Lockerbie Killer Released -- Justice Served

[Mister Moobs]

with a large Coke and french fries to go... Oh and a side order of Oil. 15 Billion Sterling...

Lockerbie bomber 'set free for oil'

Jason Allardyce

*

The British government decided it was ?in the overwhelming interests of the United Kingdom? to make Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed 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.

The letters were sent two years ago by Jack Straw, the justice secretary, to Kenny MacAskill, his counterpart in Scotland, who has been widely criticised for taking the formal decision to permit Megrahi?s release.

The correspondence makes it plain that the key decision to include Megrahi in a deal with Libya to allow prisoners to return home was, in fact, taken in London for British national interests.

Related Links

* Al-Megrahi stood in way of oil deal

* Time to shine light on a murky deal

* Gadaffi?s son to move to Britain

Edward Davey, the Liberal Democrat foreign affairs spokesman, said: ?This is the strongest evidence yet that the British government has been involved for a long time in talks over al-Megrahi in which commercial considerations have been central to their thinking.?

Two letters dated five months apart show that Straw initially intended to exclude Megrahi from a prisoner transfer agreement with Colonel Muammar Gadaffi, under which British and Libyan prisoners could serve out their sentences in their home country.

In a letter dated July 26, 2007, Straw said he favoured an option to leave out Megrahi by stipulating that any prisoners convicted before a specified date would not be considered for transfer.

Downing Street had also said Megrahi would not be included under the agreement.

Straw then switched his position as Libya used its deal with BP as a bargaining chip to insist the Lockerbie bomber was included.

The exploration deal for oil and gas, potentially worth up to £15 billion, was announced in May 2007. Six months later the agreement was still waiting to be ratified.

On December 19, 2007, Straw wrote to MacAskill announcing that the UK government was abandoning its attempt to exclude Megrahi from the prisoner transfer agreement, citing the national interest.

In a letter leaked by a Whitehall source, he wrote: ?I had previously accepted the importance of the al-Megrahi issue to Scotland and said I would try to get an exclusion for him on the face of the agreement. I have not been able to secure an explicit exclusion.

?The wider negotiations with the Libyans are reaching a critical stage and, in view of the overwhelming interests for the United Kingdom, I have agreed that in this instance the [prisoner transfer agreement] should be in the standard form and not mention any individual.?

Within six weeks of the government climbdown, Libya had ratified the BP deal. The prisoner transfer agreement was finalised in May this year, leading to Libya formally applying for Megrahi to be transferred to its custody.

Saif Gadaffi, the colonel?s son, has insisted that negotiation over the release of Megrahi was linked with the BP oil deal: ?The fight to get the [transfer] agreement lasted a long time and was very political, but I want to make clear that we didn?t mention Mr Megrahi.

?At all times we talked about the [prisoner transfer agreement]. It was obvious we were talking about him. We all knew that was what we were talking about.

?People should not get angry because we were talking about commerce or oil. We signed an oil deal at the same time. The commerce and oil deals were all with the [prisoner transfer agreement].?

His account is confirmed by other sources. Sir Richard Dalton, a former British ambassador to Libya and a board member of the Libyan British Business Council, said: ?Nobody doubted Libya wanted BP and BP was confident its commitment would go through. But the timing of the final authority to spend real money was dependent on politics.?

Bob Monetti of New Jersey, whose son Rick was among the victims of the 1988 bombing, said: ?It?s always been about business.?

A spokesman for Lord Mandelson said he had not changed his position that the release of Megrahi was not linked to trade deals. :wink: :wink:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article6814939.ece

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/World-News/Lockerbie-Bomber-Release-Linked-To-Trade-Deal-With-Britain-Says-Colonel-Gaddafis-Son/Article/200908315366896?lpos=World_News_Carousel_Region_0&lid=ARTICLE_15366896_Lockerbie_Bomber_Release_Linked_To_Trade_Deal_With_Britain%2C_Says_Colonel_Gaddafis_Son

Follow the money...

[Stramash]

with a large Coke and french fries to go... Oh and a side order of Oil. 15 Billion Sterling...

Lockerbie bomber 'set free for oil'

Jason Allardyce

*

The British government decided it was ?in the overwhelming interests of the United Kingdom? to make Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed 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.

The letters were sent two years ago by Jack Straw, the justice secretary, to Kenny MacAskill, his counterpart in Scotland, who has been widely criticised for taking the formal decision to permit Megrahi?s release.

The correspondence makes it plain that the key decision to include Megrahi in a deal with Libya to allow prisoners to return home was, in fact, taken in London for British national interests.

Related Links

* Al-Megrahi stood in way of oil deal

* Time to shine light on a murky deal

* Gadaffi?s son to move to Britain

Edward Davey, the Liberal Democrat foreign affairs spokesman, said: ?This is the strongest evidence yet that the British government has been involved for a long time in talks over al-Megrahi in which commercial considerations have been central to their thinking.?

Two letters dated five months apart show that Straw initially intended to exclude Megrahi from a prisoner transfer agreement with Colonel Muammar Gadaffi, under which British and Libyan prisoners could serve out their sentences in their home country.

In a letter dated July 26, 2007, Straw said he favoured an option to leave out Megrahi by stipulating that any prisoners convicted before a specified date would not be considered for transfer.

Downing Street had also said Megrahi would not be included under the agreement.

Straw then switched his position as Libya used its deal with BP as a bargaining chip to insist the Lockerbie bomber was included.

The exploration deal for oil and gas, potentially worth up to £15 billion, was announced in May 2007. Six months later the agreement was still waiting to be ratified.

On December 19, 2007, Straw wrote to MacAskill announcing that the UK government was abandoning its attempt to exclude Megrahi from the prisoner transfer agreement, citing the national interest.

In a letter leaked by a Whitehall source, he wrote: ?I had previously accepted the importance of the al-Megrahi issue to Scotland and said I would try to get an exclusion for him on the face of the agreement. I have not been able to secure an explicit exclusion.

?The wider negotiations with the Libyans are reaching a critical stage and, in view of the overwhelming interests for the United Kingdom, I have agreed that in this instance the [prisoner transfer agreement] should be in the standard form and not mention any individual.?

Within six weeks of the government climbdown, Libya had ratified the BP deal. The prisoner transfer agreement was finalised in May this year, leading to Libya formally applying for Megrahi to be transferred to its custody.

Saif Gadaffi, the colonel?s son, has insisted that negotiation over the release of Megrahi was linked with the BP oil deal: ?The fight to get the [transfer] agreement lasted a long time and was very political, but I want to make clear that we didn?t mention Mr Megrahi.

?At all times we talked about the [prisoner transfer agreement]. It was obvious we were talking about him. We all knew that was what we were talking about.

?People should not get angry because we were talking about commerce or oil. We signed an oil deal at the same time. The commerce and oil deals were all with the [prisoner transfer agreement].?

His account is confirmed by other sources. Sir Richard Dalton, a former British ambassador to Libya and a board member of the Libyan British Business Council, said: ?Nobody doubted Libya wanted BP and BP was confident its commitment would go through. But the timing of the final authority to spend real money was dependent on politics.?

Bob Monetti of New Jersey, whose son Rick was among the victims of the 1988 bombing, said: ?It?s always been about business.?

A spokesman for Lord Mandelson said he had not changed his position that the release of Megrahi was not linked to trade deals. :wink: :wink:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article6814939.ece

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/World-News/Lockerbie-Bomber-Release-Linked-To-Trade-Deal-With-Britain-Says-Colonel-Gaddafis-Son/Article/200908315366896?lpos=World_News_Carousel_Region_0&lid=ARTICLE_15366896_Lockerbie_Bomber_Release_Linked_To_Trade_Deal_With_Britain%2C_Says_Colonel_Gaddafis_Son

Follow the money...

And I put you above the conspiracy theorists mate. :wink:

While I have no doubt at all that Libya used delaying tactics on the ratification of the BP deal in order to obtain concessions from the UK, there are a few points to be considered;

firstly, the wider context of both the US and UK encouraging the normalisation of relations with Libya thus, for the benefit of the media, being seen to remove a major financial supporter and trainer of terrorism in the past from that arena, while obviously reaping the rewards of a lucrative Libyan market and the potential profits from Libya's natural resources.

This point should also include note of Libya's agreement to dismantle their nuclear weapons programme.

secondly, any concession made at that point was merely for Megrahi not to be excluded (as was planned) from the conditions of the prisoner transfer scheme, and considering the deal with BP was done and dusted 2 years ago, why was Megrahi not released then?

thirdly, no matter your view of devolved politics within the UK, the fact remains that the Labour Party control Westminster and the SNP control Holyrood. If Holyrood was run by Scottish Labour, then I would be the first to shout collusion as Scottish Labour have always been puppets of their masters down in Victoria Street.

There is absolutely no love lost between the two and the clashes between the two are frequent and usually unsolvable.

Where Labour was always seen as the party of the common man North of the border, that has changed hugely in the last 12 years. The difference between Tory and Labour is almost indistinguishable now which leaves few alternatives.

I do believe the BP deal played a big part in Straw not pressing for Megrahi's exclusion from the PTS.

I do not believe it had anything to do with MacAskill's decision.

I still believe it was the right decision (though will again reiterate that how he was received in Libya was a disgrace) and I also believe that should a full public enquiry be allowed, then a lot more will come to the surface. (though have to note that the likelihood of Westminster granting a full public enquiry is as likely as snow in Hell)

[Mister Moobs]

follow the money

The road to truth is long, and lined the entire way with annoying bastards

[eagle]

about oil huh ? like thats a surprise :shock:

[Mister Moobs]

I know. Right!?!

[CiaranM]

never let the facts spoil ur rant ... eh JD !!!!!!!!

The man convicted of the Lockerbie bombing has released a dossier of legal papers which he claims are proof he was wrongly convicted of the worst terrorist attack on British soil.

The documents, published online today by Abdel Basset al-Megrahi, show that serious doubts about the reliability of the key witness at his trial were raised independently by Scotland's official body, which investigates suspected miscarriages of justice.

The dossier demonstrates that the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) sent Megrahi's case back to the court of appeal in 2007, after deciding that the judges who convicted him had made a series of errors about the evidence of a Maltese shopkeeper, Tony Gauci ? the only witness to link the Libyan to the alleged plot.

According to the commission, those mistakes were significant enough to raise substantial doubts about the safety of Megrahi's conviction of killing 270 people in the Lockerbie bombing on 21 December 1988.

The crucial mistake, the SCCRC said, was believing prosecution claims that Megrahi had bought clothes at Gauci's shop on 7 December 1988, allegedly used later in the suitcase bomb. This evidence was "unreasonable", the SCCRC said, and was alone grounds for belief that Megrahi was wrongly convicted.

The commission said that evidence available at the trial, including the weather and the time Christmas lights were switched on near Gauci's shop, suggested that the clothes were actually bought on 23 November 1988 ? when Megrahi was not in Malta.

The 298-page dossier, published on a website specially set up for the purpose, is the convicted bomber's attempt to prove his innocence after his controversial release from Greenock prison on compassionate grounds last month. Megrahi is in the terminal stages of prostate cancer, and Scottish ministers believe he has less than three months to live.

The papers were used for the first two stages of his appeal earlier this year, but Megrahi abandoned the appeal two days before he was freed and before the appeal court could give its judgement on the first grounds for appeal.

When Megrahi confirmed the case was being dropped his lawyers told the appeal court that he believed this would speed up his release, fuelling claims ? later denied by Megrahi ? that a deal was struck to prevent embarrassing evidence about his conviction emerging in court.

In a statement released today by his solicitors, Megrahi said: "I have returned to Tripoli with my unjust conviction still in place. As a result of the abandonment of my appeal I have been deprived of the opportunity to clear my name through the formal appeal process. I have vowed to continue my attempts to clear my name.

"I will do everything in my power to persuade the public, and in particular the Scottish public, of my innocence."

In a reference to the many US relatives and senior figures in the US government who were furious at his release, including the secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, he said he hoped the papers would "assist in the understanding of my case, especially for those who have been most profoundly affected by it".

According to the dossier, the commission believed that the three judges who jailed Megrahi after an unprecedented trial in Holland in January 2001 had unreasonably dismissed a number of contradictions and ambiguities in Gauci's interviews with police and in court.

Megrahi's lawyers said Gauci was interviewed 23 times by Scottish police, and an undisclosed number of times by FBI and CIA investigators. He first appeared to identify Megrahi 27 months after the date of purchase of the clothes, while it took 12 years for the trial to take place. His lawyers are expected to allege next week that Gauci received a $2m reward after Megrahi's conviction.

The SCCRC said that Gauci's interviews and his evidence in court showed that he: was unable to identify the date the clothes were bought, and frequently said it may have been November or December; was confused about the date the Christmas lights went up; repeatedly told police he could not remember the exact time or day.

The commission concluded that the judges reached an unreasonable verdict based on unreliable evidence, Megrahi's appeal papers state. Megrahi's lawyers added that the verdict "consists of defective reasoning or self-misdirection in a number of respects".

His documents also reveal detailed challenges to key aspects of the bomb plot as described by prosecutors. There was no proof that the suitcase was put on board a feeder flight at Luqa airport in Malta which went to Frankfurt airport on 21 December. There was also no evidence to prove that Megrahi had been involved in the plot, and the dossier claims that the judges had unfairly rejected defence evidence at the trial that pointed towards a different culprit: the Iranian-funded Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command.

[beej]

What the **** is this all about???

''Megrahi's lawyers said Gauci was interviewed 23 times by Scottish police, and an undisclosed number of times by FBI and CIA investigators. He first appeared to identify Megrahi 27 months after the date of purchase of the clothes, while it took 12 years for the trial to take place. His lawyers are expected to allege next week that Gauci received a $2m reward after Megrahi's conviction. ''

[Mister Moobs]

never let the facts spoil ur rant ... eh JD !!!!!!!!

The man convicted of the Lockerbie bombing has released a dossier of legal papers which he claims are proof he was wrongly convicted of the worst terrorist attack on British soil.

The documents, published online today by Abdel Basset al-Megrahi, show that serious doubts about the reliability of the key witness at his trial were raised independently by Scotland's official body, which investigates suspected miscarriages of justice.

The dossier demonstrates that the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) sent Megrahi's case back to the court of appeal in 2007, after deciding that the judges who convicted him had made a series of errors about the evidence of a Maltese shopkeeper, Tony Gauci ? the only witness to link the Libyan to the alleged plot.

According to the commission, those mistakes were significant enough to raise substantial doubts about the safety of Megrahi's conviction of killing 270 people in the Lockerbie bombing on 21 December 1988.

The crucial mistake, the SCCRC said, was believing prosecution claims that Megrahi had bought clothes at Gauci's shop on 7 December 1988, allegedly used later in the suitcase bomb. This evidence was "unreasonable", the SCCRC said, and was alone grounds for belief that Megrahi was wrongly convicted.

The commission said that evidence available at the trial, including the weather and the time Christmas lights were switched on near Gauci's shop, suggested that the clothes were actually bought on 23 November 1988 ? when Megrahi was not in Malta.

The 298-page dossier, published on a website specially set up for the purpose, is the convicted bomber's attempt to prove his innocence after his controversial release from Greenock prison on compassionate grounds last month. Megrahi is in the terminal stages of prostate cancer, and Scottish ministers believe he has less than three months to live.

The papers were used for the first two stages of his appeal earlier this year, but Megrahi abandoned the appeal two days before he was freed and before the appeal court could give its judgement on the first grounds for appeal.

When Megrahi confirmed the case was being dropped his lawyers told the appeal court that he believed this would speed up his release, fuelling claims ? later denied by Megrahi ? that a deal was struck to prevent embarrassing evidence about his conviction emerging in court.

In a statement released today by his solicitors, Megrahi said: "I have returned to Tripoli with my unjust conviction still in place. As a result of the abandonment of my appeal I have been deprived of the opportunity to clear my name through the formal appeal process. I have vowed to continue my attempts to clear my name.

"I will do everything in my power to persuade the public, and in particular the Scottish public, of my innocence."

In a reference to the many US relatives and senior figures in the US government who were furious at his release, including the secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, he said he hoped the papers would "assist in the understanding of my case, especially for those who have been most profoundly affected by it".

According to the dossier, the commission believed that the three judges who jailed Megrahi after an unprecedented trial in Holland in January 2001 had unreasonably dismissed a number of contradictions and ambiguities in Gauci's interviews with police and in court.

Megrahi's lawyers said Gauci was interviewed 23 times by Scottish police, and an undisclosed number of times by FBI and CIA investigators. He first appeared to identify Megrahi 27 months after the date of purchase of the clothes, while it took 12 years for the trial to take place. His lawyers are expected to allege next week that Gauci received a $2m reward after Megrahi's conviction.

The SCCRC said that Gauci's interviews and his evidence in court showed that he: was unable to identify the date the clothes were bought, and frequently said it may have been November or December; was confused about the date the Christmas lights went up; repeatedly told police he could not remember the exact time or day.

The commission concluded that the judges reached an unreasonable verdict based on unreliable evidence, Megrahi's appeal papers state. Megrahi's lawyers added that the verdict "consists of defective reasoning or self-misdirection in a number of respects".

His documents also reveal detailed challenges to key aspects of the bomb plot as described by prosecutors. There was no proof that the suitcase was put on board a feeder flight at Luqa airport in Malta which went to Frankfurt airport on 21 December. There was also no evidence to prove that Megrahi had been involved in the plot, and the dossier claims that the judges had unfairly rejected defence evidence at the trial that pointed towards a different culprit: the Iranian-funded Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command.

What rant?

I quote an article from a brit newpaper.

It's their rant. Do you actually read anything before you go off on your ridiculous rants?

[Stramash]

What the f*ck is this all about???

''Megrahi's lawyers said Gauci was interviewed 23 times by Scottish police, and an undisclosed number of times by FBI and CIA investigators. He first appeared to identify Megrahi 27 months after the date of purchase of the clothes, while it took 12 years for the trial to take place. His lawyers are expected to allege next week that Gauci received a $2m reward after Megrahi's conviction. ''

he also identified Megrahi several days after seeing his pic in a magazine or paper as a potential suspect...

[Mister Moobs]

never let the facts spoil ur rant ... eh JD !!!!!!!!

The man convicted of the Lockerbie bombing has released a dossier of legal papers which he claims are proof he was wrongly convicted of the worst terrorist attack on British soil.

The documents, published online today by Abdel Basset al-Megrahi, show that serious doubts about the reliability of the key witness at his trial were raised independently by Scotland's official body, which investigates suspected miscarriages of justice.

The dossier demonstrates that the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) sent Megrahi's case back to the court of appeal in 2007, after deciding that the judges who convicted him had made a series of errors about the evidence of a Maltese shopkeeper, Tony Gauci ? the only witness to link the Libyan to the alleged plot.

According to the commission, those mistakes were significant enough to raise substantial doubts about the safety of Megrahi's conviction of killing 270 people in the Lockerbie bombing on 21 December 1988.

The crucial mistake, the SCCRC said, was believing prosecution claims that Megrahi had bought clothes at Gauci's shop on 7 December 1988, allegedly used later in the suitcase bomb. This evidence was "unreasonable", the SCCRC said, and was alone grounds for belief that Megrahi was wrongly convicted.

The commission said that evidence available at the trial, including the weather and the time Christmas lights were switched on near Gauci's shop, suggested that the clothes were actually bought on 23 November 1988 ? when Megrahi was not in Malta.

The 298-page dossier, published on a website specially set up for the purpose, is the convicted bomber's attempt to prove his innocence after his controversial release from Greenock prison on compassionate grounds last month. Megrahi is in the terminal stages of prostate cancer, and Scottish ministers believe he has less than three months to live.

The papers were used for the first two stages of his appeal earlier this year, but Megrahi abandoned the appeal two days before he was freed and before the appeal court could give its judgement on the first grounds for appeal.

When Megrahi confirmed the case was being dropped his lawyers told the appeal court that he believed this would speed up his release, fuelling claims ? later denied by Megrahi ? that a deal was struck to prevent embarrassing evidence about his conviction emerging in court.

In a statement released today by his solicitors, Megrahi said: "I have returned to Tripoli with my unjust conviction still in place. As a result of the abandonment of my appeal I have been deprived of the opportunity to clear my name through the formal appeal process. I have vowed to continue my attempts to clear my name.

"I will do everything in my power to persuade the public, and in particular the Scottish public, of my innocence."

In a reference to the many US relatives and senior figures in the US government who were furious at his release, including the secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, he said he hoped the papers would "assist in the understanding of my case, especially for those who have been most profoundly affected by it".

According to the dossier, the commission believed that the three judges who jailed Megrahi after an unprecedented trial in Holland in January 2001 had unreasonably dismissed a number of contradictions and ambiguities in Gauci's interviews with police and in court.

Megrahi's lawyers said Gauci was interviewed 23 times by Scottish police, and an undisclosed number of times by FBI and CIA investigators. He first appeared to identify Megrahi 27 months after the date of purchase of the clothes, while it took 12 years for the trial to take place. His lawyers are expected to allege next week that Gauci received a $2m reward after Megrahi's conviction.

The SCCRC said that Gauci's interviews and his evidence in court showed that he: was unable to identify the date the clothes were bought, and frequently said it may have been November or December; was confused about the date the Christmas lights went up; repeatedly told police he could not remember the exact time or day.

The commission concluded that the judges reached an unreasonable verdict based on unreliable evidence, Megrahi's appeal papers state. Megrahi's lawyers added that the verdict "consists of defective reasoning or self-misdirection in a number of respects".

His documents also reveal detailed challenges to key aspects of the bomb plot as described by prosecutors. There was no proof that the suitcase was put on board a feeder flight at Luqa airport in Malta which went to Frankfurt airport on 21 December. There was also no evidence to prove that Megrahi had been involved in the plot, and the dossier claims that the judges had unfairly rejected defence evidence at the trial that pointed towards a different culprit: the Iranian-funded Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command.

If he was wrongly convicted, it was the brilliance and cowardice of Europe that did it.

Look inward, oh progressive!