For those that perhaps don't fully recall..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pan_Am_Flight_103Now, the whole thing has made World news again, all this time on, with this decision..
"In 2001, Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi, a Libyan, was convicted of involvement in the bombing and sentenced to life imprisonment. On 20 August 2009, the Scottish Government released him on compassionate grounds to return to Libya as he was suffering from terminal prostate cancer and had a life expectancy of less than 3 months"
Now. This is interesting. If this man is culpable, and yes, there has been a lot of arguement over that, down the years, then he was responsible for over 200 deaths, a terrible crime, whether carried out by an individual, or someone acting as a part of a group.
He was found guilty by an independent court, despite his constant denials, other theories, other prominent figures who felt that the evidence was flawed and questionable, etc, etc..
Of course, if he was really innocent all along, that would be terrible also, although not on the same scale of terrible.
But we shall go with the fact that he got his trial in an independent court, and was found guilty.
Now, is it commonplace in the prison system to release serial killers and mass murderers early, on 'compassionate grounds'. Seriously. Is that the norm, or are they usually required to remain inside, and die there, if need be? I would have thought it to be the latter, non?
So, if that is the case, then why let what is a mass killer leave prison early, on so called compassionate grounds? What about the lack of compassion he, and those who either aided or ordered that bombing, showed for the many victims and their families? None. Totally pathological.
Now, I am not usually reactionary in my thinking, however, having weighed this up, I would have to say that it is very odd that they have let this man free. They must have known that doing so would only create a public outcry, against them. And politicians do not usually volunteer to do something that comes and bites them on the ass, unless they REALLY need to. Did the politicians who sanctioned this release REALLY need to, maybe? Perhaps something was about to come to light that would have shown the man to be innocent, all along, and in return for his silence, he would be released, and somehow compensated?
I have to agree with Obama on this one, I am not really convinced that his condition is sufficient grounds to let him go, not unless they privately know he should never have been there, to begin with...
