifetime sentence handed down at a special hearing in the Netherlands. He chose not to give evidence in his own defence. He was in the middle of an appeal to clear his name at the time of his release, an appeal which had the potential to embarrass the British authorities and America’s FBI and which was dropped just before he was freed.
Had MacAskill had the best interests of Scottish justice in mind, he would have kept Megrahi in Scotland for the appeal. Had the chemotherapy offered to him there been given to him here, we would now be several months into the appeal and closer to the elusive truth. Unless the evidence is tested in a court of law, Megrahi’s protestations are worth little. A full-scale public inquiry would be costly. But justice has not been done nor has it been seen to be done.
The decision of the Scottish parliament’s justice committee last month to consider in private a revised draft report on the decision to free Megrahi, is symptomatic of a lack of transparency. If Megrahi is as well as Saif Gaddafi makes out, he should return to Scotland and clear his name properly. He has experienced mercy; it is time the dead and their relatives experienced real justice.
Corrupted compassion: freed to die at home, Pan Am bomber is living large
[This is the headline over an opinion piece in today's edition of the New York Daily News. It reads as follows:]
Seven months after his release from a Scottish prison on "compassionate" grounds, and four months after prostate cancer was supposed to have killed him, Pan Am Flight 103 bomber Abdelbaset al-Megrahi has had a miraculous turn for the better, death-wise. How very surprising.
Saif Khadafy, son of Libyan dictator Moammar, confirmed that Megrahi, convicted of murdering 270 people at Lockerbie, Scotland, in 1988, is doing much better, thank you very much.
Megrahi "was sick and was released for humanitarian reasons, and was soon in better health and in a good condition," Khadafy told an Arab newspaper. "His future is now in God's hands."
In the same interview, Khadafy is reported to have admitted that securing release for the now "greatly improved" Megrahi had dominated trade talks - including oil deals - between Libya and the government of British Prime Minister Gordon Brown.
Not that there was ever much doubt that amoral commercial opportunism had sent Megrahi home to a triumphant welcome in Tripoli. He has been lionized ever since as a hero, a national treasure. Parents have named newborns after him, and 30,000 well-wishers reportedly have visited the swank villa in the Libyan capital where he lives.
Perhaps Megrahi is, in fact, ill. He generally appears for photos in a wheelchair or assisted by oxygen tubes. So what? If treatments, such as chemotherapy, are extending his life, they should have been administered in the prison to which he was condemned. His days of comfort are a stain that Brown will never escape.
[This article appears just a day after the publication of an editorial to similar effect in the New York Post. Could it be that someone is orchestrating a media campaign?]
Seven months after his release from a Scottish prison on "compassionate" grounds, and four months after prostate cancer was supposed to have killed him, Pan Am Flight 103 bomber Abdelbaset al-Megrahi has had a miraculous turn for the better, death-wise. How very surprising.
Saif Khadafy, son of Libyan dictator Moammar, confirmed that Megrahi, convicted of murdering 270 people at Lockerbie, Scotland, in 1988, is doing much better, thank you very much.
Megrahi "was sick and was released for humanitarian reasons, and was soon in better health and in a good condition," Khadafy told an Arab newspaper. "His future is now in God's hands."
In the same interview, Khadafy is reported to have admitted that securing release for the now "greatly improved" Megrahi had dominated trade talks - including oil deals - between Libya and the government of British Prime Minister Gordon Brown.
Not that there was ever much doubt that amoral commercial opportunism had sent Megrahi home to a triumphant welcome in Tripoli. He has been lionized ever since as a hero, a national treasure. Parents have named newborns after him, and 30,000 well-wishers reportedly have visited the swank villa in the Libyan capital where he lives.
Perhaps Megrahi is, in fact, ill. He generally appears for photos in a wheelchair or assisted by oxygen tubes. So what? If treatments, such as chemotherapy, are extending his life, they should have been administered in the prison to which he was condemned. His days of comfort are a stain that Brown will never escape.
[This article appears just a day after the publication of an editorial to similar effect in the New York Post. Could it be that someone is orchestrating a media campaign?]
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)