Thursday, August 20, 2009

The sum of all conspiracies

Ramadan 2005, in an era when Highlander was more prolific:

" paying compensation to the victims is insignificant to get out of international isolation, if that is the price even if he is innocent because stagnancy on the issue dragged on too long. As the old adage says "when you can't beat them .join them !". If further evidence prove he is innocent, then he should be compensated, Libyans should be compensated, the compensation money we paid should be returned and the world will owes us a collective apology. If he is not innocent ..well he is in prison anyway and compensations to victims have been settled. All is legal. [sic]"

Now the so called Lockerbie bomber is back home. If I had any doubts before, they are evaporating fast.. the guy is most probably innocent...or is he not?

I mean he was in the process of appealing and they let him go on condition he drops the appeal, the 'compassionate grounds' thingy while commendable seems like an excellent smokescreen, same as Mrs Clinton's attempts to block his release a few days ago It's just designed to throw dust in our eyes, and hasten the process of dropping the appeal because he is dying and wants to go home.

These points keep running in circles in my head:

(1) Libya and Megrahi are innocent of this atrocity.
(2) The appeal would have turned up embarrassing evidence proving Libya's innocence.

"Secret documents before the Appeal Court - which even the defence has not seen - might have provided new information.
They will now remain undisclosed, after the foreign secretary issued a Public Information Immunity certificate stating that to publish them would be to the detriment of UK national security." [ref].

{3) Libya has already paid out the compensations..
(4) Megrahi's illness was a gift allowing bargaining to come into place for his transfer or release whichever is more suitable, and allows to save taxpayers' money.
(5) Hillary's attempted blocking was the icing over the cake - adds spice to the cooking so that we really believe that all is fair and just and governments are outraged :P
{6) Truth has a way of turning up but now we have lost the legal grounds for compensation for the years of sanctions and suffering since 1992.

But it's not that simple, it is intertwined in a number of issues which have put the Libyans in this unenviable situation... I am not interested in elaborating further as I'm aware of our own mistakes and applaud those smart enough to make use of every 'loophole'.
What I hate the most are these kind of statements:

"Crowley told reporters that the administration will closely watch how al-Megrahi is received in Libya and that his reception may affect U.S.-Libyan relations." [ref].

Oh please not another cycle.. it's getting lame who else now wants money ?

On an another note since last month we are no longer swine flu free and for those of you who asked about my opinion on Mr Obama's June Cairo speech (though I never had any hopes as you know ) I was still prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt - but he lost me forever when he stated:

's strong bonds with Israel are well known. This bond is unbreakable. It is based upon cultural and historical ties, and the recognition that the aspiration for a Jewish homeland is rooted in a tragic history that cannot be denied."

The day the US is able to free itself from its self imposed bondage with Israel is still a long way.

If you read so far you know that I'm back folks..oh and Ramadan Mabrouk :)


programmer craig said...

Wow! I clicked the link at the top and saw my comment first thing! That was 4 years ago! Scary :)

Well, since you linked back to that old post of yours, I'll use that for my reply here:

People just don't shoot themselves in the eye if they are already in a tight spot. It is the same thing with the Hariri assassination...why would the Syrians be so stupid ?

You know that I don't agree with you on that. I didn't then and I don't know. If anything, the last 4 years provide more proof than ever that extremists actually ARE that stupid, and particularly in the middle east. Escalation is the only thing they understand, and they invariably seem to think that if they can escalate enough that their enemies will back down rather than retaliating. It's the strategy of the weak when they are trying to defeat the strong, and it sometimes works. But, it only works when it's done by proxy. This man may or may not be innocent as you claim. He was convicted, but regardless of that lets say for the sake of argument he didn't do it. Then who did? You have to answer that question before you can dismiss Libya's involvement, my dear :)

(5) Hillary's attempted blocking was the icing over the cake - adds spice to the cooking so that we really believe that all is fair and just and governments are outraged :P

I think you are very much mistaken if you believe it is only American politicians who are outraged by this. The man was convicted of mass murdering Americans. Why does he deserve "compassion"? If he's guilty, he deserves to die in prison. In fact, he deserved to be executed for that crime. If he's not guilty and his conviction was in error, it's up to him to prove that on appeal. Since he's already been convicted, there is no "innocent until proven guilty" - he has been proven guilty.

"Crowley told reporters that the administration will closely watch how al-Megrahi is received in Libya and that his reception may affect U.S.-Libyan relations."

I disagree with that. It should not affect US-Libya relations. It should affect US-UK relations. Libya is not responsible for the reprehensible behavior of the United Kingdom.

I mean he was in the process of appealing and they let him go on condition he drops the appeal...

Supposedly, he only has a few months to live. He would have been dead before his appeal ever reached the court. If he's not dead in a few months, then the UK will have a lot of explaining to do.

That's my take on it all, as an American :)

programmer craig said...

PS-From now until the end of time, nobody who commits acts of terrorism should ever be tried anywhere but the United States. The British bastards should never have been in a position where they could score points with Libya, at the expense of America. It's obvious after several high profile release (against US objections) from European prisons of people who murdered Americans that our European allies cannot be trusted to be just.

Mitchell said...

Before Iraq invaded Kuwait, the main theory about the Lockerbie bombing was that it was a retaliation by Iran for the shooting down of Iran Air Flight 655 five months before, carried out by Ahmed Jibril's wing of the PFLP, based in Syria. But after Iraq invaded Kuwait, the US wanted Syria in the coalition, and suddenly Libyan suspects were found instead.

programmer craig said...

the main theory about the Lockerbie bombing was that it was a retaliation by Iran for the shooting down of Iran Air Flight 655 five months before...

Actually, there was a claim made by one of many terrorist groups that took credit for the bombing that they had conducted it for that reason. That doesn't constitute a "theory". I have no idea why so many non-Americans embrace these conspiracy theories so enthusiastically, but I wish y'all would just be quite. We're pretty outraged by the whole thing over here, and you aren't helping.

programmer craig said...


The release of the Lockerbie bomber was tied to trade deals between Libya and the UK, reports quote the son of Libyan leader Colonel Gaddafi saying.

Seif al-Islam told Libyan TV the case was raised during talks over oil and gas, AFP news reported. The UK Foreign Office has strongly denied the claims.

I guess this should come as no surprise to anyone, right? It's seemed pretty obvious for at least a couple years now that the UK was floating the possibility of transferring this guy to Libya in exchange for "concessions". Didn't Tony Blair negotiate a treaty between Libya and the UK for the express purpose of doing just that? It seems to me that the man's "terminal" illness just forced them to act sooner than they had intended to.

For shame, Britain. For shame. One small step for terrorism, one giant brainfart for mankind.

Mitchell said...

P.C., well, conspiracy theories come in many flavors, and with varying proximity to reality. My general impression is that in dealing with state-sponsored terrorism, at least since the 1980s, the US government has often officially denied the element of state sponsorship, and/or placed the blame on other parties, and that a few "fixers" from intelligence and law enforcement have done the necessary dirty work, when more than a press conference was required. And furthermore, that this was not done out of arbitrary malevolence, but for straightforward political and strategic reasons.

In the Lockerbie case, it is a fact that western public speculation centered on Iran, Syria, and the PFLP, until the two Libyans were indicted in late 1991. It is also a fact that this change was diplomatically convenient for the post-1991 US-Arab-Israeli peace process. Now, just because an outcome is politically convenient for someone doesn't mean that they personally engineered that outcome. But there are numerous specific problems with the case against Megrahi, consistent with the theory that he's just a scapegoat.

In briefly surveying the websites of Lockerbie skeptics, I find two things missing. One is any substantial information about Megrahi's life and career before he was accused (though I assume Libyan and Arabic media have said more about the man). The other is any *detailed* theory of how and why he was framed. Indeed, his supporters don't say he was framed, only that he was wrongly convicted. And in principle a wrongful conviction could occur without evidence being planted - for example, through the victory in court of weak arguments. However, that business about finding a microchip wrapped in torn cloth in the Scottish forest, which provided the link both to a non-PFLP bomb-timer and to the clothing store near the Libyan bureau in Malta - that has always sounded like outright fabrication of evidence, produced by a professional.

But to return to what's missing from this story: my point is that Megrahi is not like Ahmed Bouchiki, the Moroccan waiter who was killed by Israeli agents in Norway in the mistaken belief that he was a Palestinian terrorist. Bouchiki was just an unfortunate civilian caught on the secret battlefield. Megrahi, however, was a man of action, a senior intelligence agent, and it would be interesting to hear at least some speculation about how and why he and Fhimah specifically became the targets. (If any of the Libyan or Arab readers of this blog can direct me to such speculation, I'd love to see it.) It could just be that a Libyan officer in Malta was exposed enough for some intelligence on his daily activities to exist, and also socially and geographically situated in a way that would sound plausible in court.

As for the dealings that may surround the more recent events (the cancellation of his appeal, his release in time for the 40th anniversary of the revolution), I have no special theories at all.

Maya M said...

Highlander, I'm glad that you're back!
About the US reactions to Mr. Megrahi's welcome in Libya - I do not quite understand you. There were similar reactions in Libya when the Bulgarian medics were welcomed and immediately pardoned, weren't there? It is only logical and does not necessarily indicate that somebody "wants more money".
The end of your post made me pity Mr. Obama, something I didn't expect ever to happen. Poor thing, drawing fire from all sides! But this happens fairly often when someone tries too hard to please everybody. I know two Bulgarian politicians who lost their chance to be elected by such behaviour. I hope the same fate awaits Pres. Obama in 4 years.

Highlander said...

Thanks for the comment Craig, I understand your anger at the Brits.

Mitchell, thank you as usual for well thought out responses :)I agree with a many of your opinions.

Maya, you brought to my minds the seed for my new post so grateful for that. You will find my answer there and I agree that 'it does not mean someone wants more money' but in the Libya case that's what seems to happen always :P but that was not my point this time.

As for Obama, as I said I no longer care what a US president do - they are all the same as long as they continue to have an unbalanced approach to Palestine.