DWCAce 19 Posted August 14, 2009 Turns out this ...uh, 'man' may be freed because he has cancer..... Ok, time to go throw up. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/8201188.stm Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ezlead 42 Posted August 14, 2009 IMHO: He should not be released until all questions about what happened are answered. If he dies in jail "So be it." Send him home to Libya a dead murderer,rather than a dying hero. MY Opinion Only!!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+Dave 2,321 Posted August 14, 2009 Big deal he has cancer, he killed 270 innocent people. Let him die. Then go to hell. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FastCargo 412 Posted August 14, 2009 Screw him. Let him rot. FC Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
herman01 0 Posted August 14, 2009 Agreed. I'm also not happy with the relaxed relations with Kadafi also. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gr.Viper 131 Posted August 14, 2009 Bgi deal he has cancer, he killed 270 innocent people. Let him die. Then go to hell. Maybe they could give him another 269 terminal diseases and make bets on which on will get him first? Reality-show style. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+Dave 2,321 Posted August 14, 2009 Agreed. I'm also not happy with the relaxed relations with Kadafi also. You and me both, a leopard never changes its spots. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fallenphoenix1986 603 Posted August 14, 2009 I live about 5 miles from where they keep that piece of s*** and I'm not in the least bit suprised he's getting out, nor as I imagine most Brits on here... kinda like the 269 other disease idea, hanging would be too good for him, unfortunatly thats no longer an option either... Craig Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
eraser_tr 29 Posted August 14, 2009 I live about 5 miles from where they keep that piece of s***and I'm not in the least bit suprised he's getting out, nor as I imagine most Brits on here... Drive to get some milk from the store when he gets out, "accidentally" lose control of the car, skid and hit him? Well that's too good for him too. Why not blow him up, then find all the pieces and blow those up 269 more times? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ruggbutt 45 Posted August 14, 2009 Last time I heard, a life sentence was served up until the day you die................... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mike463 0 Posted August 14, 2009 I knew one of the victims, Sgt Michael Stinnett, U.S. Army. He worked with my roommate at Ramstein. Yours, Mike http://www.victimsofpanamflight103.org/victims Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MaverickMike 10 Posted August 14, 2009 Another typical example of why the british justice system is an absoloute joke. Release on compassionate grounds!? What about the compassion for the families and friends of the victims. One word which sums this whole episode up is SHOCKING! Mike Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
eraser_tr 29 Posted August 14, 2009 (edited) So why, exactly can they not keep him in prison, but simply treat his cancer? When he gets treated, he's under guard by guys with big guns and handcuff him to the bed (ooh kinky ) Edited August 14, 2009 by eraser_tr Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GwynO 16 Posted August 14, 2009 Don't stress too much, given the vast amount of holes in the case against him and the fact that Gadaffi himself turned this guy out of the country in the end, plus the fact that Islamic bombers usually fight over each other to claim responsibility in order to ensure "martyrdom" while this guy has all the while maintained he is a patsy makes me wonder if this could ever have been the end of the story. No doubt the real perpetraitors are either known personally by Gadaffi or at the least are traceable through his offices, but the idea that Lybia would ever reveal the paper chase that leads to one of their very own trusted assasins is ludicrous in the extreme, in this case of Lybian exported personage, I say caveat emptor. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Emp_Palpatine 501 Posted August 19, 2009 Just a few thought: That guy is certainly not an angel... And Libya acceptance of the responsability is suspect too. But that Lockerbie bombing is indeed very obscure. From various things seen and read "over there", and without saying too much, S*ria and I*an aren't white in this massacre. They aren't white at all... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+Dave 2,321 Posted August 20, 2009 And they release him http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32487856/ns/world_news-terrorism Un f***ing believable Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MaverickMike 10 Posted August 20, 2009 Un f***ing believable That just about sums it up. As I said earlier the justice system in the UK is totally F*cked up. As an example I watched a program following police around last night and they arrested a young man (20 years old) for the 27th time for stealing vehicles and various other motor offences. He was released again without charge, only to go an steal another car but this time he mowed down a mother and child in the street while attempting to get away. It didnt say how long he was sent away for however Mike Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MigBuster 2,879 Posted August 20, 2009 We'd let Hitler out on compasionate leave these days - well when I say we I mean the human rights/terrorist sympathisers / nutcases that the government seems to listen too. Why dont they just take him to the cemetery so he can piss over the graves!! Bottom line if he is guilty of murdering 200+ people - human rights DO NOT apply period!! Luckily this guy will still die of a pretty horrible prolonged death if he actually has cancer - so thats one positive to take. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Emp_Palpatine 501 Posted August 20, 2009 (edited) Most certainly part of a wider deal... regarding oil, or the Bulgarian nurses, or controlling the countless african migrants using libyan coast as a departure base. That's the usual Qaddafi's method. You can be sure that whenever he holds you by the balls, he'll note hesitate to crush them unless you give him what he wants. And sadly, he has a lot of assets to hold us by the balls. Edited August 20, 2009 by Emp_Palpatine Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SayethWhaaaa 245 Posted August 20, 2009 Don't stress too much, given the vast amount of holes in the case against him and the fact that Gadaffi himself turned this guy out of the country in the end, plus the fact that Islamic bombers usually fight over each other to claim responsibility in order to ensure "martyrdom" while this guy has all the while maintained he is a patsy makes me wonder if this could ever have been the end of the story. No doubt the real perpetraitors are either known personally by Gadaffi or at the least are traceable through his offices, but the idea that Lybia would ever reveal the paper chase that leads to one of their very own trusted assasins is ludicrous in the extreme, in this case of Lybian exported personage, I say caveat emptor. One of the things I found interesting about reading this particular story here (and through the Beeb and US media outlets) has been the differences in opinion between the Scots/British and those in the US. Apparently there's quite a bit of skepticism in Scotland (and I guess the UK too) about the guilt of Abdel Baset al-Megrahi, there's a strong belief that there was a lot left unsaid and that, yeah, as G^^ said, that he could very well have been a patsy, diverting attention away from the real bombers. And then in the US, the overwhelming opinion is of, essentially, wanting to see him dead, convinced that he is indeed the agent responsible for the act. No question. ...I mean, either way, the dude could very possibly be dead in 3 months from prostate cancer. That in itself isn't going to be a fun way to go, so what does it really matter if he's released now? He's a dead man walking. It's not like he'll cruising back in a yacht doing blow off the backs of bikini clad women. He'll be lucky to get out of bed or go to the toilet without help. One thing though, I notice in the article it says he's served 8 years of a life sentence. I thought he'd been detained since 1990/1? I was 9 at the time, so I don't remember much about the case. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
+Dave 2,321 Posted August 20, 2009 ...I mean, either way, the dude could very possibly be dead in 3 months from prostate cancer. That in itself isn't going to be a fun way to go, so what does it really matter if he's released now? He's a dead man walking. It's not like he'll cruising back in a yacht doing blow off the backs of bikini clad women. He'll be lucky to get out of bed or go to the toilet without help. That is his problem. He will get be around family, friends etc and even be treated like a hero. What about his victims? They didn't get that chance. One roof, one man, one rifle would almost be too good for him. Falling 27,000 ft to his death would be a better end for him. Also he was on the run for many years. Patsy? My ass. If he was innocent, why run? This is a win for state sponsored terrorism. There is no compassion for terrorist, hunt them down and kill them all. No remorse. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MaverickMike 10 Posted August 20, 2009 There is no compassion for terrorist, hunt them down and kill them all. No remorse. Exactly right. You can guarantee that if the roles where reversed, the terrorists would'nt show any compassion towards a normal person. This guy should rot in a solitary cell until the day he dies. Then he has hell to look forward to. Mike Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fallenphoenix1986 603 Posted August 20, 2009 Like I said earlier I'm not even slightly suprised, and the whole things a joke lets face it he wouldn't have been the first convict to die in prison. To hell with his rights. Craig Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Emp_Palpatine 501 Posted August 20, 2009 One of the things I found interesting about reading this particular story here (and through the Beeb and US media outlets) has been the differences in opinion between the Scots/British and those in the US. Apparently there's quite a bit of skepticism in Scotland (and I guess the UK too) about the guilt of Abdel Baset al-Megrahi, there's a strong belief that there was a lot left unsaid and that, yeah, as G^^ said, that he could very well have been a patsy, diverting attention away from the real bombers. As I stated before, two other entities aren't innocent in this case. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
