Another Shameful Propaganda Piece

3 September 2010

Here I'd like to comment on a recent editorial (unattributed) in the Post and Courier (Charleston, SC) called "Post-Lockerbie Shame." Below are some quotes from it and my comments/corrections.

The "compassionate release" of a convicted PanAm bomber in 2009 was an affront to justice...
No quotation marks are needed here - compassion is the actual basis of the law justifying Megrahi's release. That process and decision in implementing that law are complex and murky and open to criticism. But as usual for America's slavish media units, this block of anonymous text makes no mention whatsoever of the mountain of evidence all but proving Megrahi was framed and wrongly convicted in the first place.

This is irresponsible journalism, treating this as a one-sided issue when it just is not. There have been doubts (at the least) expressed so widely by informed parties that one wearies of repeating them. Put in short form, there are two relevant rulings by Scottish judicial bodies - the 2001 conviction, and the 2007 ruling by the Scottish Criminal Case Review Commission. The conviction has been ruled, by the SCCRC review, to be a "possible miscarriage of justice." The SCCRC decision, which has not been so challenged, had authorized a second appeal which was never heard, lost in the shuffle of cancer and release.

The Post's "Post-Lockerbie Shame" cites the challenged conviction and ignores the unchallenged SCCRC ruling and the avoided appeal it unleashed. That's slanted reporting and gives a false impression of the legal standing of Megrahi's guilt. Officially in place, but crumbling.

Libya has paid billions in reparations to victims' families in acknowledgement of its role in the bombing, but Col. Gadhafi has never expressed the slightest remorse.
Is this sloppy journalism or the willfully deceptive kind? There is no "acknowledgment" in the 2003 letter to the UN, the settlement money, or anywhere, of Libya's involvement in the bombing. They are, and insist they are, uninvolved. Hence no remorse. Get it? The money and acknowledged word play were to end the unfair sanctions crippling their nation. "Acknowledged ... but no remorse." That's just cheap, folks.

According to a Scottish doctor paid by Libya, he had only months to live. [... MacAskill later] released al-Megrahi, citing the doctor's opinion.
Dr. Kay was paid by Libya? Or is the unnamed writer still confused by chatterbox Sikora's attempts at insinuating himself into the situation? Please double-check yourselves there. It is pretty confusing.

The freed terrorist is now living the good life in Tripoli, and BP is drilling in waters off the Libyan coast.
And the real bombers of Pan Am 103 are aging gracefully in their own corners of this sick world, never serving a day in jail for this murder of 270 people after the CIA decided to blame Libya.

Also, suffering from cancer but not dead yet, in a nice house, with family and supporters, equals the good life? Relative to jail, obviously so. But what evidence can anyone show that his conviction for this heinous crime was reasonable or sustainable? Why should we actually be mad that a man is dying slower and in more comfort than he might otherwise be?

The Senate rightly wants to know ...
No they don't.

The comment thread for this article has been closed.
Before any comments were even posted? Were they afraid I was coming?

2 comments:

ADmin said...

By advancing a solid framework you are truly taking the anxiety away for the reason uk-essay.net that you realize what you are doing when sit to compose the paper.

Kelly Rous said...

Gracias por un gran sitio. Ella encontró un montón de cosas interesantes. Voy a recomendar a mis amigos. Y vendré a visitarte.