Thursday 20th August 2009

I’m not one who usually says things like this, but bear with me. The following seems to me to be almost close to being a horribly “Daily Mail” sort of thing. I dunno why but it just seems to me to be that sort of thing. I think it’s the tone of righteous indignation that sits with publications like that, but in this case (and I dunno if the Mail is actually saying what I’m about to), I really can’t understand why this has been allowed to happen.

I wasn’t old enough when the original event happened for it to be a big part of my awareness, and I’ve not really read much about it since. I don’t know enough to profess a proper opinion, but from what little I’ve read, I think it’s madness. Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi, the Lockerbie bomber. Being freed from prison on compassionate grounds.

This is where it gets all Daily Mail, and for that I apologise.

Compassionate grounds? This is a guy who has been found guilty of killing 270 people. Surely that action means that he is completely undeserving of compassion? To really go tabloid, where was his compassion when he killed those people? This just seems wrong.

It’s a crazy world.

Posted at 6:13 pm | Posted In: Rant Tagged:



Friday 21st August 2009, 1:19 am

“He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you.” – Nietzsche

“An eye for an eye will make the whole world blind.” – Gandhi

There’s a fine line between justice and vengeance, and having compassion for even the most wretched people is what should make us better than them.


Friday 21st August 2009, 9:21 am

Yes, Andy. Yes. Although I can see that if I were a relative or friend of someone killed, I would be struggling to fully accept that.


Saturday 22nd August 2009, 1:57 pm

It’s difficult. It’s very difficult. But the families of 270 people have already suffered for this, and 270 people arent’ coming back. I think it’s very difficult to comment on what should have or could have been done, but I think it’s absolutely incredible that after such a terrible atrocity, and in the face of the public baying for his blood, the people responsible for making that decision were compassionate. I can’t help but be glad that the sort of person that makes that kind of decision is in power, however hard it is to comprehend how the decision was made.


Thursday 27th August 2009, 11:17 pm

“I can’t help but be glad that the sort of person that makes that kind of decision is in power, however hard it is to comprehend how the decision was made.”

Something that occurred to me after I wrote this entry, is that politically this was possibly a really fucking stupid decision. It’s an emotive topic and there were lots of reasons for MacAskill not to free him, as it’d be the more palatable option for the public at large. For whatever reason he thought it best to release him despite the possibility of backlash. I dunno if there’s some ulterior motive, I’d like to think it was a politician doing what they thought was right, rather than what they thought was more PR-friendly. That has to be applauded, even if I’m still unsure about whether it was the right decision or not.


Sunday 8th November 2009, 3:24 am

Having read a bit more about what happened, I think I understand this more now. It seems likely that al-Megrahi didn’t do it, and that convicting him was a massive misjustice. By releasing him, it avoids an appeal which could be very embarrassing, end up with him being aquitted and with no-one to blame, possibly re-opening the case, which could be politically undesirable.

Not noble at all, then…

Write a comment: