That could be because this one Libyan is responsible for 270 deaths?Dilbert_X wrote:
I'm not trolling (particularly).
Significant numbers in the US campaigned like crazy to get members of the IRA released early, immunity from prosecution for crimes already committed etc.
The UK releases one Libyan and all hell breaks loose.
Supposedly, the IRA killed a lot of people too.
Fuck Israel
/facedesk
In one go.
In one go.
All hell? Its called discussing that topic. Jesus dude. I don't know anyone who talks about. Fuck sakes. Some of us are just trying to talk about this topic. You seem incapable of being able to do that. Not surprised really. That is what a lot of you do. You HAVE to compare and somehow bring up Iraq and whatever. This forum is such a joke sometimes.Dilbert_X wrote:
I'm not trolling (particularly).
Significant numbers in the US campaigned like crazy to get members of the IRA released early, immunity from prosecution for crimes already committed etc.
The UK releases one Libyan and all hell breaks loose.
Except that on the current evidence (released around noon today) it looks very much like the British government played no part in the decision.Red Forman wrote:
you motherfuckers.
-----------------------------
From: THE SUNDAY TIMES
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,544362,00.html
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/p … 814939.ece
The British government decided it was “in the overwhelming interests of the United Kingdom” to make Abdel Basset Ali al-Megrahi, the Lockerbie bomber, eligible for return to Libya, leaked ministerial letters reveal.
Gordon Brown’s government made the decision after discussions between Libya and BP over a multi-million-pound oil exploration deal had hit difficulties. These were resolved soon afterwards.
After this story came out the Foreign Office published all the correspondance relating to this, in which it is clear that the decision to release on compassionate grounds was solely in the Scots hands. If he had been released as part of a prisoner transfer agreement, then the British government would have been involved, as it was, they weren't.
Sure it was......
Debates evolve, there is going to be spill over into a related topic. It happens.
And anyway debating rigidly is boring see: lowing.
And anyway debating rigidly is boring see: lowing.
Blackbelts are just whitebelts who have never quit.
On National Geographic they excluded a terrorist attack being responsible for the crash. Not sure what the cause was cos I went to bed.
So the bomb components they found and traced back to Lybian intelligence was fabricated?.Sup wrote:
On National Geographic they excluded a terrorist attack being responsible for the crash. Not sure what the cause was cos I went to bed.
Was it the "Loose Change" guys who did the NG "documentary"?
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
NG didn't exclude a terrorist attack ... they questioned the evidence that lead to Libya ...FEOS wrote:
So the bomb components they found and traced back to Lybian intelligence was fabricated?.Sup wrote:
On National Geographic they excluded a terrorist attack being responsible for the crash. Not sure what the cause was cos I went to bed.
Was it the "Loose Change" guys who did the NG "documentary"?
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
Yes.FEOS wrote:
So the bomb components they found and traced back to Lybian intelligence was fabricated?
'A circuit board fragment, allegedly found embedded in a piece of charred material, was identified as part of an electronic timer similar to that found on a Libyan intelligence agent who had been arrested 10 months previously, carrying materials for a Semtex bomb. The timer allegedly was traced through its Swiss manufacturer, Mebo, to the Libyan military, and Mebo employee Ulrich Lumpert identified the fragment at al-Megrahi's trial. Mebo's owner, Edwin Bollier, later revealed that in 1991 he had declined an offer from the FBI of $4 million to testify that the timer fragment was part of a Mebo MST-13 timer supplied to Libya. On 18 July 2007, Ulrich Lumpert admitted he had lied at the trial.[32] In a sworn affidavit before a Zurich notary public, Lumpert stated that he had stolen a prototype MST-13 timer printed circuit board from Mebo and gave it without permission on 22 June 1989, to "an official person investigating the Lockerbie case".[33] Dr Hans Köchler, UN observer at the Lockerbie trial, who was sent a copy of Lumpert's affidavit, said: "The Scottish authorities are now obliged to investigate this situation. Not only has Mr Lumpert admitted to stealing a sample of the timer, but to the fact he gave it to an official and then lied in court".'
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pan_Am_Fli … estigation
The whole case was a stitchup.
Fuck Israel
no. this is trolling not evolving.m3thod wrote:
Debates evolve, there is going to be spill over into a related topic. It happens.
And anyway debating rigidly is boring see: lowing.
Dilbert_X wrote:
OMG! A country bent its laws and morals over oil and commercial contracts?
That never happened before
you're the last person who should be complaining about trolling.
Blackbelts are just whitebelts who have never quit.
I don't think there's any doubt there was a bomb on board. The question is whether it was put on a plane in Malta (as was asserted by the prosecution), where it then flew to Frankfurt and was transferred to a 727 and then on to Heathrow where the passengers and luggage were transfered to the 747 that blew up or whether it was put on (or rather, in the luggage area there - which is the area that was broken into) the 747 during the break-in that happened at Heathrow (which was never mentioned to the jury in the trial) several hours before the plane departed.FEOS wrote:
So the bomb components they found and traced back to Lybian intelligence was fabricated?.Sup wrote:
On National Geographic they excluded a terrorist attack being responsible for the crash. Not sure what the cause was cos I went to bed.
Was it the "Loose Change" guys who did the NG "documentary"?
It's a lot of plane changes across a lot of countries - or a break in at the airport the plane departed from, which the jury in the trial were not informed of.
Last edited by Bertster7 (2009-09-02 11:31:31)
There was no jury, this information was kept from the defence lawyers, as was much else.which the jury in the trial were not informed of.
Fuck Israel
See the highlighted portion.Varegg wrote:
NG didn't exclude a terrorist attack ... they questioned the evidence that lead to Libya ...FEOS wrote:
So the bomb components they found and traced back to Libyan intelligence was fabricated?.Sup wrote:
On National Geographic they excluded a terrorist attack being responsible for the crash. Not sure what the cause was cos I went to bed.
Was it the "Loose Change" guys who did the NG "documentary"?
Flawed prosecution would seem to be a concern, based on what Dilbert provided. Though I don't know if I would go so far as to say "fabricated" which would imply some sort of conspiracy.
As for Bert's argument, multiple plane changes does not automatically mean Libya wasn't involved...only that their intended target may not have been that particular flight/aircraft.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
The break-in may mean that Libya weren't involved, its such a mess its impossible to know.
Offering someone $4m to give evidence of a particular flavour, at the same time claiming not to have the funds to check a circuit board for explosive residue does seem a little suspicious
Offering someone $4m to give evidence of a particular flavour, at the same time claiming not to have the funds to check a circuit board for explosive residue does seem a little suspicious
Fuck Israel
And the fact there was a break in to exactly the right bit of Heathrow (which is a huge airport) on the day before the bombing, which was covered up - that's just coincidence? You're not giving any consideration to that at all and don't consider it to be something that should have been raised at the trial?FEOS wrote:
See the highlighted portion.Varegg wrote:
NG didn't exclude a terrorist attack ... they questioned the evidence that lead to Libya ...FEOS wrote:
So the bomb components they found and traced back to Libyan intelligence was fabricated?
Was it the "Loose Change" guys who did the NG "documentary"?
Flawed prosecution would seem to be a concern, based on what Dilbert provided. Though I don't know if I would go so far as to say "fabricated" which would imply some sort of conspiracy.
As for Bert's argument, multiple plane changes does not automatically mean Libya wasn't involved...only that their intended target may not have been that particular flight/aircraft.
you crack me up bert. you find no way the brit govt could be involved yet you believe the other conspiracy crap. lol.
I know the political situation between the Labout government and the SNP. The SNP aren't going to be doing the British government any favours unless they have to.Red Forman wrote:
you crack me up bert. you find no way the brit govt could be involved yet you believe the other conspiracy crap. lol.
Nor do I consider the facts surrounding the trial to be "conspiracy crap".
You crack me up with your lack of knowledge, in any sort of depth, on any of these issues.
oh....lol.Bertster7 wrote:
You crack me up with your lack of knowledge, in any sort of depth, on any of these issues.
sorry mr know it all.
i follow the money. thats what smart people do. go bury your head in the sand college boy.
'Following the money' might lead to the conclusion that the Libyan thing was a stitch-up, since Bush senior wanted to keep the Syrians and Iranians sweet during Gulf War I (another oil war).
Fuck Israel
not talking aboot that kthx.
Of course it should have, if there is material evidence that it could have affected the proximate cause of the explosion. To just introduce things that serve no purpose other than to cloud the issue doesn't help justice in any way.Bertster7 wrote:
And the fact there was a break in to exactly the right bit of Heathrow (which is a huge airport) on the day before the bombing, which was covered up - that's just coincidence? You're not giving any consideration to that at all and don't consider it to be something that should have been raised at the trial?FEOS wrote:
See the highlighted portion.Varegg wrote:
NG didn't exclude a terrorist attack ... they questioned the evidence that lead to Libya ...
Flawed prosecution would seem to be a concern, based on what Dilbert provided. Though I don't know if I would go so far as to say "fabricated" which would imply some sort of conspiracy.
As for Bert's argument, multiple plane changes does not automatically mean Libya wasn't involved...only that their intended target may not have been that particular flight/aircraft.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
Revealed: Libya paid for medical advice that helped Lockerbie bomber's release
My money is that the bomber lives a long time.
My money is that the bomber lives a long time.