Libya & Lockerbie

[Fop 1]

You think justice starts and ends at sentencing? Should there be no incentivisation for good behaviour or rehabilitation?

 

 

What about the context of the court issuing him a life sentence with a recommended 20 years before parole eligibility?

 

I didn't bring it up "as an example" I'm not comparing or contrasting the jail terms they were issued or have served (that's you changing the subject). I'm saying (and i'm not the first) that the two are inextricably linked. That the U-turn Jack Straw did on Biggs in the space of a month was directly related to the impending release of (what the state have judged) a mass murderer. As John Snow says in the article linked above "it would have been untenable politically for Biggs, whose release had been so recently rejected and who had killed no one, to stay in prison whilst Megrahi who had allegedly killed 270 people was freed."

 

So you are basically saying that a shoplifter that refuses to repent for their crime should be held for longer than say someone that is convicted of killing 100's of people but does go through the motions to satisfy the system, and that that is "justice"?

[Meenzer 15871]

Strawmantastic.

[Happy Face 29]

You think justice starts and ends at sentencing? Should there be no incentivisation for good behaviour or rehabilitation?

 

 

What about the context of the court issuing him a life sentence with a recommended 20 years before parole eligibility?

 

I didn't bring it up "as an example" I'm not comparing or contrasting the jail terms they were issued or have served (that's you changing the subject). I'm saying (and i'm not the first) that the two are inextricably linked. That the U-turn Jack Straw did on Biggs in the space of a month was directly related to the impending release of (what the state have judged) a mass murderer. As John Snow says in the article linked above "it would have been untenable politically for Biggs, whose release had been so recently rejected and who had killed no one, to stay in prison whilst Megrahi who had allegedly killed 270 people was freed."

 

So you are basically saying that a shoplifter that refuses to repent for their crime should be held for longer than say someone that is convicted of killing 100's of people but does go through the motions to satisfy the system, and that that is "justice"?

 

 

An all new and spectacular low.

[Fop 1]

You think justice starts and ends at sentencing? Should there be no incentivisation for good behaviour or rehabilitation?

 

 

What about the context of the court issuing him a life sentence with a recommended 20 years before parole eligibility?

 

I didn't bring it up "as an example" I'm not comparing or contrasting the jail terms they were issued or have served (that's you changing the subject). I'm saying (and i'm not the first) that the two are inextricably linked. That the U-turn Jack Straw did on Biggs in the space of a month was directly related to the impending release of (what the state have judged) a mass murderer. As John Snow says in the article linked above "it would have been untenable politically for Biggs, whose release had been so recently rejected and who had killed no one, to stay in prison whilst Megrahi who had allegedly killed 270 people was freed."

 

So you are basically saying that a shoplifter that refuses to repent for their crime should be held for longer than say someone that is convicted of killing 100's of people but does go through the motions to satisfy the system, and that that is "justice"?

 

 

An all new and spectacular low.

 

 

So what exactly are you saying then?

[Happy Face 29]

You think justice starts and ends at sentencing? Should there be no incentivisation for good behaviour or rehabilitation?

 

 

What about the context of the court issuing him a life sentence with a recommended 20 years before parole eligibility?

 

I didn't bring it up "as an example" I'm not comparing or contrasting the jail terms they were issued or have served (that's you changing the subject). I'm saying (and i'm not the first) that the two are inextricably linked. That the U-turn Jack Straw did on Biggs in the space of a month was directly related to the impending release of (what the state have judged) a mass murderer. As John Snow says in the article linked above "it would have been untenable politically for Biggs, whose release had been so recently rejected and who had killed no one, to stay in prison whilst Megrahi who had allegedly killed 270 people was freed."

 

So you are basically saying that a shoplifter that refuses to repent for their crime should be held for longer than say someone that is convicted of killing 100's of people but does go through the motions to satisfy the system, and that that is "justice"?

 

 

An all new and spectacular low.

 

 

So what exactly are you saying then?

 

That parole cases should be considered individually.

[manc-mag 1]

Fop giving it the full Dead Sheep QC routine. Again.

[Fop 1]

You think justice starts and ends at sentencing? Should there be no incentivisation for good behaviour or rehabilitation?

 

 

What about the context of the court issuing him a life sentence with a recommended 20 years before parole eligibility?

 

I didn't bring it up "as an example" I'm not comparing or contrasting the jail terms they were issued or have served (that's you changing the subject). I'm saying (and i'm not the first) that the two are inextricably linked. That the U-turn Jack Straw did on Biggs in the space of a month was directly related to the impending release of (what the state have judged) a mass murderer. As John Snow says in the article linked above "it would have been untenable politically for Biggs, whose release had been so recently rejected and who had killed no one, to stay in prison whilst Megrahi who had allegedly killed 270 people was freed."

 

So you are basically saying that a shoplifter that refuses to repent for their crime should be held for longer than say someone that is convicted of killing 100's of people but does go through the motions to satisfy the system, and that that is "justice"?

 

 

An all new and spectacular low.

 

 

So what exactly are you saying then?

 

That parole cases should be considered individually.

 

And sentences should be what in relation to the crime?

[Fop 1]

Fop giving it the full Dead Sheep QC routine. Again.

You can have some Fop-love too if you need it.

[manc-mag 1]

tainted love.

[Fop 1]

tainted love.

[Happy Face 29]

And sentences should be what in relation to the crime?

 

Yes, that's right, sentences should reflect the seriousness crime.

[Fop 1]

And sentences should be what in relation to the crime?

 

Yes, that's right, sentences should reflect the seriousness crime.

 

So in your opinion how would Biggs serving 30 years do that?

[Happy Face 29]

And sentences should be what in relation to the crime?

 

Yes, that's right, sentences should reflect the seriousness crime.

 

So in your opinion how would Biggs serving 30 years do that?

 

You've lost me now mate. I never said it would if he had.

 

What's this got to do with Jack Straw saying in July...

 

"Mr Biggs chose to serve only one year of a 30 year sentence before he took the personal decision to commit another offence and escape from prison, avoiding capture by travelling abroad for 35 years whilst outrageously courting the media. I am refusing the Parole Board's recommendation for parole. Biggs chose not to obey the law and respect the punishments given to him - the legal system in this country deserves more respect than this. It was Mr Biggs's own choice to offend and he now appears to want to avoid the consequences of his decision. I do not think this is acceptable."

 

..to gladly releasing him a month later.

Edited September 3, 2009 by Happy Face

[Fop 1]

And sentences should be what in relation to the crime?

 

Yes, that's right, sentences should reflect the seriousness crime.

 

So in your opinion how would Biggs serving 30 years do that?

 

You've lost me now mate. I never said it would if he had.

 

What's this got to do with Jack Straw saying in July...

 

"Mr Biggs chose to serve only one year of a 30 year sentence before he took the personal decision to commit another offence and escape from prison, avoiding capture by travelling abroad for 35 years whilst outrageously courting the media. I am refusing the Parole Board's recommendation for parole. Biggs chose not to obey the law and respect the punishments given to him - the legal system in this country deserves more respect than this. It was Mr Biggs's own choice to offend and he now appears to want to avoid the consequences of his decision. I do not think this is acceptable."

 

..to gladly releasing him a month later.

 

So you're saying it wouldn't have done if he had?

[Happy Face 29]

And sentences should be what in relation to the crime?

 

Yes, that's right, sentences should reflect the seriousness crime.

 

So in your opinion how would Biggs serving 30 years do that?

 

You've lost me now mate. I never said it would if he had.

 

What's this got to do with Jack Straw saying in July...

 

"Mr Biggs chose to serve only one year of a 30 year sentence before he took the personal decision to commit another offence and escape from prison, avoiding capture by travelling abroad for 35 years whilst outrageously courting the media. I am refusing the Parole Board's recommendation for parole. Biggs chose not to obey the law and respect the punishments given to him - the legal system in this country deserves more respect than this. It was Mr Biggs's own choice to offend and he now appears to want to avoid the consequences of his decision. I do not think this is acceptable."

 

..to gladly releasing him a month later.

 

So you're saying it wouldn't have done if he had?

 

No. I'm saying it was a political decision made with Megrahi in mind, rather than an individual decision made with justice in mind.

 

I'd also add you're thick as fuck.

[Fop 1]

And sentences should be what in relation to the crime?

 

Yes, that's right, sentences should reflect the seriousness crime.

 

So in your opinion how would Biggs serving 30 years do that?

 

You've lost me now mate. I never said it would if he had.

 

What's this got to do with Jack Straw saying in July...

 

"Mr Biggs chose to serve only one year of a 30 year sentence before he took the personal decision to commit another offence and escape from prison, avoiding capture by travelling abroad for 35 years whilst outrageously courting the media. I am refusing the Parole Board's recommendation for parole. Biggs chose not to obey the law and respect the punishments given to him - the legal system in this country deserves more respect than this. It was Mr Biggs's own choice to offend and he now appears to want to avoid the consequences of his decision. I do not think this is acceptable."

 

..to gladly releasing him a month later.

 

So you're saying it wouldn't have done if he had?

 

No. I'm saying it was a political decision made with Megrahi in mind, rather than an individual decision made with justice in mind.

 

I'd also add you're thick as fuck.

 

So you're saying that "Justice" does have to do with sentence length?

[Rob W 0]

at the end of the day it's all politics

 

If Mr M had been from Mali or Bhutan they'd have let him die in jail for sure

[Fop 1]

at the end of the day it's all politics

 

If Mr M had been from Mali or Bhutan they'd have let him die in jail for sure

 

 

Lovely oil.

[Park Life 71]

Thought the thread title was a twinned town thing at first.

[Happy Face 29]

The Times of London reports on two leaked memos from the British government under Labor Prime Minister Gordon Brown that strongly suggest that the Libyan accused of planning the Lockerbie airliner bombing was released in return for BP drilling rights in Libya. (H/t Crooks & Liars.

 

So are they leaked memos or spilled memos?

 

BP was founded in the early twentieth century for the purpose of exploiting Iran’s oil, which, as Stephen Kinzer at Tomdispatch argues, it gradually convinced itself it actually owned.

 

And the word ‘exploit’ seems to have been central to the company’s ethos ever since.

 

Although the Republicans and some Democrats in Congress don’t seem all that upset about, like, the destruction of the entire Gulf of Mexico (and some have been apologizing to BP for the shoddy way the US government has treated the company, making it pay for the damage it caused and all)– nevertheless, there are stirrings toward a congressional investigation of the Megrahi release.

 

http://www.juancole.com/2010/07/lockerbie-...ing-rights.html

[Rob W 0]

all business dear boy - the Libyans have never been able to do much with their own oil business so they opened it up - there was a big rush to start with but the last couple of bidding rounds have had a very poor response - terms aren't very competitive

 

Actually the "whole Gulf of Mexico" is not "destroyed" - just the bit of Louisiana

[Happy Face 29]

all business dear boy - the Libyans have never been able to do much with their own oil business so they opened it up - there was a big rush to start with but the last couple of bidding rounds have had a very poor response - terms aren't very competitive

 

Actually the "whole Gulf of Mexico" is not "destroyed" - just the bit of Louisiana

 

You'd have thought the BBC would mention this turn of events though.....given how frequently they've repeated the claim he was released for health reasons as fact....

 

8th July 2010

 

4th July 2010

 

30th March 2010

 

etc.

 

I can't be arsed going back to August.

[Happy Face 29]

Britain feared harsh action by Libya against UK interests if the convicted Lockerbie bomber died in jail, cables published by Wikileaks claim.

 

The US diplomatic cables reveal London's full support for the early release of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi.

 

The details, published in the Guardian, allege Libyan leader Colonel Gaddafi made "thuggish" threats to halt all trade deals if Megrahi stayed in jail.

 

Britain was "between a rock and a hard place", one cable to Washington said.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11944645

[Kevin S. Assilleekunt 1]

Would love to see some kind of leak on the actual bombing case, there seems to be reasonable doubt that it may not have been Al-Megrahi, and at the very least he certainly couldn't have pulled it off alone.

[AgentAxeman 199]

Would love to see some kind of leak on the actual bombing case, there seems to be reasonable doubt that it may not have been Al-Megrahi, and at the very least he certainly couldn't have pulled it off alone.

 

Well............. no................ of course he couldn't.

 

 

 

 

 

He'd need at least one person to actually be in the plane as well.