4 Comments »

1. The idea that the PM’s meeting with the Lockerbie victims’ relatives was "private" is quite preposterous.

   The meeting came about only because fears were raised by the relatives in March 2004 that the government would not use its newly-forged relationship with Libya to seek the truth behind the Lockerbie bombing. The link <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3584717.stm">http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3584717.stm</a&gt; reports a spokeswoman for UK Families Flight 103 as saying: "We find it difficult to believe that neither the UK Government nor the Crown Office has any further questions to ask in Libya that could shed light upon what happened. Megrahi was convicted of ‘conspiracy’ to murder. Who are the co-conspirators? What was the motivation behind the bombing? Who financed this act of terrorism? Who was ultimately responsible? How was it allowed to happen?"

   In Tony Blair’s "private" meeting with the relatives yesterday, did he address any of these very pertinent questions? Highly unlikely, I would think: even if the questions were actually posed I guess, the lawyer he is, the PM would have retorted:

   a. Megrahi was convicted on 31 January 2001 solely of ‘murder’ (not conspiracy to murder nor contravening the aviation security acts, since these charges were inexplicably dropped by the Scottish Prosecutor in the final days of the trial at Kamp Zeist in the Netherlands);

   b. There were therefore no co-conspirators; and,

   c. Megrahi’s motives and sources of finance – in the absence of an admission of guilt – remain unknown (and unknowable!).

   So can Tony Blair keep the lid on the quest for the truth about the Lockerbie bombing? Probably, but he shouldn’t be allowed to!

   We are asked to believe that Libya has accepted full responsibility but in fact all it has admitted to is a "responsibility for the actions of its officials" (see and hear the audio clips at 0632hrs, 0732hrs and 0832hrs on <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/today/listenagain/ztuesday_20040224.shtml">http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/today/listenagain/ztuesday_20040224.shtml</a&gt; ).

   I have never believed that Libya was responsible for the sabotage of flight Pan Am 103. There is considerable evidence to inculpate the apartheid regime of P W Botha – see <a href="http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/5260/haseldine.html">http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/5260/haseldine.html</a&gt;

   But I reckon that any further prosecution has to await the outcome of Megrahi’s application to the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission which could conceivably overturn his conviction and thus open the way for the real conspirators to be brought to trial.

   Comment by Patrick Haseldine — 25 May 2004 on 11:25 pm | Link

2. Yesterday’s decision by Scotland’s high court of justiciary to allow Megrahi to appeal against the severity of his 27-year sentence – while at the same time the Crown Office appeals against the leniency of the sentence – has all the appearance of Fawlty Towers/Monty Python about it. The search for the truth about the Lockerbie bombing appears not to be advanced one iota by these legal shenanigans.

   The Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission still has the power to declare Megrahi’s conviction to be a "miscarriage of justice", thereby opening up the prospect of bringing the real culprits to trial. Bring it on, SCCRC, bring it on……

   Comment by Patrick Haseldine — 1 Jun 2004 on 10:08 pm | Link

3. Is it likely to happen?

   Now its a bit later in the day, someone has been blamed and brought to "justice", the media doesn’t seem to me to be overly interested in it, and the general public will always assume that it was Libya and "er, that bloke what got done fer it".

   Read your website on Botha – very interesting, how much actual hard evidence is there?

   Comment by lodjer — 2 Jun 2004 on 9:20 am | Link

4. If by ‘actual hard evidence’ you mean the crucial evidence deployed by the prosecution in its case against Libya viz a fragment of printed circuit board:

   allegedly found on the forest floor 18 months after the Lockerbie bombing;

   allegedly part of a Swiss-made MEBO timer;

   identified by an alleged FBI ‘scientist’ (Thomas Thurman);

   and, the failure to call Mr Thurman to testify about the PCB fragment at the trial,

   then I am the first to admit the actual hard evidence against the apartheid regime for the sabotage of Pan Am 103 is yet to be uncovered.

   Comment by Patrick Haseldine — 2 Jun 2004 on 11:15 am | Link

---

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Post a public comment

Name (required)
E-mail (required)
(You must give an email address, but it will not be displayed to the public.)
Website
(You may give your website, and it will be displayed to the public.)

Comments:

This is not a way of contacting the Prime Minister. If you would like to contact the Prime Minister, go to the 10 Downing Street official site.

Privacy note: Shortly after posting, your name and comment will be displayed on the site. This means that people searching for your name on the Internet will be able to find and read your comment.