Yesterday a unique article appeared at a news site I’m unfamiliar with – The Daily Beast – with the story of Brian Flynn’s educated rage that “the Lockerbie bomber” was set free by a corrupt Scottish system and then "recovered." Mr. Flynn’s brother, John Patrick, was killed on PA103. I’ve observed a moment’s silence to reflect on that, and realizing it’s futile to even try and grasp the loss and moving on, I’d like to address to Mr. Flynn directly.
Mr. Flynn, you mention your early work helping your mother with research, and that she "served on both presidential commissions that investigated the causes of the bombing and improved airline security." And with your help, she “lobbied Congress to enact the Iran Libya Sanctions Act, which ultimately put enough pressure on Libya to hand over the indicted Libyan agents...” I can admire this channeling of grief into action, and I’m sure you all did so in good faith and with the best intentions, based on what you knew, to ensure John did not die in vain.
As you may know, the sanctions placed on Libya did hurt and sent a message – some sources say 20,000 or more died from these, but I’m sure it was more than 270 anyway. You might realize that the original American demand – a trial in the US – was never met and could never be. It was only reluctantly that Washington agreed to the only trial that could happen – a compromise one, in a third country, under Scots law.
What was your position during that debate? Did you side with those trying for any trial that could work, or with those demanding full Libyan compliance even at the cost of no trial? The sanctions were not lifted until after the surrender of the suspects, after nearly a decade in place. Even some official sources acknowledge the US government did not actually desire a trial at all - just a reason for sanctions against Libya.
“Eventually, Abdel Baset al Megrahi was convicted and sentenced to life in prison. And although he would be the only man to pay for the atrocity, we felt in a small way that some justice had been served. [...] When Megrahi was released ... this blatant act of betrayal robbed us of that one shred of justice.”I can understand why it’s upsetting if one believes in Megrahi’s guilt, or even just in the integrity of court decisions, to have a convicted murderer go free. But the Scottish system does that, irrespective of guilt. And I really am sorry to have to say this, but I believe you were badly misled on the guilt part.
I gather you desire to have no doubts about this at all, and that is your right. But you say you’ve done the research, while I and many, many others remain less than convinced, even after some study. Maybe we’re just not looking deep enough? What do you think accounts for the difference?
“Like many of our Irish ancestors,” you point out, “we Flynns like a fight.” I see you have stepped into the ring again with some pretty bold words. You even took the time to address a critical comment beneath your article. As your compatriot Bunntamas points out elsewhere (comments), you're highly evolved in the facts domain, studying in-depth for decades, whereas I've just been skimming fringe info for a year. So you should easily wipe the floor with me and score a victory for truth and against the “conspiracy theorists.” Or you could take some cop-out reason to turn down the offer - something about “waste of time” is standard.
We could debate here via comments, at the anti-Conspiracy Theory JREF forum (forums.randi,org) or wherever else you feel more comfortable, like e-mails. I would like to publish the results of course as I don't want to be accused of hushing up any loss I may suffer. Whether you agree or not, I’ll start off in the comments, springing off of points made in your article and one detailed response. Feel free to pick any points to respond to.
Thanks for any consideration
- Adam Larson
aka Caustic Logic
to whom you owe nothing
but shouldn't ignore anyway
(commenting tips in sidebar - if you show an interest I'll turn off comment moderation to speed it up.)