Goodness, a billion American dollars spent to support a rebellion hardly buys you anything these days.
The Libyan rebel government has refused outright to deport our old friend Abdel-Baset al-Megrahi, the man convicted of the bombing of Pan Am flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland which murdered 270 people, most of them Americans.
There was a formal request from US Senators Chuck Schumer( D NY) and others to hold al-Megrahi accountable and allow his extradition. "A new Libya can send a strong statement to the world by declaring it will no longer be a haven for this convicted terrorist," he said.
The Libyan response? Go pound sand, ferrenghi.
The transitional government's justice minister, Mohammed al-Alagi, said in Tripoli that the request by American senators had "no meaning" because Mr. Megrahi had already been tried and convicted.
"We will not hand over any Libyan citizen," he was quoted as saying. Obviously they're confident that this isn't going to affect their getting that nice package of western aid they want in the least.
As you'll remember, the British government freed al-Megrahi as part of a corrupt deal to gain access to Libyan oil contracts. al-Megrahi, a Libyan intelligence officer, was imprisoned in 2001 for life but served less than 8 years before he was released because he was supposedly dying of cancer and a doctor's report paid for by the Libyan government said he had three months to live at most. That was over two years ago, and it's worth remembering that the Obama Administration signed off on the deal.
al-Megrahi is a national hero in Libya. When he returned from Scotland after his premature release, he returned to a tumultuous welcome at the airport and was greeted by Khaddaffi himself, who awarded al-Megrahi a handsome pension and a nice villa in an upscale neighborhood of Tripoli. There's no way they're going to turn him over just for murdering a few infidels.
This was no doubt intended as a nice little message to the West . We may have bought and paid for their revolution, but it means nothing in the grand scheme of things. Once the inevitable struggle for power ends, the change is going to consist of a different set of rulers, who will likely be worst than Khaddaffi was from our point of view, no matter what our expectations. As the locals say, man supposes, Allah disposes.
We will eventually learn that the Muslim world has an entirely different set of values than the West. Eventually.
Great photo! I'd like to use it on my Maxine Waters expose.
ReplyDeleteAl-Megrahi's been tried, convicted, served time in prison and is currently in a Coma, so what's the point. Should he be summoned from the shadows, retried, re-convicted, re-sentenced, and hung.?
I guess they could do it like the Mubarak trial, except wheel al-Megrahi in while he's in a Coma, and then hang him as he sleeps. Nah? I'm so over 30 year old grudges it's not funny.
Hi Larry!
ReplyDeleteNice to have you drop by.
As for al-Megrahi, eh, I don't think he's in a coma.
Remember, the only reason he was tried in Britain is because they were leery about turning him over to us because we have capital punishment. So we agreed to waive extradition with the proviso that he would never be freed without US consent.
He should have been hung or fried, and even that wouldn't have been justice.
The reality was that this was an act of war by a sovereign state, and we should have bombed Khaddaffi and Libya back to the stone age and then left the rubble there as a reminder to others.If we'd done that, 9/11 might never have happened.
al-Megrahi murdered 270 people,most of them Americans and it was a particularly unpleasant and somewhat slow death, as most of them were catapulted into the air at freezing temperatures gasping for breath and died only when they hit the ground.
I could be wrong, but I have a feeling that if one of these people had been someone dear to you, you might not be over it just yet.
Regards,
Rob
The main stream media has largely been against the Libyan war. Since their man is in the White House, their opposition has been more muted than it likely would have been had a Republican been involved but it should be clear to any intellectually honest observer that the US media is and has been against NATO intervention in Libya and has sought to undermine it where and when possible.
ReplyDeleteI've been against the operation from the beginning because of concerns about our abilities to sustain such an operation without placing our liberty in even graver danger than it already is, what we are going to get from this, and will we be enabling Al Qaeda or other Islamic terrorists.
In the beginning, I stated that the rebels could not over throw the Ghaddaffi government without significant help from ground troops from NATO nations or America. since we don't have the available ground forces, this was a major reason the operatin was a bad idea. While they have not fully succeeded yet, I may have been wrong about this assertion that the rebels could not over throw the Libyan governmetn without significant help from ground forces outside the country.
If I formed my opinions based upon what the main stream media told me, I'd be extremely confused. These people breathlessly claim we're supporting Al Qaeda and therefore Libyan military actions should be opposed. They may have actually gotten this right!! However, they've been telling us for years that America "had it coming" and deserved what it received at the hands of Al Qaeda on 911 and other times. As Such, by their logic supporting Al Qaeda should meet with their approval.
The main stream media is illogical. This is partly why they cannot be trusted.