The justice minister for Scotland is Kenny McAskill.
He consulted with the victims families and the governments of UK, Libya, USA and Scotland before making his decision.
Your electioneering senators said nothing then or anything until their elections came up.; then they started to make demands. Demands on a sovereign country to hold an enquiry on their soil; a conceit on their part.
The duplicity by the USA and UK was exposed, the incompetence of the CIA too. Morally bankrupt, the lot.
It was you who brought up the words of the former justice minister. An example of an individual with a vested interest. Typical of the sort of key witness USA provides; at least you are consistant. USA nearly supported the Nazi's. It was a loan, not friendship.
You again seek to divert the discussion by referring to the two world wars, which USA joined late ( pushed into the second by the Japanese). It shows either a weak argument ; weakness of mind or both, on your part.
I'm talking about the 1996 sanctions and you are quite incorrect about them only being relaxed. Again you are factually incorrect about Karol Sikora, this was one of 3 doctors appointed by Libya; the release of the prisoner was not based on Sikoras findings although they agreed with Frasiers diagnosis.
The release of the prisoner was a decision made by McAskill. It was within the legislation of compassionate release in accordance with our laws and customs. Of that there is no doubt.
I don't see what the Lockerbie had to do with Gadaffi.
I believe London/CIA/Bush/Blair have some explaining to do. They won't though; they have shown this by blocking the release of communications with the Scottish government. The CIA had eventually to disclose what they were suppressing and they were shown to be mad or bad.
Shame on them!
So you. Stop wasting my time with your opinions. You a fascinated by one man and are missing the bigger picture.
@irres Oh, and one more thing: if we are "fair weather friends" then you have no friends at all. Who has been a better friend to the UK than the US? Three bailouts in three massive wars (WW1, 2, and Cold, since I know you have forgotten.)
I once played "connect 4" with a psychopath (nice chap). The problem with psychopaths, put simply, is they can't tell right from wrong. They are often: charismatic; highly manipulative and egocentric; but appear to think of the world only from their point of view. So if they kill you by accident or design it doesn't matter.
Apart from the connect 4 bit; I think this pretty much describes the Bush government, in particulary Cheney.
@irresistablejewel Sanctions were already in place in Iran since 1979, so that's not relevant. In terms of Libya, sanctions were placed on his dictatorship around 1986 with the Berlin disco bombings, along with air strikes against him.
The sanctions were NOT removed. Perhaps eased a little, but sanctions remained on Libya until at least 2003. Megrahi was just a sacrificial lamb then?
Funny that you spend far more time disputing the Justice Minister's credibility than Kaddafi's...
"Lockerbie Outrage Ignores Evidence Against CIA" echoes some of the damning findings of "Dispatches: The Lockerbie Trial"
Professor Robert Black QC explains matters precisely in
"Lockerbie bomber drops appeal" He is careful not to pre-empt McAskill decision; he is from Lockerbie, but is pleased the prisoner is closer to release and I share his opinion. UK and USA governments appear embarrased about something; they have their man and can block progress.
@irresistablejewel How could they have "blocked progress" on the release? He was going to be let go on those ridiculous "compassionate grounds" no matter what.. This is my problem with this whole thing. The bastard lives on for almost TWO YEARS now with "terminal cancer" and all kinds of regret by the "doctors" that gave the "diagnosis."
It looks like Scotting dick-waving to me - at London and, to a lesser extent, at the USA.
"Look at us! Look how devolved we are!" - Salmond et al.
If a piece of UK legislation seeks to re-write or undermine Scottish law, slap an injunction on it. That stops progress; then dispute the validity of said legislation. The Scots could also disrupt matters by submitting numerous amendments; postponements and slow the process to a stop; so the UK gave up on that.
Dr Frazier has not expressed regret, nor would he be expected to. You must stop making these things up.
Pressure grows in Scotland for a re-trial when judges force the CIA and prosecution to disclose information that they with held in the original trial. That and a particularly damning documentry that blew holes in the prosecutions case.
Retrial ordered, appeal granted.
Prisoner diagnosed terminal (by expert)
UK and USA will not release communication they made with McAskill.
This is why.
Here is the defence position (another of our experts)
It may harm UK trade if the prisoner dies in jail, is what Milliband said.
Prisoner stays in jail.
All the time questions are being raised about how safe the initial conviction actually is.
Salmond is alerted that a piece of UK legislation has been drafted, called "The prisoner transfer agreement". The SNP in Westminster move to block this.
All known, all fact.
After disclosing Westminsters intentions, they return and attack Blair.
@irr Let's scope out the argument for a moment. Why would Kaddafi had done anything AT ALL if he was innocent of this crime? Did he send up Megrahi as a sacrifical lamb? Why didn't HE point the finger at Iran or the PLO or whatever other evidence-less theory you subscribe to? Why didn't HE launch some sort of alternate investigation, finding SOME evidence to the contrary? Why pay any reparations or cooperate at all?
And don't give me some snarky nonsense like "go ask him." That does not cut it.
@irres I also find it odd that throughout all of your various recriminations and attacks, you are deafeningly silent about Kaddafi himself.
I guess the only way to fit your SNP round peg through the square hole of justice if for Kaddafi to be not only "innocent", but utterly un-examined too!
You say all these bad things about London/CIA/Bush/Blair et al and NOTHING about Kaddafi. Is your boy just an "innocent victim" in all of this then?
@irres So you actually believe it was the PLO and Iraq? Wow, that's a new one. It was an Iranian jetliner shot down in that combat zone, not an Iraqi plane. The Pimp that I am referring to is Kaddaffi. I thought I cleared that up earlier.
@TheLoyalOfficer A pimp is someone who procures women for money, the term has no relevence to Gadaffi as far as I'm aware. Let us call Bush "The Gimp" shall we, and Cheney "The Cunt"; they seem good descriptions to me.
So Salmond was aware enough to make it all public; even live TV coverage of the trial (a first). He knew what a "hot-potato this would be.
Claiming the Scottish government had a hidden agenda is therefore incorrect. There is no evidence to support this bogus claim (of yours)
Re Kosovo: Salmond (him again) attacked the Westminster parliament about their decision to intervene (as part of NATO) in the civil war. He pointed to the three UN security council votes against intervention and that Blair had no mandate for this.
After the Glasgow bombing, where the bombers were set apon by the general public, he again pointed out that these wars were provocative, stirring up trouble and not solving anything.
@irres And also, you praise the fact that it was a public trial and blablabla, and yet crap all over your own judges? This is inconsistent. The trial should have been straight and narrow from the get-go. Are you saying that I should applaud Salmond for being against Kosovo? And Bosnia? So the majority of Scots were against intervention? Funny - that's not the read that I got from the euros at the time, especially by 1994/1995 when you were begging/ordering us to fight your battles for you.
Evidence was suppressed at the original trial. That is quite clear now.
After the judges forced disclosure. The key witness is found to have been paid $1million to testify and a written character appraisal (by the CIA) describes him as a liar. On top of that he was shown a picture of the accused before an ID parade, a shirt shown shredded at the trial was found to be intact months after the trial and 3 other reasons. Judges order re-trial; appeal granted.
@irres (cont)UK Wikileaks revealations ask more questions than answers. Clearly London and Kaddafi were up to something. Then all kinds of rumors swirl about the "cancer" diagnosis - which was clearly bullshit. "Terminal" coming up on TWO years now? Please.
Sorry ma'am, but there are just too many loose ends here. Your valiant defense of MacAssFill&Co. would be admirable were it not such a complete swallowing of their story.
The best outcome would have been a regular appeal or re-trial.
So in the end: Scotland don't do dirty oil deals and we say shame on those who even think that way. The hypocrisy of UK and USA foreign policy is understood by our electorate. They decimated the 3 main Westminster parties and will move for independence from Westminster. If acheived Scotland will withdraw from NATO and this will dampen the enthusiasm for supporting the USA in their illegitimate wars.
Gadaffi will stay in power it will be a stalemate you will lose credibility on the UN council
@irres Like I said, talk to France. They wanted this war, not us.
How was the appeal granted?
Go ahead and embarrass the CIA. I don't care. Let justice be done.
However, there is no doubt in my mind that the Pimp ordered this plane to be bombed. As I said earlier, if he has the gumption to kill so many of his own people as he has recently, then there is no doubt as to his willingness to kill others, especially back in 1988 when he was even more radical.
A pimp is by definition: One who finds customers for a prostitute. Are you referring to the American friend of Prince Andrew, who it seems is a pimp, pedo or both?
Prince Andrew no longer represents the UK.
Perhaps Gadaffi was thanking the UK for their (failed) attempt to undermine the Scottish legal system.
It seems BP lobbied the UK but not Scotland.
Westminster has no power. Your implied link does not exist
Referendum on Scottish independence soon (well overdue)
@irres If the attempt failed, why would the Pimp thank them anyway?
And what about the son's comments? He said that trade/oil/money was "of course" a huge factor in the release. So you are saying that all of this was just some obtuse ruse or bluff?
Since it has been proved "beyond a shadow of a doubt" that BP did not lobby the Scottish government and since the UK parliament's "prisoner transfer agreement" was discovered and squashed by said Scottish government; then his sons words mean nothing to us.
Maybe Gadaffi's son is trying to spread unrest and dissent amongst his enemies, you are his declared enemies after all. Me, I couldn't care less what he means.
Gadaffi is not Sadam Hussein; who are these rebels anyway?
@irres Enemies? Kaddafi was looking to improve relations at this time - that's what a lot of this was about. He and his son's statements have great signifigance in that context.
Who are the rebels? Great question - ask the French. They are the ones that wanted this war, not us. Of course Obama does what he is told by euro hypocrites who do nothing but talk, so here we are. But this war is MASSIVELY unpopular here and is viewed as a failed test by Obama to finally stop the wars.
What Gadaffi, or his son say is not of great significance at all.
They said they were not responsible for Lockerbie disaster, but would pay compensation in return for sanctions being lifted; which they did.
$4.5million each victim minus $2.5million American legal fees (the shame of it)
By the way Scotland has no extradition agreement with Libya, so you would have a potentially innocent man waiting years to get to trial, because no bail could be granted.
Again and as you previously agreed; it was a UN action.
It was not simply an American action.
When you say "The US had to EXECUTE the mandate" that's incorrect.
::
I don't rely on the opinion of war criminals.
::
I think Bush is one of the poorest presidents USA ever had; but even he is not stupid enough to send the American war machine, alone, into a Soviet satellite state to start "calling the shots".
::
A UN action, is a different matter; that's why it was done that way.
@irres Wow - all kinds of errors there. Yugo was not a Soviet satellite. Bush did not go into Bosnia/Kosovo - Clinton did. The opinions of war criminals are indeed VERY important when they were the commanders and in charge of all operations. You saying that the military evaluations of the Nuremberg Trial defendants should not have been examined? The entire Allied military (USSR included) would completely disagree with you. Only token euro forces were there. We did most of the work, as usual.
It is you who are mistaken, Yugoslavia while not part of the Warsaw pact was a Communist country.
Yes Clinton did and yes Bush was a poor president.
How do you know " The entire Allied military (USSR included) would completely disagree with you" talked to them all have you. Sounds good but it is just more meaningless pap from you.
I believe Prince Andrews involvement with the pimp left him in disgrace (no longer a UK trade envoy).
@irres Check with the Allied Nuremberg interorgators. Their books and reports tell us that there was a vast interest in the military views of the Axis war criminals. Goering, as just one example, was interviewed extensively by the Allies - the air war particularly. The Russians wanted to talk to him too.
Yugo was independent of the Soviet orbit - especially when the USSR collapsed in 1991. So you continue to be off the mark. Europe could have, and should have intervened.
@irresistablejewel There were only TOKEN euro/UN forces for the Kosovo and Bosnia operations. So yes, we EXECUTED the mandates. Intervention in Bos/Kos without US forces would have been UNTHINKABLE.
Hence your continent's shameful weakness in the Balkans in 1995 and 1999. All happened long before Bush took office, so you need to drop your obsession with him while we discuss this. This was all Clinton (maybe a little bit Bush Sr.)
@irre Well if the case was as bad as you say it is, with 6 grounds for a mistrial and all of these other things, then your judges must be completely retarded. Why was he convicted in the first place then? Why not expose the "eeeeevil CIA" right then?
Also, why did the Pimp thank QE2, Prince Andrew, and PM Brown after the killer was released? His son said something similar. And yet you insist that London had nothing to do with this?
Your jigsaw puzzle is missing a bunch of pieces...
@TheLoyalOfficer Yes! It seems the case was as bad as I say. It was not me that was missing a few pieces of the jigsaw puzzle; it was the four judges presiding over the case.
The key witness has been completely dis-credited and without him the prosecution case falls apart. A torn piece of evidence photographed at the time mysteriously restored itself in time to be presented as evidence, etc.
Had there been a re-trial the judges would require an explaination.
@irres An ultimately, yes, an appeal would have been far better than this bullshit "compassion" release with that bastard still alive. Also, I have not heard a single American say that he should not have had his appeal so I don't know how "we got what we wanted" at all in this situation as you said earlier.
Yeah, but it's not up to American's, this appeal you talk about; or the UK government, or BP.
Appeal was granted anyway.
The prosecution's case had fallen apart.
Had it gone ahead and the CIA could be compelled to attend, the judges might start awarding costs against them. They ruined a £60million trial by trying to make it an easy conviction.
There is a distinct lack of sympathy for those who seek to subvert our justice system.
Your government saved the embarresment of their central intelligence service (an oxymoron if ever I heard one). They kept the $1.3Billion Gadaffi paid out. They have a guilty man, they can villify. They deflect the idea that there are countries who employ terrorism in response to USA terrorism; instead its always a lone wolf or relgious nut.
@irres Ah so all the hidden motives lie with the US, and not with Scotland or the UK? Please. You can believe that if you want. Like I said, there are pieces missing from this story.
What terrorism did the US employ? Are we going to have to go over the Vincennes all over again or is this some other leftist anti-US fallacy?
How am I talking nonsense? Repeat after me: intervention in Bos/Kos without US forces would have been UNTHINKABLE. UN Resolutions are cute but TROOPS get things done.
@irresistablejewel Iran or Iraq? You said Iraq before... Was that a typo or something?
I didn't have a problem with a public trial, neither did anyone else. So I don't understand what you are angling for with that comment.
In terms of motives, it seems to me that we don't have the full story. You claim no influence on the Scots. How so? Because there is no document? Well, there are no documents with phone calls or secret meetings. You strike me as naiive to buy this Scottish story in whole.
@irres If what you say is true, then a lot of folks are lying. Why you don't consider that the Scots could be lying as well is laughable. The BP connection is NOT necessarily out of the picture. After all, there just might not be a paper trail. Just like Cheney and Halliburton, etc. Just a verbal deal on a golf green.
So we are left to guess from these surface "facts", which make little sense when taken all together. Kaddaffi and his son's comments - inconsistent.
@TheLoyalOfficer The reason I believe the Scots version of events is twofold: it is consistant and it was/is open to public scrutiny. Two accused tried, on neutral territory, under Scots law; on TV. One freed, one found guilty (eligible for parole minimum 20 years). We know all that.
Gadaffi offers compensation, in return for USA sanctions lifted; but states "Libya was not responsible". USA accepts. We know that.
Westminster and Gadaffi say if he dies in prison there will be repercussions
When the previously suppressed evidence was released; the prosecutions case disintegrated. Key witness is known liar and paid to testify; contradictory evidence; witness given magazine with accused on front cover, before ID parade. 6 counts for a complete mis-trial. 4 or was it 5, provided by our old friend the CIA. One piece of evidence appears to have been brought to the scene and left by person or persons unknown.
A retrial will show CIA = mad or bad. Want a re-trial now?
So when David Cameron (the now UK prime minister) says "Its a bad decision... it should go through appeal" there are two problems with this.
One is the prisoner will probably be dead before the end of a long and expensive trial, the other is that if we had done it Camerons and Millibands way he would have been released far sooner.
So f*ck off, David.
FOX propoganda and senators electioneering is a shameful sight. Hypocrisy!
@irre How does the "political geography" of Yugoslavia prevent the euros from doing their jobs and relying on us in Bosnia and Kosovo? Please. Your job, not ours. And yet, we did the job. WEAK.
Euro is also short of European. I explained this months ago.
Friend today, enemy tomorrow. How many times do I have to explain that before you get a clue about international relations?
BP has a huge amount of UK subsidies and remains run mostly by Brits - even more if the disasters had not occurred.
@TheLoyalOfficer It required a UN mandate, supported by Russia to intervene. It is not the "job" of the EU to impose their will on non-member states. The former Yugoslavia lies between Russia and the EU, but was Communist under Toto. So while we call it an intervention, the Russians may perceive it as invasion and vice-versa.
Russian supply lines are shorter, anything in their airspace would be removed.
::
Friend today, enemy tomorrow = fairweather friend. Friends like that I can get any day.
@irres The UN mandate was nothing. The US had to EXECUTE the mandate - at great risk to our forces. Meanwhile, you chumps let those folks kill each other for over 3 years! I'm not impressed. Where were the euros with their 2 million+ troops? Meanwhile, in an interview in 1995 the Serb leaders said before they went into hiding that just 10,000 troops between Sarajevo and Belgrade would have cut their supply lines and ended the war!
It seemed necessary once the wells were torched. I would have allowed the Scots guard tanks to enter Bagdahd, but no-body asked me.
Afghanistan has been in a state of perpetual war for 100 years; even the Russians gave up on it. Why is America even there?
USA are clearly warmongers
::
Lets be clear about BP. The Chairman is Swedish; Chief financial officer, American; head of Exploration English; CEO American.. need I go on? You are incorrect.
@irres And in regards to BP - follow the money. Where are most of the subsidies from? UK
Watch the "Frontline" documentary about BP and tell me they are NOT a British company. They only put up those Americans after the Gulf of Mexico disaster to give their image a desperate facelift.
Read the history of the Anglo-Persian Oil Company (BP) and it becomes even more clear - it's a British company. You can't just wash away decades of history based on stock ownership and management shuffles.
@irres When did the USA government say we wanted this rat bastard released? Especially on these bullshit "compassionate grounds."
And what makes you so sure that he did not do it? If Kaddafi is bad enough to his OWN people to draw military action from the near-useless euros and UN, what makes you think he did not have the gumption to send his agents to destroy the jetliner? If anything, his recent behavior places him in STRONG suspicion to ordering this massacre.
It is most certainly not a Russian or Chinese action, they don't approve it; next time they will likely veto.
You have no ground troops Obama assured the American public in that speech where he looked staight at you when saying what America could and would do; then all dreamy and distant when he said what America could do (eg Arm rebels)
Reminder - the sanctions were enforced by Bill Clinton, for the most part, not the Bush's.
Considering the pathetic level of support that we are getting from our "allies", yes, I imagine we will have to leave Afghanistan soon. I guess I'll just have to pray that the Taliban does not take it all over and harbor terrorists to attack my city and murder my friends again.
Try starting a war in Syria or Yemen and see what kind of support you get then; it will be nada.
So remember: with BP it's your refineries too; yes I call Bush stupid because the evidence is overwhelming and my government "SNP" do not seek to curry favour with Gadaffi.
Scotland will, I promise you, withdraw from NATO if they gain full independence (big IF tho')
America sponsored Bin Laden; the Taliban and Mubarak; you reap what you sow.
@irres And now we have to do the heavy lifting YET AGAIN in Libya. How ironic that you tried to curry favor with the Bedouin Pimp, and then dragged us off to war with him to protect your BP refineries! You euros are just utterly SHAMELESS. It's almost as amazing as it is exasperating.
And Obama just eats it hook, line, and sinker. And you call Bush stupid?
(Also to distract from Silvio's whoring, and let Sarkozy wave his dick around like he's a real man with an election coming. Pathetic.)
The Lancet is a weekly peer-reviewed general medical journal. It is one of the world's best known, oldest, and most respected general medical journals.
Between March 2003 and June 2006 over 600,000 deaths, they say.
1.2 million so far over the course of the war (+/- 2.5%) according to the ORB.
::
Kind of makes 9/11 sound insignificant compared to your war.
::
BBC reports child and infant mortality rising to 239 per 1000, due to sanctions, before that it was lower than Australia.
@irres Re: Lancet - also European, and therefore overrun by anti-American fanatics. Just like the Bolshevik Broadcasting Collective (BBC) The Lancet's methods have been challenged and dispelled long ago. Many of the people they were "polling" had moved, or were refugees, or were working on stats provided by, (guess who?)-Saddam! Of course you probably believe dictators before anything American anyway, right?
@irres I guess you think that there should have been no Gulf War in 1991 either... Just let Saddam roll right into Saudi after looting Kuwait and take over 40% of the world's oil.
I must remind you that the sanctions were approved by the UN, including your government for obstructing inspections.
I would like to see a SINGLE Iraqi family who said: "my baby died of the sanctions." Nonsense - especially with all of the ILLEGAL business that the euros were doing!
@irres I'm happy you pointed that out about the French. Yes, they "lead" the war, we just have to fight it. So France gets to push for this whole thing and yet do what they love to do the most - nothing/talk.
In terms of the Taliban, etc. as I have said many times before now - enemies today, friends tomorrow, and vice versa. That's the way global politics works, tragically. We (BOTH our countries) loaned money to Hitler and Japan - what's your point?
"... what America couldn't do (eg Arm rebels)" I mean
So you are claiming that American or the UN, it doesn't matter which, are going to win a war without ground troops. Well congratulation I believe you will be the first country ever to do so.
You have nuclear capability, but that's far fetched even by your standards.
The we have Obama saying stuff like "the war will end in 3 years"
Dumb ass. A staged withdrawl fine, but don't give dates??
@irre Please - make NO mistake: I did NOT want this war. Nor did I want the Iraq war, nor Bosnia, Kosovo (euro backyard - your job), nor Somalia in 93. Nor do I want war with Iran. Only the Gulf and Afghan wars I view as legit.
Like I said, Obama is a dumbass. He's gotten hoodwinked by those scumbag French,Brits and Italians. You call us a fair weather friend? Well, we are the ONLY ones who FIGHT. It's a French action because they pushed all the way for it - probably to steal the oil.
@irres The Warsaw Pact was GONE for over 8 years by the time the Kosovo crisis emerged. Your backyard. You euros should have taken care of it.
Bombing is a part of war, my dear. War is not run by attorneys or PC Thought Police. Unless, of course, you want to lose.
The Gulf War - yes, the 1991 war over Kuwait. Funny how everyone says NOW that we should have "pushed on to Bagdhad" when NO ONE said that at the time. Anyway...
We are in Afghanistan to prevent the harboring of Al-Qaeda.
@irres As for BP, the management is overwhelmingly Brit - usually Lord so-and-so or some other mediocrity from the nobility. So it's pretty much a Brit company, in spite of its shareholders. Also, BP collects tax subsidies from the UK - a bit from the US too, but much less than from Her Majesty.
So it's basically a Brit company, and Cameron will hoodwink Obama to go to war to protect it. I would find the irony re: the Bedouin Pimp delicious, were it not so deadly and pathetic.
I demand justice! ... there you go, happy now? :-( American aid includes weapons does it? Just listen to yourself. Not oil for food this time then (shameful) Seems this "Saddam propoganda", as you put it, is supported by "The Lancet" Between 1.8 and 1.6 million displaced. 70% of Iraq children suffering trauma related symtoms (WHO) Just shows what happens when you have an idiot president and a moneygrubbing psychopath like Cheney running the show. American monkeys!
@irres Ah yes, the Lancet and WHO - not a bit biased, eh? Please.
Again, where are all of the mass graves of the children that supposedly died from the sanctions in Iraq?
Nowhere, because there are NONE. Relatively few people died from the UN-mandated sanctions. Your "reports" talk about "displacement" and "trauma". Not death. And were these reports related to the sanctions, or to the Iraq war?
If you truly demanded justice then you would not buy this party line on the bomber.
@irres The matter is NOT closed until the truth is revealed.
Paki aid is not trade - it is cash grants, loans and weapons. I went over why we funded him - the Cold War against the USSR. Friend today, enemy tomorrow, etc...
In war all commanders are valid targets - of course - including ours. (Btw, that sanctions figure is a Saddam fabrication - where are the mass graves from the sanctions then? Total BS propaganda.)
@irresistablejewel If you "cared" you would demand JUSTICE as opposed to accepting this ridiculous claim of "compassionate grounds" from MacAssFill - especially in light of the recent wikileaks indicating that the Bedouin Pimp was going to make things miserable for UK interests in Libya without the release of the mass murderer.
@irr Why fight Libya then? Other than the fact that the French, whom Obama worships, pushed him into it. God knows most the American people, myself included, are against the French misadventure in Libya.
As for Bin Laden - I don't give a crap about "martyr." He murdered my friends, destroyed my office, and attacked my city. The penalty is DEATH.
As for this Lockerbie travesty, we'll see if the Frogs can actually win a war for the first time since Napoleon. Then maybe the truth will come out.
The official line is that the UN intervened to stop a massace of "the rebels", by Gadaffi forces.
It's a UN action and these are "legal" bombs that we are dropping on civilians. Arming the rebels is not legal despite Hilary Clinton trying to bend the UN mandate to suit.
Cameron visited Gadaffi two weeks before the "war" with his weapons salesmen; make of that what you will.
@irresistablejewel not all info is public check newsnet Scotland about labours hypocritical behavior also labour sell out Scottish law and water to Westminster tony Blair also did this in 1999 what the snp have done is frozen council tax which labour wants to increase labour also tried to abstain a fuel regulator in Scotland and they want to increase prescription charges
@irresistablejewel This mass murderer, by the way, now holds the RECORD for the longest life after release of anyone ever let go on "compassionate grounds" by your "justice" system.
Coming up on two years of "terminal cancer" now. What a disgrace.
Holds a few records probably. So what? Have'nt you heard? The matter is closed
::
It is easy to confuse justice with vengence
Obamas decision is rather provocative. Entering a sovereign country without permission to kill or capture is illegal. Executing an unarmed man; changing the "story" and flimsy propoganda; its a PR disaster
"The world is a safer and better place; expect an imminent terrorist reprisal"
America fights with gung-ho nutters in their army and it should be pointed out that the British SAS are considered the best special forces unit in the world.
Cowardly Euro allies as what opposed to America, your troops kill more allied soldiers in "friendly fire incidents" than the enemy does. Look at the woman from Lewis American special forces sent to rescue her actually went and killed her, your army is nothing but a sloppy joke. You like insulting Europe but America started off as a colony of England.
@DrunkOnScotsWhisky Again, more superfluous nonsense. Friendly fire happens. Those are accidents in war. I'm sure the Brits accidentally fired on American troops in WW2 many times. It's an unfortunate reality of war.
America was a colony of England when Europe had BALLS. The continent was full of imperial jerks, but at least they had valor. Now they are just a bunch of lazy chickenshit hypocrites. The UK is a little better, since at least they fight - but with more complaints than troops.
@TheLoyalOfficer Lets cut Europe out of the equation and see what happens, if Europe was to stop all NATO engagements and leave America to it's own devices it wouldn't be long before America came cap in hand begging for Europe to help them fight the wars like Afghanistan and Iraq. Without European help America is NOTHING. As for friendly fire sure it happens in the UK army but not to the same extent that it happens in the American army.
@TheLoyalOfficer and what help does America provide except that they are guaranteed each time to kill more allied soldiers than the enemy through friendly fire. ISAF- I saw americans fight and they killed me through friendly fire. SAS best in the world does that in your book constitute cowardice or surrender?
@DrunkOnScotsWhisky Tragically, NONE of the Euro troops are up to the standards of the SAS. I said the Brits fought - though kicking and screaming and with more complaints than troops. The Canadians and Aussies are pretty good, too. Less whining from them as well.
If you want to sit there and parse words like a lawyer, you can go ahead and do so. But don't waste my time with non sequiturs and rhetorical questions. You know what I mean.
And there are only 600 SAS. And Britain rarely commits more than half to anything. So that's 300 elite dudes available. Thanks, but it does not amount to much...
More than the euros though, who are completely worthless. At least you have a little bit of value.
@TheLoyalOfficer Phrase words like a solicitor, that s simply the way I talk, tell me do you work for the CIA or something, otherwise how do you know how many SAS the UK has deployed in Afghanistan?
Perhaps all 600 have rotated through over time but if all 600 are deployed in Afghanistan at the same time that would be the first time ever that such a committment was made. And that I can confirm.
But 300 or 600 or even a few thousand guys do not make victory in a war. Again, my main problem is with continental Europe, although you Brits do complain far too much for your own good.
Inchon and Pusan were outstanding victories - they actually won the war. The UK had little to do with either. Maybe a bit, thanks for tiny dollop of batallion sized aid. I guess it was all you all could manage.
You must be voting for all parties in europe then since the politicians give the finger to the United States of America on a daily basis. Nothing new there.
Anyway as for the BlackWatch you know, I know and the world knows that the Black Watch did more for Korea than the USA, whether you can accept this is another matter entirely. More to the point FACT- America until THE UK helped out was suffering defeat after defeat in Korea.
@DrunkOnScotsWhisky Pusan was not a defeat, neither was Inchon. So, once again, you have no idea what you are talking about.
I support the anti-imperial, (so-called "isolationist") faction of the Tea Party - about 40-50% or so of the total membership. I don't support Sarah Palin at all - after all, she wants to remain wedded to lazy, ungrateful, cowardly, hypocritical Euro "allies."
The first US politician to give Europe the finger gets my vote.
@TheLoyalOfficer and the first politician to tell America to piss off gets my vote, oh wait we have already done that. I never said Puson was a defeat, I said that before the UK came into the Korean War America had won no victories whatsoever.
TheLoyalOfficer Iran was NOT mining international waters that was and has been proven to a USA lie in a attempt to justify the murder of 290 Iranian civilians. Inchon and Puson were minor compared to the battle of hook end of. You are one to talk America dosen't recognise acts of war when they commit them, Bay of Pigs, Iran Flight 655 etc.
@TheLoyalOfficer I'm a liar well in that case ou are most assuredly an Pro-American idiot who has been spoonfed so much propoganda from the day you were born that you won't or are unable to comprehend fact from fiction. You probably support Sarah Palin and are a member of the Tea Party.
Again, the proof of your retardedness is your belief that the mining of international waters is not an act of war.
Why don't you move to Iran then? I'm sure the dictator of Iran would love to show you off as a moron who does not recognize acts of war when Iran commits them.
Maybe you'll get some free coucous from it or something. Pretty good deal for a socialist prick like yourself...
In regards to Iran you still seem to cling to the foolish notion even after the amount of evidence that has been uncovered that Iran provoked America into shooting down Iran Flight 655 which killed 290 civilians.
If Seoul hadbeen taken that would have effectively on the war in Favour of the Chinese and North Koreans. I see rather than resort to a reasoned debate over the battles and their significance that you have decided to resort to petty name calling in an effort to some ho make your argument come out on top and you call me sad.
@TheLoyalOfficer Wikipedia refers to it as the THIRD battle of hook in 1953. I assume you know basic arithmetic, the third battle was in 1953 the first and second were in 1951 and 1952 respectively. If you bothered to study the battles at hook you would notice and it even states this on the wiki page that Hook was a place of tactical importance because the if Chinese/Korean army had seized Hook it would have opened an invasion route to the captal of South Korea Seoul.
"Steve Kappes [CIA] had secret meetings with the Libyan leader in 2003, accompanied by MI6 agent Sir Mark Allen."... The CIA were involved in ALL talks about the release of Megrahi.
Also widely praised for their part in the battle were The Duke of Wellington's Regiment (Duke's) who relieved the Black Watch at the Third battle of Hook in 1953. They were awarded many honours and even at one point renamed "Hook Company" after the battle.
TheLoyalofficer If you study history you will find the battle of Hook in 1953 was a completely different battle to the ones the Black Watch were first in which ocured in 1951 and again in 1952. The American Marine corp barely merited a mention on the SAME wiki page because they too were isignificant. You do realise that The Black Watch reinforced and then took over from the US Marine Corps at the Battle Of Hook 1952 because they were losing badly don't you?
Check the wiki page again - the battle (really a skirmish) did not take place until 1953. Your skirmish had no impact on the outcome of the war. INCHON and PUSAN - douchebag. Why don't you READ so I don't have to keep repeating myself.
You've been pwnd. Why don't you just give up? Why do you keep embarrassing yourself? Just like mining int'l waters is not an act of war. You are a FUCKING MORON.
As for Korea your so fucking brainwashed, I doubt anything will get through to you READ MY LIPS you fucking daftie, America was LOSING the war and the Black-watch won a SERIES of battles at Hook, if it wasn't for that America and her Marines would have been wiped out, like Vietnam. Read your own history America's own ELITE force told The Black Watch they wouldn't hold Hook for 24 hours and we managed to hold it for the entirety of the war another 2 and a half years.
@DrunkOnScotsWhisky Hey douchebag - the battle of the Hook did not take place until 1953! Held for 2+ years? More like 2+ months!
PWND again! Wow, I am actually starting to feel sorry for you, being mentally disabled as you are...
So mining int'l waters is NOT an act of war? They had been doing it for MONTHS before the Vincennes incident. Amazing how you don't even address that...
Move to Iran and join their propaganda dept - they would love to have you!
At least he doesn't have Coprolalia, or try to justify the Vincennes disgrace. If the Lusitania was on military duty, it becomes a legitimate target.
I think the "Dukes" aka "The Hook Company" have claim to the main battle honours. Our "Black Watch" aka "The Ladies from Hell" are the most decorated regiment in the British army.
Y'know from the days when you didn't get medals for killing unarmed civilians.
Iran Flight 655 was passing over a widely used and PRE-ESTABLISHED air corridor it was no accident you daft cunt. America tried to cover it up and awarded the crew medals.
The Luistinaia was listed as purely a civilian passenger ship, if it was carrying supplies then the Germans were quite rightly entitled to topedo it. 120,000 over a few months does not equal the MILLIONS lost by Britain and the commonwealth allies who did almost the entire fighting. AMERICA created a war zone by provoking IRAN by killing 290 civilians by shooting down their plane.
Again America gave Britain supplies and material in World War Two and NOT World War One. merican supplies in the second world war came at a grossly infated premium price. most countries were still paying off their debts some 6--70 years later.
Maybe id someone agrees with 1pcdoc that it's okay for America to kill 290 innocent men, woman and children in a craven act of terroism shoukld also be in jail. LoyalIdiot so you think that even IF Iran was interfering with shipping that justifies the killing of 290 civilians, in that case your no better than whoever bombed PAM AM. Hook was the DEFINING moment of korea you can spin it any way you want but at the end of the day and history backs me up that is a statement of FACT.
They created a WAR ZONE. You said that Iran did nothing - PWND.
That's why the ACCIDENT happened. They sent a civilian airliner over a WAR ZONE - that THEY CREATED.
Your Hook is a bunch of bullshit. Shut your fucking mouth. One Regiment does not win a war. Try the dozens of ROK and American DIVISIONS who fought. PUSAN AND INCHON YOU ILLITERATE ASSHOLE.
For the last time America was barely in World War One and gave very little aid to BRITAIN as she used her vast resources from the British Empire. Again Iran CONTRA scandal. America created an act of war by shooting down an Iranian passenger plane and awarding the Captain and crew medals. You pro-american stance IN SPITE of the FACTS is getting absolutely ridiculous, actually try reading history but not from an American perspective.
@DrunkOnScotsWhisky Any person that agrees with Lockerbie bomber like DrunkOnScotsWhisky do maybe they should spend the rest of their life in prison I would call him a terrorist just look at his profile just look at the video if I had the power he would be gone
@Loyal Idiot read my lips, Inchon Pusan in Korea although significant are nothing without the battle of hook in which America was losing badly so the Black Watch were called in. THAT was the DEFINING moment of the Korean war without the black Watch victories America would have LOST, your pathetic attempts at poutting a pro-american spin on everything are showing you up as the pro-american idiot you really are.
@DrunkOnScotsWhisky Here you go got someone from United Kingdom and you agree that he should be free maybe you should take his place or close enough to spend the rest of the time in prison for him I bet everybody in your country of United Kingdom and the United States would agree to let you take his place that someone agrees in releasing a person that agrees in bombing people maybe you should be in prison
To contrast the LoyalOfficer to Jim Swire does the LoyalOfficer comes across as a frothing at the mouth pro-American who thinks America can do no wrong and is probably brainwashed by watching too much Fox News.
Jim Swire has conducted himself with dignity and integrity contrast that to some of the hypocritical American families who through arrogance or ingnorance point blank refuse to believe that Megrahi may be innocent. Many of them have criticised Libya yet at the same time took compensation money off them. I have NEVER seen any American family mention any of the people from the other 21 countries involved on the Logarbaidh bombing, they think everyone should acquiesce to their point of view.
Britain didn't NEED American supplies in World War One she had the vast reserves of the British Empire for that. If the BlackWatch couldn't have held the Hook salient in Korea then the chinese/Koreans woulk have won it's that simple. is anybody who disagrees with your opinion anti-american to you?
Americans fought and bled so AMERICA COULD give Asylum to Nazi WAR CRIMINALS (Werner Von Braun) let off Jpanese WAR CRIMINALS from Unit 731who conducted human experimentation. Also they harbour terrorists who blow up planes Luis Carilles. Lets not forget the awarding of medals to a US Navy captain and his crew who shot down a civilian plane and killed 290 people including 66 children. You'r pro America slanted view of history is showing the world what abrainwashed xenophobe you really are.
America did NOT give Britain material aid in world war one Britain used their Empire to fight the war. As for the Michael offensive in the LAST few months of world war one so what? that was nothing it Hardly compares to the Somme or Jutland now does it. As for Inchon that was mostly undefended and secured after UN bombing. The fact remians America couldn't hold hook in Korea but the Black Watch could.
@Drunk What? We traded HUGE amounts of war materials with Britain in WW1. Please. And with Russia knocked out, the Michael Offensive would have swept your bony depleted asses into the English Channel were it not for American manpower - and morale effects.
"UN" bombing? More like American bombing. Plus it's the Inchon CAMPAIGN that matters - the fact that it was mostly undefended was just part of McArthur's genius (although he would mess up later).
TheLoyalOfficer ever heard of Iran-Contra you know where America was supplying money and weapons to Iran. Judging by your comments do you surmise that FABRICATED shipping lane violations by Iran mean that it was okay for America to shoot down a civilian airliner and kill 290 innocent civilians among them 66 children.
America didn't bail anyone out in World War One, they were barely even in the war American troops only reached Europe in 1918, for the last five months of the war. Also they brought influenza with them which resulted in the deaths of millions.
The justice minister for Scotland is Kenny McAskill.
He consulted with the victims families and the governments of UK, Libya, USA and Scotland before making his decision.
Your electioneering senators said nothing then or anything until their elections came up.; then they started to make demands. Demands on a sovereign country to hold an enquiry on their soil; a conceit on their part.
The duplicity by the USA and UK was exposed, the incompetence of the CIA too. Morally bankrupt, the lot.
irresistablejewel 8 months ago
It was you who brought up the words of the former justice minister. An example of an individual with a vested interest. Typical of the sort of key witness USA provides; at least you are consistant. USA nearly supported the Nazi's. It was a loan, not friendship.
You again seek to divert the discussion by referring to the two world wars, which USA joined late ( pushed into the second by the Japanese). It shows either a weak argument ; weakness of mind or both, on your part.
irresistablejewel 8 months ago
I'm talking about the 1996 sanctions and you are quite incorrect about them only being relaxed. Again you are factually incorrect about Karol Sikora, this was one of 3 doctors appointed by Libya; the release of the prisoner was not based on Sikoras findings although they agreed with Frasiers diagnosis.
The release of the prisoner was a decision made by McAskill. It was within the legislation of compassionate release in accordance with our laws and customs. Of that there is no doubt.
irresistablejewel 8 months ago
I don't see what the Lockerbie had to do with Gadaffi.
I believe London/CIA/Bush/Blair have some explaining to do. They won't though; they have shown this by blocking the release of communications with the Scottish government. The CIA had eventually to disclose what they were suppressing and they were shown to be mad or bad.
Shame on them!
So you. Stop wasting my time with your opinions. You a fascinated by one man and are missing the bigger picture.
USA won't con us again!
irresistablejewel 8 months ago
@irres Also, the doctor's name is Karol Sikora and has since expressed some regrets about his "diagnosis"...
Check out the Daily Telegraph from 20 Feb 2010. "Almost impossible that he lives beyond 2 years..."
"No deterioration of his health [in his luxury villa.]"
I guess we have a medical MIRACLE on our hands here, eh?
What a JOKE. Talk about a con...
TheLoyalOfficer 8 months ago
The former justice minister just happens to be the leader of “the rebels”.
Good grief!. It costs him nothing to say “lets you (UN) and him (Gadaffi) fight”.
If Gadaffi goes, who will lead Libya? Probably him.
(no need to pay him a £1million, he will say what you want for nothing)
So I would dispute his credibilty; he loses everything if Gadaffi remains.
He is a usurper, saying what the USA want to hear; to get to power.
I would go further. He is a liar.
irresistablejewel 8 months ago
@irres Oh, and one more thing: if we are "fair weather friends" then you have no friends at all. Who has been a better friend to the UK than the US? Three bailouts in three massive wars (WW1, 2, and Cold, since I know you have forgotten.)
Tell the truth already!
TheLoyalOfficer 8 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer Re: Fairweather-friends
I once played "connect 4" with a psychopath (nice chap). The problem with psychopaths, put simply, is they can't tell right from wrong. They are often: charismatic; highly manipulative and egocentric; but appear to think of the world only from their point of view. So if they kill you by accident or design it doesn't matter.
Apart from the connect 4 bit; I think this pretty much describes the Bush government, in particulary Cheney.
We lock ours up.
irresistablejewel 8 months ago
To my knowledge the CIA had identified the accused and USA pressure (sanctions) were put on Libya (and Iran) to get the men in court.
Gadaffi got sanctions removed, he paid $4.5 million (or $2million + $2.5million lawyers fees) for each victim. Iranian sanctions remain to this day.
He won’t accuse the PLO, or Iran, for two reasons:
1. They are effectively on the same side and
2. He has no evidence (or interest in helping USA)
(I don't think he likes the USA)
irresistablejewel 8 months ago
@irresistablejewel Sanctions were already in place in Iran since 1979, so that's not relevant. In terms of Libya, sanctions were placed on his dictatorship around 1986 with the Berlin disco bombings, along with air strikes against him.
The sanctions were NOT removed. Perhaps eased a little, but sanctions remained on Libya until at least 2003. Megrahi was just a sacrificial lamb then?
Funny that you spend far more time disputing the Justice Minister's credibility than Kaddafi's...
TheLoyalOfficer 8 months ago
"Lockerbie Outrage Ignores Evidence Against CIA" echoes some of the damning findings of "Dispatches: The Lockerbie Trial"
Professor Robert Black QC explains matters precisely in
"Lockerbie bomber drops appeal" He is careful not to pre-empt McAskill decision; he is from Lockerbie, but is pleased the prisoner is closer to release and I share his opinion. UK and USA governments appear embarrased about something; they have their man and can block progress.
Black is correct (imo)
Goodbye.
irresistablejewel 8 months ago
@irresistablejewel How could they have "blocked progress" on the release? He was going to be let go on those ridiculous "compassionate grounds" no matter what.. This is my problem with this whole thing. The bastard lives on for almost TWO YEARS now with "terminal cancer" and all kinds of regret by the "doctors" that gave the "diagnosis."
It looks like Scotting dick-waving to me - at London and, to a lesser extent, at the USA.
"Look at us! Look how devolved we are!" - Salmond et al.
TheLoyalOfficer 8 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer You are being obtuse. They "log jam" it.
If a piece of UK legislation seeks to re-write or undermine Scottish law, slap an injunction on it. That stops progress; then dispute the validity of said legislation. The Scots could also disrupt matters by submitting numerous amendments; postponements and slow the process to a stop; so the UK gave up on that.
Dr Frazier has not expressed regret, nor would he be expected to. You must stop making these things up.
irresistablejewel 8 months ago
@irres The release was not a piece of legislation. It was an act by the "Justice" Minister MacAssFill.
The prisoner transfer agreement could have been blocked, and was, but that's different.
TheLoyalOfficer 8 months ago
@irresistablejewel And I will see your vid and raise you another! Check this out... v=wjZ_0jULUWE
His own former Justice Minister, Mustafa Muhammed Abud al-Jeleil, puts it succinctly: Kaddafi ordered the attack.
You going to dispute that too because it does not fit into your nice, tight, SNP-flavored package?
He was in charge of the Libyan Justice Ministry throughout this entire process. He claims that a bribe was given to Scotland.
HMMM...
TheLoyalOfficer 8 months ago
Pressure grows in Scotland for a re-trial when judges force the CIA and prosecution to disclose information that they with held in the original trial. That and a particularly damning documentry that blew holes in the prosecutions case.
Retrial ordered, appeal granted.
Prisoner diagnosed terminal (by expert)
UK and USA will not release communication they made with McAskill.
This is why.
Here is the defence position (another of our experts)
v=Z9fpafvURo4
Only version that makes sense.
irresistablejewel 8 months ago
It may harm UK trade if the prisoner dies in jail, is what Milliband said.
Prisoner stays in jail.
All the time questions are being raised about how safe the initial conviction actually is.
Salmond is alerted that a piece of UK legislation has been drafted, called "The prisoner transfer agreement". The SNP in Westminster move to block this.
All known, all fact.
After disclosing Westminsters intentions, they return and attack Blair.
"agreement" abandoned.
Again fact.
irresistablejewel 8 months ago
@irr Let's scope out the argument for a moment. Why would Kaddafi had done anything AT ALL if he was innocent of this crime? Did he send up Megrahi as a sacrifical lamb? Why didn't HE point the finger at Iran or the PLO or whatever other evidence-less theory you subscribe to? Why didn't HE launch some sort of alternate investigation, finding SOME evidence to the contrary? Why pay any reparations or cooperate at all?
And don't give me some snarky nonsense like "go ask him." That does not cut it.
TheLoyalOfficer 8 months ago
@irres I also find it odd that throughout all of your various recriminations and attacks, you are deafeningly silent about Kaddafi himself.
I guess the only way to fit your SNP round peg through the square hole of justice if for Kaddafi to be not only "innocent", but utterly un-examined too!
You say all these bad things about London/CIA/Bush/Blair et al and NOTHING about Kaddafi. Is your boy just an "innocent victim" in all of this then?
PLEASE!
TheLoyalOfficer 8 months ago
I don't believe that. USA has had run-ins with Gadaffi for years.
The appeal would be granted after a preliminary hearing as is usual.
It is not our business to embarrass the CIA (they won't go, we can't make them)
The pimp was an American businessman friend of Prince Andrew, thats irrelevant.
I would guess it was the PLO, gaining a favour from Iraq.
Certainly they had to respond to the earlier disaster as it was perceived as USA terrorism, I believe.
Why dirty their own hands?
irresistablejewel 8 months ago
@irres So you actually believe it was the PLO and Iraq? Wow, that's a new one. It was an Iranian jetliner shot down in that combat zone, not an Iraqi plane. The Pimp that I am referring to is Kaddaffi. I thought I cleared that up earlier.
TheLoyalOfficer 8 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer A pimp is someone who procures women for money, the term has no relevence to Gadaffi as far as I'm aware. Let us call Bush "The Gimp" shall we, and Cheney "The Cunt"; they seem good descriptions to me.
So Salmond was aware enough to make it all public; even live TV coverage of the trial (a first). He knew what a "hot-potato this would be.
Claiming the Scottish government had a hidden agenda is therefore incorrect. There is no evidence to support this bogus claim (of yours)
irresistablejewel 8 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer
Re Kosovo: Salmond (him again) attacked the Westminster parliament about their decision to intervene (as part of NATO) in the civil war. He pointed to the three UN security council votes against intervention and that Blair had no mandate for this.
After the Glasgow bombing, where the bombers were set apon by the general public, he again pointed out that these wars were provocative, stirring up trouble and not solving anything.
I believe Salmond is correct.
irresistablejewel 8 months ago
@irres And also, you praise the fact that it was a public trial and blablabla, and yet crap all over your own judges? This is inconsistent. The trial should have been straight and narrow from the get-go. Are you saying that I should applaud Salmond for being against Kosovo? And Bosnia? So the majority of Scots were against intervention? Funny - that's not the read that I got from the euros at the time, especially by 1994/1995 when you were begging/ordering us to fight your battles for you.
TheLoyalOfficer 8 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer
No and no again.
Evidence was suppressed at the original trial. That is quite clear now.
After the judges forced disclosure. The key witness is found to have been paid $1million to testify and a written character appraisal (by the CIA) describes him as a liar. On top of that he was shown a picture of the accused before an ID parade, a shirt shown shredded at the trial was found to be intact months after the trial and 3 other reasons. Judges order re-trial; appeal granted.
irresistablejewel 8 months ago
@irres (cont)UK Wikileaks revealations ask more questions than answers. Clearly London and Kaddafi were up to something. Then all kinds of rumors swirl about the "cancer" diagnosis - which was clearly bullshit. "Terminal" coming up on TWO years now? Please.
Sorry ma'am, but there are just too many loose ends here. Your valiant defense of MacAssFill&Co. would be admirable were it not such a complete swallowing of their story.
The best outcome would have been a regular appeal or re-trial.
TheLoyalOfficer 8 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer
Seems the CIA wanted him convicted, but went a bit OTT; then fought to keep irregularities suppressed.
I'm pointing out to you that at every stage, the Scots government made the case public knowledge.
UK and USA governments want things kept out of the public domain whereas the Scots government want it all in the open.
Seem strange to you?
Re Kosovo. It certainly wasn't Salmond or the SNP begging or ordering anyone to fight there. They opposed it, but Westminster said yes.
irresistablejewel 8 months ago
So in the end: Scotland don't do dirty oil deals and we say shame on those who even think that way. The hypocrisy of UK and USA foreign policy is understood by our electorate. They decimated the 3 main Westminster parties and will move for independence from Westminster. If acheived Scotland will withdraw from NATO and this will dampen the enthusiasm for supporting the USA in their illegitimate wars.
Gadaffi will stay in power it will be a stalemate you will lose credibility on the UN council
irresistablejewel 8 months ago
@irres Like I said, talk to France. They wanted this war, not us.
How was the appeal granted?
Go ahead and embarrass the CIA. I don't care. Let justice be done.
However, there is no doubt in my mind that the Pimp ordered this plane to be bombed. As I said earlier, if he has the gumption to kill so many of his own people as he has recently, then there is no doubt as to his willingness to kill others, especially back in 1988 when he was even more radical.
TheLoyalOfficer 8 months ago
The Bedouin Pimp = Kaddaffi. It's my term of endearment for him - LOL.
TheLoyalOfficer 8 months ago
A pimp is by definition: One who finds customers for a prostitute. Are you referring to the American friend of Prince Andrew, who it seems is a pimp, pedo or both?
Prince Andrew no longer represents the UK.
Perhaps Gadaffi was thanking the UK for their (failed) attempt to undermine the Scottish legal system.
It seems BP lobbied the UK but not Scotland.
Westminster has no power. Your implied link does not exist
Referendum on Scottish independence soon (well overdue)
We will keep the queen
irresistablejewel 8 months ago
@irres If the attempt failed, why would the Pimp thank them anyway?
And what about the son's comments? He said that trade/oil/money was "of course" a huge factor in the release. So you are saying that all of this was just some obtuse ruse or bluff?
TheLoyalOfficer 8 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer
Since it has been proved "beyond a shadow of a doubt" that BP did not lobby the Scottish government and since the UK parliament's "prisoner transfer agreement" was discovered and squashed by said Scottish government; then his sons words mean nothing to us.
Maybe Gadaffi's son is trying to spread unrest and dissent amongst his enemies, you are his declared enemies after all. Me, I couldn't care less what he means.
Gadaffi is not Sadam Hussein; who are these rebels anyway?
irresistablejewel 8 months ago
@irres Enemies? Kaddafi was looking to improve relations at this time - that's what a lot of this was about. He and his son's statements have great signifigance in that context.
Who are the rebels? Great question - ask the French. They are the ones that wanted this war, not us. Of course Obama does what he is told by euro hypocrites who do nothing but talk, so here we are. But this war is MASSIVELY unpopular here and is viewed as a failed test by Obama to finally stop the wars.
TheLoyalOfficer 8 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer
What Gadaffi, or his son say is not of great significance at all.
They said they were not responsible for Lockerbie disaster, but would pay compensation in return for sanctions being lifted; which they did.
$4.5million each victim minus $2.5million American legal fees (the shame of it)
By the way Scotland has no extradition agreement with Libya, so you would have a potentially innocent man waiting years to get to trial, because no bail could be granted.
Unnacceptable.
irresistablejewel 8 months ago
Again and as you previously agreed; it was a UN action.
It was not simply an American action.
When you say "The US had to EXECUTE the mandate" that's incorrect.
::
I don't rely on the opinion of war criminals.
::
I think Bush is one of the poorest presidents USA ever had; but even he is not stupid enough to send the American war machine, alone, into a Soviet satellite state to start "calling the shots".
::
A UN action, is a different matter; that's why it was done that way.
irresistablejewel 8 months ago
@irres Wow - all kinds of errors there. Yugo was not a Soviet satellite. Bush did not go into Bosnia/Kosovo - Clinton did. The opinions of war criminals are indeed VERY important when they were the commanders and in charge of all operations. You saying that the military evaluations of the Nuremberg Trial defendants should not have been examined? The entire Allied military (USSR included) would completely disagree with you. Only token euro forces were there. We did most of the work, as usual.
TheLoyalOfficer 8 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer
It is you who are mistaken, Yugoslavia while not part of the Warsaw pact was a Communist country.
Yes Clinton did and yes Bush was a poor president.
How do you know " The entire Allied military (USSR included) would completely disagree with you" talked to them all have you. Sounds good but it is just more meaningless pap from you.
I believe Prince Andrews involvement with the pimp left him in disgrace (no longer a UK trade envoy).
irresistablejewel 8 months ago
@irres Check with the Allied Nuremberg interorgators. Their books and reports tell us that there was a vast interest in the military views of the Axis war criminals. Goering, as just one example, was interviewed extensively by the Allies - the air war particularly. The Russians wanted to talk to him too.
Yugo was independent of the Soviet orbit - especially when the USSR collapsed in 1991. So you continue to be off the mark. Europe could have, and should have intervened.
TheLoyalOfficer 8 months ago
@irresistablejewel There were only TOKEN euro/UN forces for the Kosovo and Bosnia operations. So yes, we EXECUTED the mandates. Intervention in Bos/Kos without US forces would have been UNTHINKABLE.
Hence your continent's shameful weakness in the Balkans in 1995 and 1999. All happened long before Bush took office, so you need to drop your obsession with him while we discuss this. This was all Clinton (maybe a little bit Bush Sr.)
TheLoyalOfficer 8 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer
USA rah rah!
The Balkans didn't have oil; that's why it took so long.
I would hope from our discussion that you now understand the difference between Scotland; UK; Europe and the UN (and where they are the same).
That while McAskills decision was contoversial and unpopular with some; it was in accordance with our law.
That's all we care about; well that and independence.
irresistablejewel 8 months ago
There were 3 senior judges presiding and 4th (non-voting). Five pre-trial hearings.
It seems there was an attempt to "pull the wool" over the judges eyes, in the first trial.
"Miscarriage of justice"" is the only grounds for appeal, this term is not defined in Scots statue (it's up to the judge's interpretation)
Key witness Gaucci described as inter alia, no case without him.
5 Appeal judges will crucify prosecution.
USA then returns $292million to Gadaffi.
... and on it goes...
irresistablejewel 8 months ago
@irre Well if the case was as bad as you say it is, with 6 grounds for a mistrial and all of these other things, then your judges must be completely retarded. Why was he convicted in the first place then? Why not expose the "eeeeevil CIA" right then?
Also, why did the Pimp thank QE2, Prince Andrew, and PM Brown after the killer was released? His son said something similar. And yet you insist that London had nothing to do with this?
Your jigsaw puzzle is missing a bunch of pieces...
TheLoyalOfficer 8 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer Yes! It seems the case was as bad as I say. It was not me that was missing a few pieces of the jigsaw puzzle; it was the four judges presiding over the case.
The key witness has been completely dis-credited and without him the prosecution case falls apart. A torn piece of evidence photographed at the time mysteriously restored itself in time to be presented as evidence, etc.
Had there been a re-trial the judges would require an explaination.
Pimp? no clue what you mean.
irresistablejewel 8 months ago
@irres An ultimately, yes, an appeal would have been far better than this bullshit "compassion" release with that bastard still alive. Also, I have not heard a single American say that he should not have had his appeal so I don't know how "we got what we wanted" at all in this situation as you said earlier.
TheLoyalOfficer 8 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer
Yeah, but it's not up to American's, this appeal you talk about; or the UK government, or BP.
Appeal was granted anyway.
The prosecution's case had fallen apart.
Had it gone ahead and the CIA could be compelled to attend, the judges might start awarding costs against them. They ruined a £60million trial by trying to make it an easy conviction.
There is a distinct lack of sympathy for those who seek to subvert our justice system.
They would have freed him.
irresistablejewel 8 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer
Your government saved the embarresment of their central intelligence service (an oxymoron if ever I heard one). They kept the $1.3Billion Gadaffi paid out. They have a guilty man, they can villify. They deflect the idea that there are countries who employ terrorism in response to USA terrorism; instead its always a lone wolf or relgious nut.
They can say they want an appeal; but they don't.
Again you are talking nonsense about the Balkans.
... and yes Bush jnr is an idiot
irresistablejewel 8 months ago
@irres Ah so all the hidden motives lie with the US, and not with Scotland or the UK? Please. You can believe that if you want. Like I said, there are pieces missing from this story.
What terrorism did the US employ? Are we going to have to go over the Vincennes all over again or is this some other leftist anti-US fallacy?
How am I talking nonsense? Repeat after me: intervention in Bos/Kos without US forces would have been UNTHINKABLE. UN Resolutions are cute but TROOPS get things done.
TheLoyalOfficer 8 months ago
UK "prisoner transfer agreement" wasn't a USA idea was it?
Then I'm not saying all the hidden motives were with the USA, am I
What terrorism did the USA employ?
There is a long list, but the Vincennes is the relevant one here. I believe the PLO did Iran a "favour".
The Scots were quite open.
They shamed the Blair government and kept the prisoner locked up instead. Followed due process and put it all in the public domain.
Your senators never said a thing at the time.
irresistablejewel 8 months ago
@irresistablejewel Iran or Iraq? You said Iraq before... Was that a typo or something?
I didn't have a problem with a public trial, neither did anyone else. So I don't understand what you are angling for with that comment.
In terms of motives, it seems to me that we don't have the full story. You claim no influence on the Scots. How so? Because there is no document? Well, there are no documents with phone calls or secret meetings. You strike me as naiive to buy this Scottish story in whole.
TheLoyalOfficer 8 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer
Iran
UK government wants prisoner released (after Bliar meets Gimp)
They draft UK legislation "prisoner transfer agreement" (Only one prisoner it could refer to)
Blocked by Scots.
Salmond wants details of this and all correspondence between them and USA/UK governments.
THEY won't agree to this.
Salmond attacks Bliar over this. Calls for full disclosure of all correspondence. UK and USA decline.
(Hardly the act of a man trying to hide something)
irresistablejewel 8 months ago
@irres If what you say is true, then a lot of folks are lying. Why you don't consider that the Scots could be lying as well is laughable. The BP connection is NOT necessarily out of the picture. After all, there just might not be a paper trail. Just like Cheney and Halliburton, etc. Just a verbal deal on a golf green.
So we are left to guess from these surface "facts", which make little sense when taken all together. Kaddaffi and his son's comments - inconsistent.
TheLoyalOfficer 8 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer The reason I believe the Scots version of events is twofold: it is consistant and it was/is open to public scrutiny. Two accused tried, on neutral territory, under Scots law; on TV. One freed, one found guilty (eligible for parole minimum 20 years). We know all that.
Gadaffi offers compensation, in return for USA sanctions lifted; but states "Libya was not responsible". USA accepts. We know that.
Westminster and Gadaffi say if he dies in prison there will be repercussions
irresistablejewel 8 months ago
Well see...
When the previously suppressed evidence was released; the prosecutions case disintegrated. Key witness is known liar and paid to testify; contradictory evidence; witness given magazine with accused on front cover, before ID parade. 6 counts for a complete mis-trial. 4 or was it 5, provided by our old friend the CIA. One piece of evidence appears to have been brought to the scene and left by person or persons unknown.
A retrial will show CIA = mad or bad. Want a re-trial now?
irresistablejewel 8 months ago
So when David Cameron (the now UK prime minister) says "Its a bad decision... it should go through appeal" there are two problems with this.
One is the prisoner will probably be dead before the end of a long and expensive trial, the other is that if we had done it Camerons and Millibands way he would have been released far sooner.
So f*ck off, David.
FOX propoganda and senators electioneering is a shameful sight. Hypocrisy!
McAskill closes book; nobody won.
irresistablejewel 8 months ago
@irresistablejewel Dead??? He is going on TWO YEARS of life now...
Total nonsense. His appeal should have been heard.
TheLoyalOfficer 8 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer
Ronnie Biggs lived longer.
It's a waste of time and money.
10 years or so to hear the appeal; providing a secure courtroom; flying witnesses in; employing judges and security.
Prosecutions case flimsy and already discredited.
America has to return $292 million if he is released a free man; we pay him compensation and case re-opens.
No. It stops there. USA and UK governments will block any public enquiry anyway.
Get real.
Your idea won't work.
irresistablejewel 8 months ago
@irres Plus, if the case was so weak, why was he convicted in the first place in YOUR COURTS?
TheLoyalOfficer 8 months ago
You clearly live in a fantasy world.
You said..." overwhelmingly Brit - usually Lord so-and-so ..." Its not.
Several key positions are occupied by Americans; it's 40% owned by America.
Americas biggest oil and gas producer is British? Is that what you would have me believe.
You don't understand the political geography of the former Yugoslavia, or you wouldn't make the idiotic statements you do.
Euro is a currency.
Bombing is part of a war, the indescriminate part.
USA created Al Queda
irresistablejewel 8 months ago
@irre How does the "political geography" of Yugoslavia prevent the euros from doing their jobs and relying on us in Bosnia and Kosovo? Please. Your job, not ours. And yet, we did the job. WEAK.
Euro is also short of European. I explained this months ago.
Friend today, enemy tomorrow. How many times do I have to explain that before you get a clue about international relations?
BP has a huge amount of UK subsidies and remains run mostly by Brits - even more if the disasters had not occurred.
TheLoyalOfficer 8 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer It required a UN mandate, supported by Russia to intervene. It is not the "job" of the EU to impose their will on non-member states. The former Yugoslavia lies between Russia and the EU, but was Communist under Toto. So while we call it an intervention, the Russians may perceive it as invasion and vice-versa.
Russian supply lines are shorter, anything in their airspace would be removed.
::
Friend today, enemy tomorrow = fairweather friend. Friends like that I can get any day.
irresistablejewel 8 months ago
@irres The UN mandate was nothing. The US had to EXECUTE the mandate - at great risk to our forces. Meanwhile, you chumps let those folks kill each other for over 3 years! I'm not impressed. Where were the euros with their 2 million+ troops? Meanwhile, in an interview in 1995 the Serb leaders said before they went into hiding that just 10,000 troops between Sarajevo and Belgrade would have cut their supply lines and ended the war!
WEAK
TheLoyalOfficer 8 months ago
By Gulf war, you mean Kuwait?
It seemed necessary once the wells were torched. I would have allowed the Scots guard tanks to enter Bagdahd, but no-body asked me.
Afghanistan has been in a state of perpetual war for 100 years; even the Russians gave up on it. Why is America even there?
USA are clearly warmongers
::
Lets be clear about BP. The Chairman is Swedish; Chief financial officer, American; head of Exploration English; CEO American.. need I go on? You are incorrect.
irresistablejewel 8 months ago
@irres And in regards to BP - follow the money. Where are most of the subsidies from? UK
Watch the "Frontline" documentary about BP and tell me they are NOT a British company. They only put up those Americans after the Gulf of Mexico disaster to give their image a desperate facelift.
Read the history of the Anglo-Persian Oil Company (BP) and it becomes even more clear - it's a British company. You can't just wash away decades of history based on stock ownership and management shuffles.
TheLoyalOfficer 8 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer
BP was de-nationalised then went multinational; it is irrelevant in this thread.
So is the Westminster (UK) parliament; their "prisoner transfer agreement" was rejected. (It would have freed the prisoner).
Then Scot's legal lords compel evidence to be disclosed. Re-trial ordered. Appeal granted.
Prisoner now diagnosed as terminally ill.
Prisoner decides to drop appeal and is released by McAskill on medical grounds.
UK and USA governments get what they wanted.
irresistablejewel 8 months ago
@irres When did the USA government say we wanted this rat bastard released? Especially on these bullshit "compassionate grounds."
And what makes you so sure that he did not do it? If Kaddafi is bad enough to his OWN people to draw military action from the near-useless euros and UN, what makes you think he did not have the gumption to send his agents to destroy the jetliner? If anything, his recent behavior places him in STRONG suspicion to ordering this massacre.
TheLoyalOfficer 8 months ago
No they don't lead the war, the UN do.
It's not an American action or a French action.
It is most certainly not a Russian or Chinese action, they don't approve it; next time they will likely veto.
You have no ground troops Obama assured the American public in that speech where he looked staight at you when saying what America could and would do; then all dreamy and distant when he said what America could do (eg Arm rebels)
Creeped me right out that did.
No ground troops, Eh? In a war?!
irresistablejewel 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"Lancet - also European, and therefore overrun by anti-American fanatics"
Oh look! you have thought of a childish name for the BBC now. Well done!
"The Lancet's methods have been challenged and dispelled long ago"
Erm, no they haven't; just in your mind.
By the way Haliburton had secured the rebuilding contract, before the war started.
No! I tend to believe information when it is provided by people or organisations without an agenda and that it can be cross referenced.
irresistablejewel 8 months ago
Reminder - the sanctions were enforced by Bill Clinton, for the most part, not the Bush's.
Considering the pathetic level of support that we are getting from our "allies", yes, I imagine we will have to leave Afghanistan soon. I guess I'll just have to pray that the Taliban does not take it all over and harbor terrorists to attack my city and murder my friends again.
TheLoyalOfficer 8 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer
"Pathetic level of support"
Try starting a war in Syria or Yemen and see what kind of support you get then; it will be nada.
So remember: with BP it's your refineries too; yes I call Bush stupid because the evidence is overwhelming and my government "SNP" do not seek to curry favour with Gadaffi.
Scotland will, I promise you, withdraw from NATO if they gain full independence (big IF tho')
America sponsored Bin Laden; the Taliban and Mubarak; you reap what you sow.
irresistablejewel 8 months ago
I think it is probably best that you continue delude yourself to the damage your country is inflicting on civilians.
They may bury children in mass graves where you come from, but I don't know any countries that practice this.
I think its the American propoganda machine that wants to hide the shame of this.
So there are 3 sources that are independant and dispute what you say; I tend to believe them and not you, or Bush or Blair or Cheney.
irresistablejewel 8 months ago
@irres And now we have to do the heavy lifting YET AGAIN in Libya. How ironic that you tried to curry favor with the Bedouin Pimp, and then dragged us off to war with him to protect your BP refineries! You euros are just utterly SHAMELESS. It's almost as amazing as it is exasperating.
And Obama just eats it hook, line, and sinker. And you call Bush stupid?
(Also to distract from Silvio's whoring, and let Sarkozy wave his dick around like he's a real man with an election coming. Pathetic.)
TheLoyalOfficer 8 months ago
The Lancet is a weekly peer-reviewed general medical journal. It is one of the world's best known, oldest, and most respected general medical journals.
Between March 2003 and June 2006 over 600,000 deaths, they say.
1.2 million so far over the course of the war (+/- 2.5%) according to the ORB.
::
Kind of makes 9/11 sound insignificant compared to your war.
::
BBC reports child and infant mortality rising to 239 per 1000, due to sanctions, before that it was lower than Australia.
irresistablejewel 8 months ago
@irres Re: Lancet - also European, and therefore overrun by anti-American fanatics. Just like the Bolshevik Broadcasting Collective (BBC) The Lancet's methods have been challenged and dispelled long ago. Many of the people they were "polling" had moved, or were refugees, or were working on stats provided by, (guess who?)-Saddam! Of course you probably believe dictators before anything American anyway, right?
TheLoyalOfficer 8 months ago
@irres I guess you think that there should have been no Gulf War in 1991 either... Just let Saddam roll right into Saudi after looting Kuwait and take over 40% of the world's oil.
I must remind you that the sanctions were approved by the UN, including your government for obstructing inspections.
I would like to see a SINGLE Iraqi family who said: "my baby died of the sanctions." Nonsense - especially with all of the ILLEGAL business that the euros were doing!
TheLoyalOfficer 8 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer
" I guess you think that there should have been no Gulf War in 1991"
Incorrect.
Are you not changing your story?
You previously said it was a French led war; now you say " And now we have to do the heavy lifting YET AGAIN in Libya" which is it?
Again BP is a multinational approximately 40% American; 40% UK and 20% others; but that doesn't suit your view does it?
Taliban means "students". Your media says they support the opium trade, they don't, it's more propoganda.
irresistablejewel 8 months ago
@irres I'm happy you pointed that out about the French. Yes, they "lead" the war, we just have to fight it. So France gets to push for this whole thing and yet do what they love to do the most - nothing/talk.
In terms of the Taliban, etc. as I have said many times before now - enemies today, friends tomorrow, and vice versa. That's the way global politics works, tragically. We (BOTH our countries) loaned money to Hitler and Japan - what's your point?
TheLoyalOfficer 8 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer
"... what America couldn't do (eg Arm rebels)" I mean
So you are claiming that American or the UN, it doesn't matter which, are going to win a war without ground troops. Well congratulation I believe you will be the first country ever to do so.
You have nuclear capability, but that's far fetched even by your standards.
The we have Obama saying stuff like "the war will end in 3 years"
Dumb ass. A staged withdrawl fine, but don't give dates??
USA = fairweather friend.
irresistablejewel 8 months ago
@irre Please - make NO mistake: I did NOT want this war. Nor did I want the Iraq war, nor Bosnia, Kosovo (euro backyard - your job), nor Somalia in 93. Nor do I want war with Iran. Only the Gulf and Afghan wars I view as legit.
Like I said, Obama is a dumbass. He's gotten hoodwinked by those scumbag French,Brits and Italians. You call us a fair weather friend? Well, we are the ONLY ones who FIGHT. It's a French action because they pushed all the way for it - probably to steal the oil.
TheLoyalOfficer 8 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer
Kosovo (Warsaw pact problem really) ethnic religious differences. Had to have a UN mandate first.
BP is not "pretty much a British company" at all. It is a huge multinational.
Are you telling me you still don't understand this even after I went to all the trouble of explaining it?
You say you don't approve of many of these wars, yet you write in such glowing terms about how great it is dropping democracy from 10,000 feet.
Reap what you sow you will (Yoda)
irresistablejewel 8 months ago
@irres The Warsaw Pact was GONE for over 8 years by the time the Kosovo crisis emerged. Your backyard. You euros should have taken care of it.
Bombing is a part of war, my dear. War is not run by attorneys or PC Thought Police. Unless, of course, you want to lose.
The Gulf War - yes, the 1991 war over Kuwait. Funny how everyone says NOW that we should have "pushed on to Bagdhad" when NO ONE said that at the time. Anyway...
We are in Afghanistan to prevent the harboring of Al-Qaeda.
TheLoyalOfficer 8 months ago
@irres As for BP, the management is overwhelmingly Brit - usually Lord so-and-so or some other mediocrity from the nobility. So it's pretty much a Brit company, in spite of its shareholders. Also, BP collects tax subsidies from the UK - a bit from the US too, but much less than from Her Majesty.
So it's basically a Brit company, and Cameron will hoodwink Obama to go to war to protect it. I would find the irony re: the Bedouin Pimp delicious, were it not so deadly and pathetic.
TheLoyalOfficer 8 months ago
irresistablejewel 8 months ago
@irres Ah yes, the Lancet and WHO - not a bit biased, eh? Please.
Again, where are all of the mass graves of the children that supposedly died from the sanctions in Iraq?
Nowhere, because there are NONE. Relatively few people died from the UN-mandated sanctions. Your "reports" talk about "displacement" and "trauma". Not death. And were these reports related to the sanctions, or to the Iraq war?
If you truly demanded justice then you would not buy this party line on the bomber.
TheLoyalOfficer 8 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer
Correction; infant mortality is 108 per 1000; child mortality 131 per 1000.
(239 per 2000)
It's only 2,777 civilian casulties in Afghanistan for the year of 2010
No reason to be there now, since Bin Laden killed, is there?
I reckon you will stay anyway because companies like Haliburton are making so much (blood) money.
It's no wonder there are so many aggreived people looking at you and your hypocritical foreign policy.
irresistablejewel 8 months ago
I care about it; the matter is closed.
::
Bush was an enemy commander that declared war on Iraq and Afghanistan. His sanctions led to the deaths of a million children.
So by your logic is he viable assasination target?
(Its this kind of double-standard that won't wash) The USA holds Pakistan in contempt it is obvious by the actions taken.
Aid is trade, it won't be cut.
America wanted him dead, now he is dead; so thats the problem all solved now.
Why did you fund him at all?
irresistablejewel 8 months ago
@irres The matter is NOT closed until the truth is revealed.
Paki aid is not trade - it is cash grants, loans and weapons. I went over why we funded him - the Cold War against the USSR. Friend today, enemy tomorrow, etc...
In war all commanders are valid targets - of course - including ours. (Btw, that sanctions figure is a Saddam fabrication - where are the mass graves from the sanctions then? Total BS propaganda.)
TheLoyalOfficer 8 months ago
@irresistablejewel If you "cared" you would demand JUSTICE as opposed to accepting this ridiculous claim of "compassionate grounds" from MacAssFill - especially in light of the recent wikileaks indicating that the Bedouin Pimp was going to make things miserable for UK interests in Libya without the release of the mass murderer.
TheLoyalOfficer 8 months ago
Have dragged YOU into another war... ??
Are you drunk?
Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life, son.
::
I thought Obama was ok when he first came to power, but its more of the same.
Fire the first salvo then push off; your lawers trying everything to break UN resolutions.
Why not send your assassins out again... is that not the American way?
::
You just created a martyr, you idiots; you can dance on the other ones grave soon enough. The matter is closed.
irresistablejewel 8 months ago
@irr Why fight Libya then? Other than the fact that the French, whom Obama worships, pushed him into it. God knows most the American people, myself included, are against the French misadventure in Libya.
As for Bin Laden - I don't give a crap about "martyr." He murdered my friends, destroyed my office, and attacked my city. The penalty is DEATH.
As for this Lockerbie travesty, we'll see if the Frogs can actually win a war for the first time since Napoleon. Then maybe the truth will come out.
TheLoyalOfficer 8 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer
Why fight Libya, why ask me?
The official line is that the UN intervened to stop a massace of "the rebels", by Gadaffi forces.
It's a UN action and these are "legal" bombs that we are dropping on civilians. Arming the rebels is not legal despite Hilary Clinton trying to bend the UN mandate to suit.
Cameron visited Gadaffi two weeks before the "war" with his weapons salesmen; make of that what you will.
It looks like hypocrisy.
SNP landslide due partly to this.
irresistablejewel 8 months ago
Scotland are dropping the prescription charge; while England will raise theirs to £7.40.
The legal systems of Scotland and "England & Wales" are seperate.
There is a lot of hypocrisy surrounding the Lockerbie tragedy, but its not coming from the Scotland, Salmond and the SNP.
irresistablejewel 10 months ago
@irresistablejewel And now the bastard is coming up on TWO years of "terminal cancer."
I wonder if the released mass murderer will outlive his master now?
And how ironic that the Brits and Frogs have dragged us into another M.E. war - this time against their hero, Kaddaffi!
Truly AMAZING. Wow. I could not have cooked this up myself!
TheLoyalOfficer 8 months ago
watch?v=XvfSuHA62Gg planned by gordon brown to blame snp
MrScottishJamie 11 months ago
@MrScottishJamie
Not quite. Labour wanted him transferred; SNP vetoed this.
McAskill later released him on compassionate grounds.
Westminster had no power to decide at any time.
This is all public knowledge.
irresistablejewel 10 months ago
@irresistablejewel not all info is public check newsnet Scotland about labours hypocritical behavior also labour sell out Scottish law and water to Westminster tony Blair also did this in 1999 what the snp have done is frozen council tax which labour wants to increase labour also tried to abstain a fuel regulator in Scotland and they want to increase prescription charges
MrScottishJamie 10 months ago
@irresistablejewel This mass murderer, by the way, now holds the RECORD for the longest life after release of anyone ever let go on "compassionate grounds" by your "justice" system.
Coming up on two years of "terminal cancer" now. What a disgrace.
TheLoyalOfficer 8 months ago
@TheLoyalOfficer
Holds a few records probably. So what? Have'nt you heard? The matter is closed
::
It is easy to confuse justice with vengence
Obamas decision is rather provocative. Entering a sovereign country without permission to kill or capture is illegal. Executing an unarmed man; changing the "story" and flimsy propoganda; its a PR disaster
"The world is a safer and better place; expect an imminent terrorist reprisal"
(according to the American government)
Sums it up, really.
irresistablejewel 8 months ago
@irresistablejewel For the victims of this travesty of justice and anyone who cares about them, the matter is certainly not "closed."
Bin Laden was an enemy commander who declared war on the United States. So every time we kill an enemy general, he has to be waving a gun?
This is the exact euro-wussery that has all of us Americans so exasperated.
As for the pakis, they were harboring him (obviously) so they can go f*ck themselves. In fact, their billions of aid should get cut immediately.
TheLoyalOfficer 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TheLoyalOfficer
"But 300 or 600 or even a few thousand guys do not make victory in a war"
It does if they are Spatans, or SAS.
VenusDotCom 1 year ago
America fights with gung-ho nutters in their army and it should be pointed out that the British SAS are considered the best special forces unit in the world.
DrunkOnScotsWhisky 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Inchon and Pusan were a UN engagement. Thats a fact, isn't it? I don't dispute that the majority of the UN force was American.
irresistablejewel 1 year ago
Cowardly Euro allies as what opposed to America, your troops kill more allied soldiers in "friendly fire incidents" than the enemy does. Look at the woman from Lewis American special forces sent to rescue her actually went and killed her, your army is nothing but a sloppy joke. You like insulting Europe but America started off as a colony of England.
DrunkOnScotsWhisky 1 year ago
@DrunkOnScotsWhisky Again, more superfluous nonsense. Friendly fire happens. Those are accidents in war. I'm sure the Brits accidentally fired on American troops in WW2 many times. It's an unfortunate reality of war.
America was a colony of England when Europe had BALLS. The continent was full of imperial jerks, but at least they had valor. Now they are just a bunch of lazy chickenshit hypocrites. The UK is a little better, since at least they fight - but with more complaints than troops.
TheLoyalOfficer 1 year ago
@TheLoyalOfficer As I understand; Inchon and Pusan were a UN engagement.
irresistablejewel 1 year ago
@irresistablejewel Yeah with about 95+% US/ROK manpower and firepower.
TheLoyalOfficer 1 year ago
@TheLoyalOfficer Lets cut Europe out of the equation and see what happens, if Europe was to stop all NATO engagements and leave America to it's own devices it wouldn't be long before America came cap in hand begging for Europe to help them fight the wars like Afghanistan and Iraq. Without European help America is NOTHING. As for friendly fire sure it happens in the UK army but not to the same extent that it happens in the American army.
DrunkOnScotsWhisky 1 year ago
@DrunkOnScotsWhisky Buuuuuulshit! How does Europe help? Looking gay?
What "help" does Europe offer? Surrendering? Corruption? Not fighting? Crappy troops? Retreating? Complaining?
Europe go away - PLEASE. They do NOTHING anyway! Save us the money. You homos can go and garrision Kosovo and Bosnia.
ISAF = I Saw Americans Fight
TheLoyalOfficer 1 year ago
@TheLoyalOfficer and what help does America provide except that they are guaranteed each time to kill more allied soldiers than the enemy through friendly fire. ISAF- I saw americans fight and they killed me through friendly fire. SAS best in the world does that in your book constitute cowardice or surrender?
DrunkOnScotsWhisky 1 year ago
@DrunkOnScotsWhisky Tragically, NONE of the Euro troops are up to the standards of the SAS. I said the Brits fought - though kicking and screaming and with more complaints than troops. The Canadians and Aussies are pretty good, too. Less whining from them as well.
But the Euros? French & Co.? You can have them!
USELESS
TheLoyalOfficer 1 year ago
@TheLoyalOfficer you do realise that the UK is part of Europe?
DrunkOnScotsWhisky 1 year ago
@Drunk
If you want to sit there and parse words like a lawyer, you can go ahead and do so. But don't waste my time with non sequiturs and rhetorical questions. You know what I mean.
And there are only 600 SAS. And Britain rarely commits more than half to anything. So that's 300 elite dudes available. Thanks, but it does not amount to much...
More than the euros though, who are completely worthless. At least you have a little bit of value.
TheLoyalOfficer 1 year ago
@TheLoyalOfficer Phrase words like a solicitor, that s simply the way I talk, tell me do you work for the CIA or something, otherwise how do you know how many SAS the UK has deployed in Afghanistan?
DrunkOnScotsWhisky 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@DrunkOnScotsWhisky Again I am grateful for the small dollop of elite help.
Perhaps all 600 have rotated through over time but if all 600 are deployed in Afghanistan at the same time that would be the first time ever that such a committment was made. And that I can confirm.
But 300 or 600 or even a few thousand guys do not make victory in a war. Again, my main problem is with continental Europe, although you Brits do complain far too much for your own good.
TheLoyalOfficer 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TheLoyalOfficer
"But 300 or 600 or even a few thousand guys do not make victory in a war"
It does if they are Spatans, or SAS.
irresistablejewel 1 year ago
Inchon and Pusan were outstanding victories - they actually won the war. The UK had little to do with either. Maybe a bit, thanks for tiny dollop of batallion sized aid. I guess it was all you all could manage.
You must be voting for all parties in europe then since the politicians give the finger to the United States of America on a daily basis. Nothing new there.
TheLoyalOfficer 1 year ago
Anyway as for the BlackWatch you know, I know and the world knows that the Black Watch did more for Korea than the USA, whether you can accept this is another matter entirely. More to the point FACT- America until THE UK helped out was suffering defeat after defeat in Korea.
DrunkOnScotsWhisky 1 year ago
@DrunkOnScotsWhisky Pusan was not a defeat, neither was Inchon. So, once again, you have no idea what you are talking about.
I support the anti-imperial, (so-called "isolationist") faction of the Tea Party - about 40-50% or so of the total membership. I don't support Sarah Palin at all - after all, she wants to remain wedded to lazy, ungrateful, cowardly, hypocritical Euro "allies."
The first US politician to give Europe the finger gets my vote.
TheLoyalOfficer 1 year ago
@TheLoyalOfficer and the first politician to tell America to piss off gets my vote, oh wait we have already done that. I never said Puson was a defeat, I said that before the UK came into the Korean War America had won no victories whatsoever.
DrunkOnScotsWhisky 1 year ago
TheLoyalOfficer Iran was NOT mining international waters that was and has been proven to a USA lie in a attempt to justify the murder of 290 Iranian civilians. Inchon and Puson were minor compared to the battle of hook end of. You are one to talk America dosen't recognise acts of war when they commit them, Bay of Pigs, Iran Flight 655 etc.
DrunkOnScotsWhisky 1 year ago
@DrunkOnScotsWhisky Yes they were mining international waters! You are just an anti-American LIAR - and probably a Bolshevik to boot.
Inchon and Pusan were HUGE battles involving DIVISIONS and CORPS of troops, not your little pissant batalion.
TheLoyalOfficer 1 year ago
@TheLoyalOfficer I'm a liar well in that case ou are most assuredly an Pro-American idiot who has been spoonfed so much propoganda from the day you were born that you won't or are unable to comprehend fact from fiction. You probably support Sarah Palin and are a member of the Tea Party.
DrunkOnScotsWhisky 1 year ago
No, they were minor skirmishes.
INCHON and PUSAN, moron.
Again, the proof of your retardedness is your belief that the mining of international waters is not an act of war.
Why don't you move to Iran then? I'm sure the dictator of Iran would love to show you off as a moron who does not recognize acts of war when Iran commits them.
Maybe you'll get some free coucous from it or something. Pretty good deal for a socialist prick like yourself...
TheLoyalOfficer 1 year ago
In regards to Iran you still seem to cling to the foolish notion even after the amount of evidence that has been uncovered that Iran provoked America into shooting down Iran Flight 655 which killed 290 civilians.
DrunkOnScotsWhisky 1 year ago
If Seoul hadbeen taken that would have effectively on the war in Favour of the Chinese and North Koreans. I see rather than resort to a reasoned debate over the battles and their significance that you have decided to resort to petty name calling in an effort to some ho make your argument come out on top and you call me sad.
DrunkOnScotsWhisky 1 year ago
@TheLoyalOfficer Wikipedia refers to it as the THIRD battle of hook in 1953. I assume you know basic arithmetic, the third battle was in 1953 the first and second were in 1951 and 1952 respectively. If you bothered to study the battles at hook you would notice and it even states this on the wiki page that Hook was a place of tactical importance because the if Chinese/Korean army had seized Hook it would have opened an invasion route to the captal of South Korea Seoul.
DrunkOnScotsWhisky 1 year ago
"Steve Kappes [CIA] had secret meetings with the Libyan leader in 2003, accompanied by MI6 agent Sir Mark Allen."... The CIA were involved in ALL talks about the release of Megrahi.
warriorprince1010 1 year ago
Also widely praised for their part in the battle were The Duke of Wellington's Regiment (Duke's) who relieved the Black Watch at the Third battle of Hook in 1953. They were awarded many honours and even at one point renamed "Hook Company" after the battle.
DrunkOnScotsWhisky 1 year ago
TheLoyalofficer If you study history you will find the battle of Hook in 1953 was a completely different battle to the ones the Black Watch were first in which ocured in 1951 and again in 1952. The American Marine corp barely merited a mention on the SAME wiki page because they too were isignificant. You do realise that The Black Watch reinforced and then took over from the US Marine Corps at the Battle Of Hook 1952 because they were losing badly don't you?
DrunkOnScotsWhisky 1 year ago
@DrunkOnScotsWhisky Do you have a reading problem?
Check the wiki page again - the battle (really a skirmish) did not take place until 1953. Your skirmish had no impact on the outcome of the war. INCHON and PUSAN - douchebag. Why don't you READ so I don't have to keep repeating myself.
You've been pwnd. Why don't you just give up? Why do you keep embarrassing yourself? Just like mining int'l waters is not an act of war. You are a FUCKING MORON.
It's sad.
TheLoyalOfficer 1 year ago
Comment removed
DrunkOnScotsWhisky 1 year ago
Comment removed
DrunkOnScotsWhisky 1 year ago
As for Korea your so fucking brainwashed, I doubt anything will get through to you READ MY LIPS you fucking daftie, America was LOSING the war and the Black-watch won a SERIES of battles at Hook, if it wasn't for that America and her Marines would have been wiped out, like Vietnam. Read your own history America's own ELITE force told The Black Watch they wouldn't hold Hook for 24 hours and we managed to hold it for the entirety of the war another 2 and a half years.
DrunkOnScotsWhisky 1 year ago
@DrunkOnScotsWhisky Hey douchebag - the battle of the Hook did not take place until 1953! Held for 2+ years? More like 2+ months!
PWND again! Wow, I am actually starting to feel sorry for you, being mentally disabled as you are...
So mining int'l waters is NOT an act of war? They had been doing it for MONTHS before the Vincennes incident. Amazing how you don't even address that...
Move to Iran and join their propaganda dept - they would love to have you!
TheLoyalOfficer 1 year ago
@TheLoyalOfficer
At least he doesn't have Coprolalia, or try to justify the Vincennes disgrace. If the Lusitania was on military duty, it becomes a legitimate target.
I think the "Dukes" aka "The Hook Company" have claim to the main battle honours. Our "Black Watch" aka "The Ladies from Hell" are the most decorated regiment in the British army.
Y'know from the days when you didn't get medals for killing unarmed civilians.
No evidence yet?
Then shout abuse, thats bound to work!
irresistablejewel 1 year ago
@DrunkDouche
Wiki it. Relief of position not until Nov 1952. WRONG by over 2 years, bitch!
Battle of the Hook - 1953. Your earlier engagements barely even merit mention on Wiki- because they were NOT THAT IMPORTANT! BAHAHAHAHA!
Does being PWND so much actually hurt, or are you immune to pain because you have no brain?
TheLoyalOfficer 1 year ago
Iran Flight 655 was passing over a widely used and PRE-ESTABLISHED air corridor it was no accident you daft cunt. America tried to cover it up and awarded the crew medals.
DrunkOnScotsWhisky 1 year ago
The Luistinaia was listed as purely a civilian passenger ship, if it was carrying supplies then the Germans were quite rightly entitled to topedo it. 120,000 over a few months does not equal the MILLIONS lost by Britain and the commonwealth allies who did almost the entire fighting. AMERICA created a war zone by provoking IRAN by killing 290 civilians by shooting down their plane.
DrunkOnScotsWhisky 1 year ago
Again America gave Britain supplies and material in World War Two and NOT World War One. merican supplies in the second world war came at a grossly infated premium price. most countries were still paying off their debts some 6--70 years later.
DrunkOnScotsWhisky 1 year ago
@DrunkOnScotsWhisky
Bullshit again! We gave HUGE piles of supplies in WW1! What do you think was in the Lusitania?
And how about our 120,000 dead boys? Huh, dickhead?
YOU'RE WELCOME
TheLoyalOfficer 1 year ago
Maybe id someone agrees with 1pcdoc that it's okay for America to kill 290 innocent men, woman and children in a craven act of terroism shoukld also be in jail. LoyalIdiot so you think that even IF Iran was interfering with shipping that justifies the killing of 290 civilians, in that case your no better than whoever bombed PAM AM. Hook was the DEFINING moment of korea you can spin it any way you want but at the end of the day and history backs me up that is a statement of FACT.
DrunkOnScotsWhisky 1 year ago
@DrunkMoron
They created a WAR ZONE. You said that Iran did nothing - PWND.
That's why the ACCIDENT happened. They sent a civilian airliner over a WAR ZONE - that THEY CREATED.
Your Hook is a bunch of bullshit. Shut your fucking mouth. One Regiment does not win a war. Try the dozens of ROK and American DIVISIONS who fought. PUSAN AND INCHON YOU ILLITERATE ASSHOLE.
Run along now and read some history.
TheLoyalOfficer 1 year ago
For the last time America was barely in World War One and gave very little aid to BRITAIN as she used her vast resources from the British Empire. Again Iran CONTRA scandal. America created an act of war by shooting down an Iranian passenger plane and awarding the Captain and crew medals. You pro-american stance IN SPITE of the FACTS is getting absolutely ridiculous, actually try reading history but not from an American perspective.
DrunkOnScotsWhisky 1 year ago
@Drunkcluelessfool Michael Offensive - American Troops = your bony asses thown into the English Channel you fucking douche. Do the math.
Over 120,000 American boys sacrificed for your ungrateful ass. Hardly "very litte aid". Plus ships, planes, munitions, food, and LOANS.
You're welcome.
Why was Iran MINING the Persian Gulf then and firing on civilian ships with vessels and planes? ACTS OF WAR
TheLoyalOfficer 1 year ago
@DrunkOnScotsWhisky Any person that agrees with Lockerbie bomber like DrunkOnScotsWhisky do maybe they should spend the rest of their life in prison I would call him a terrorist just look at his profile just look at the video if I had the power he would be gone
1pcdoc 1 year ago
@Loyal Idiot read my lips, Inchon Pusan in Korea although significant are nothing without the battle of hook in which America was losing badly so the Black Watch were called in. THAT was the DEFINING moment of the Korean war without the black Watch victories America would have LOST, your pathetic attempts at poutting a pro-american spin on everything are showing you up as the pro-american idiot you really are.
DrunkOnScotsWhisky 1 year ago
@Drunk Bullshit.
Read the history.
PUSAN and INCHON. Your molehill was not the "defining moment". You are a clown.
Those battles were "nothing"?? Really? Whole corps fighting as opposed to your little regiment? Give me a break.
Stop being a fucking clown.
TheLoyalOfficer 1 year ago
@DrunkOnScotsWhisky Here you go got someone from United Kingdom and you agree that he should be free maybe you should take his place or close enough to spend the rest of the time in prison for him I bet everybody in your country of United Kingdom and the United States would agree to let you take his place that someone agrees in releasing a person that agrees in bombing people maybe you should be in prison
1pcdoc 1 year ago
@1pcdoc
You bet, you lose.
irresistablejewel 1 year ago
To contrast the LoyalOfficer to Jim Swire does the LoyalOfficer comes across as a frothing at the mouth pro-American who thinks America can do no wrong and is probably brainwashed by watching too much Fox News.
DrunkOnScotsWhisky 1 year ago
@Drunk I don't even have a television, let alone watch or listen to Fox News. So that's just another bullshit angle perpetrated by you.
Just like WW1, Korea, the ACTS OF WAR of Iran in the late 80's. Oceans of PWNRship.
Quit while you're behind, dude. Go cry into your pillow.
TheLoyalOfficer 1 year ago
Jim Swire has conducted himself with dignity and integrity contrast that to some of the hypocritical American families who through arrogance or ingnorance point blank refuse to believe that Megrahi may be innocent. Many of them have criticised Libya yet at the same time took compensation money off them. I have NEVER seen any American family mention any of the people from the other 21 countries involved on the Logarbaidh bombing, they think everyone should acquiesce to their point of view.
DrunkOnScotsWhisky 1 year ago
Britain didn't NEED American supplies in World War One she had the vast reserves of the British Empire for that. If the BlackWatch couldn't have held the Hook salient in Korea then the chinese/Koreans woulk have won it's that simple. is anybody who disagrees with your opinion anti-american to you?
DrunkOnScotsWhisky 1 year ago
@Drunk BAHAHAAHA!
Without our support in WW1 you tools would have been DONE. Read the fucking history - yet again you are just embarrassing youself.
INCHON and PUSAN - retard. Look them up. This is just getting ridiculous...
TheLoyalOfficer 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Americans fought and bled so AMERICA COULD give Asylum to Nazi WAR CRIMINALS (Werner Von Braun) let off Jpanese WAR CRIMINALS from Unit 731who conducted human experimentation. Also they harbour terrorists who blow up planes Luis Carilles. Lets not forget the awarding of medals to a US Navy captain and his crew who shot down a civilian plane and killed 290 people including 66 children. You'r pro America slanted view of history is showing the world what abrainwashed xenophobe you really are.
DrunkOnScotsWhisky 1 year ago
Comment removed
DrunkOnScotsWhisky 1 year ago
America did NOT give Britain material aid in world war one Britain used their Empire to fight the war. As for the Michael offensive in the LAST few months of world war one so what? that was nothing it Hardly compares to the Somme or Jutland now does it. As for Inchon that was mostly undefended and secured after UN bombing. The fact remians America couldn't hold hook in Korea but the Black Watch could.
DrunkOnScotsWhisky 1 year ago
@Drunk What? We traded HUGE amounts of war materials with Britain in WW1. Please. And with Russia knocked out, the Michael Offensive would have swept your bony depleted asses into the English Channel were it not for American manpower - and morale effects.
"UN" bombing? More like American bombing. Plus it's the Inchon CAMPAIGN that matters - the fact that it was mostly undefended was just part of McArthur's genius (although he would mess up later).
And, of course, PUSAN.
TheLoyalOfficer 1 year ago
TheLoyalOfficer ever heard of Iran-Contra you know where America was supplying money and weapons to Iran. Judging by your comments do you surmise that FABRICATED shipping lane violations by Iran mean that it was okay for America to shoot down a civilian airliner and kill 290 innocent civilians among them 66 children.
DrunkOnScotsWhisky 1 year ago
America didn't bail anyone out in World War One, they were barely even in the war American troops only reached Europe in 1918, for the last five months of the war. Also they brought influenza with them which resulted in the deaths of millions.
DrunkOnScotsWhisky 1 year ago
@DrunkOnScotsWhisky Check the Michael Offensive, 1918. Imagine it without 500,000 American troops. Imagine you: SMOKED.
Plus all of our loans and supplies and munitions and food an equipment? Please. DONE.
So yes, WW1 - we took care of that for you. Why did 120,000 American boys die then? That's the bill.
You're welcome.
You want to talk about WW2 now?
Please
TheLoyalOfficer 1 year ago
Comment removed
DrunkOnScotsWhisky 1 year ago