sildenafil

Sep

7

Brown, Ghaddafi, Libya and Lockerbie

Filed Under British Politics 

I’ve been remiss in not commenting on this story. To be honest, because I have been so busy recently, I haven’t been able to follow it as closely as I’d have liked. so consider this an open thread to comment on it.

Bookmark and Share

Comments

28 Responses to “Brown, Ghaddafi, Libya and Lockerbie”

  1. THX1138 on September 7th, 2009 1:07 pm

    One for The Brits where do we stand on the BNP being allowed on QT?

    Let’em on I say

    Matthew Syed nail’s in Today Times

    “The BNP is currently surfing a shallow wave of popularity not because it gets too much exposure, but because it gets too little”

  2. Ronnie on September 7th, 2009 1:11 pm

    Yes, let them on. Either we have free speech or we don’t. And how can we argue with them in public if they are not allowed to debate in public.

  3. Morgan on September 7th, 2009 4:04 pm

    I must admit to not being well informed regarding the BNP, though much of the little I do know is offensive.

  4. David M. on September 7th, 2009 4:43 pm

    THX,

    I agree 100% with the Matthew Syed comment.

    In addition to being a former Cambridge University ‘Boxing Blue’ I believe that, like BrickTop, Griffin also keeps pigs. So if you ever meet him try not to get on the wrong side of him!

  5. THX1138 on September 7th, 2009 5:05 pm

    I hope the other parties put up some real street fighters up against the bastard

    Tories William Hague ?

    Labour Mandelson?

    Lib Dems Charles Kennedy if he’s sober :)

    Perhaps Alan Sugar or Mad Mel too really put the boot in

    Hitler’s BNP membership gets leaked

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUNUuqlG1a0

    Totally LOL funny

  6. David M. on September 7th, 2009 5:28 pm

    THX,

    In a proper street fight with Griffin I’d still put money on former boxer, former deputy PM, PREZZA.(John Prescott) However not a good choice if it involves talking coherently. Don’t forget labour attack dog and former Home Secretary Dr John ‘Bruiser’ Reid.

    However for an occasion like this I’d deploy Melanie Phillips. She has a good track record with bringing out the worst in the BNP. eg. on BBC R4’s ‘Moral Maze.’

  7. THX1138 on September 7th, 2009 5:36 pm

    David

    Yes of course great choice Prescott or Reid would be perfect.

    You should look in on Prescott blog it’s marvelous un reconstructed Tory bashing- Great Fun

    http://www.gofourth.co.uk/johns_blog

    I think Hague would make Griffin look stupid with his wit. Trouble with Mad Mel is that I might and rooting for Griffin.

    What about Rod Liddle ?

  8. David M. on September 7th, 2009 6:00 pm

    THX,

    Rod Liddle. Was it him with the Nigel Farage and Chinese firecracker piece? LOL! Yes, good in a supporting role.

    Baroness Scotland? BUT don’t forget THE most withering and condescending of all the Blair babes – Patricia Hewitt!!!

    If I was the QT director I’d also stick George Galloway on the panel, and also Frederick Forsyth.

  9. THX1138 on September 7th, 2009 6:48 pm

    David

    Yep that was our Rod

    This is him in The Times having a right good go at the BNP

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/rod_liddle/article6301507.ece

    What about Hislop ?

    Isn’t this fun :)

  10. THX1138 on September 7th, 2009 6:52 pm

    Patricia Hewitt yep she nearly ran me over on Highgate Hill last summer – I gave her a right mouthful, have to say it was very empowering.

  11. Original Tony on September 7th, 2009 7:36 pm

    I wonder if you saw my name on the BNP list then?

    We just need a leader that can speak without shouting his mouth off.

  12. Conservative Cabbie on September 7th, 2009 7:42 pm

    OT

    I wonder if you saw my name on the BNP list then?

    If you are on that list, then I’m very disappointed in you I’m afraid. there is nothing good or worthy about the BNP.

  13. Israel on September 7th, 2009 8:27 pm

    Cabbie:

    What BNP list?

  14. Hayward Maberley on September 8th, 2009 11:33 am

    Israel,
    Is that a touch of irony?
    If not for you then for the benefit of those on your side across the ditch and on my side across the pond

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/6121283/BNP-list-leaker-is-living-off-the-British-people.html

  15. Hayward Maberley on September 8th, 2009 11:41 am

    Mr Cabbie ,
    Ah Lockerbie, a tangled web woven on all sides to deceive.
    Read Mr Fisk @
    http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/fisk/robert-fisk-for-the-truth-look-to-tehran-and-damascus-ndash-not-tripoli-1775813.html

  16. Hayward Maberley on September 8th, 2009 12:25 pm

    Mr Cabbie,
    Further on the tangled web, Mr Piger @
    http://www.newstatesman.com/international-politics/2009/09/pilger-megrahi-justice

  17. Conservative Cabbie on September 8th, 2009 12:34 pm

    Hayward

    One can always rely on John Pilger to find American complicity in there. American officials “bribed” a witness. I don’t often read John Pilger. Is he prone to bouts of unsubstantiated fantasy? Because there is not one direct piece of evidence in the entire article.

    I cannot say whether Megrahi is guilty or not, and that is fairly irrelevant to my feelings on the matter. Megrahi is a convicted terrorist, and should not have been released. However, what is just as disgusting, is that seemingly, the British government may have been complicit in denying justice to the victims, if in fact Megrahi is innocent. Whichever way this works, it is an absolute travesty, by those responsible for releasing Megrahi. And they claim they did it in the name of compassion.

  18. Ronnie on September 8th, 2009 12:38 pm

    Cabbie.

    ‘I cannot say whether Megrahi is guilty or not, and that is fairly irrelevant to my feelings on the matter. Megrahi is a convicted terrorist, and should not have been released.’

    That doesn’t make sense.

  19. Conservative Cabbie on September 8th, 2009 1:22 pm

    Ronnie

    That doesn’t make sense.

    Well it wouldn’t do when you miss of the bit I wrote about the possibility of being innocent. He has been convicted, if he is guilty as his convictions suggest, then he should not be released. That seems to be a fairly simple conclusion. What is confusing you about it?

    If however, he is innocent, then the legal processes that are in place to determine that should be gone through. By not doing so, the authorities are doing a disservice to the families of the victims and Megrahi.

    However, the court of John Pliger does not count.

    Hopefully that explains things. I cannot make it any simpler.

  20. THX1138 on September 8th, 2009 1:34 pm

    I shared a two hr train journey with Jim Swire and he was convinced that Megrahi was innocent.

    The plane was blown up by the Iranians in revenge for the US warship shooting down the Iranian Airbus.

  21. An American on September 8th, 2009 1:44 pm

    C. Cabbie,

    This too will be my last post. I wanted to thank you for all of you hard work. I came to this blog explicitly because of you. I admire your fine mind and sense of decency.

    But, I can no longer listen to the constant criticism of the country I love. I originally came on your blog to find some solace and answers into the terrible tragedy that is happening here. But instead, I’m constantly attacked personally for my beliefs…

    I’ve contacted other bloggers to come over to your blog with no success. I think they check in and check out after seeing how few conservatives comment here.

    I wish you future luck but my feeling is that you are casting pearls before swine at this time.

    If you’re ever in New Mexico, you’ll always be welcome in our home. Take care and God bless.

  22. Martin Meenagh on September 8th, 2009 1:45 pm

    By not having an appeal, the authorities avoid the eight hundred pages and thirteen volumes of appeal evidence, and don’t have to answer very very serious questions about their case. They also get access to oil and gas, and don’t agitate matters with the Iranians or Syrians. The CIA and the usual political suspects get to ‘grandstand’. mr Al-Megrahi gets to die at home, provided he decides to do so.

    But CC is right–we don’t get to really know what happened. Do we want to, over and above having the energy and avoiding another, albeit small, step-slide to a Persian war? I mean that as a genuine question.

  23. Martin Meenagh on September 8th, 2009 1:45 pm

    An American–good luck to you, by the way.

  24. THX1138 on September 8th, 2009 1:51 pm

    An American – Sweetheart don’t go !

  25. Ronnie on September 8th, 2009 2:01 pm

    Cabbie.

    Being in the West means that we do care that those convicted are actually guilty and that all the evidence is heard to ensure that is the case. Not knowing if someone is guilty but being satisfied with their conviction is quite a step back from that.

    Martin, my answer to your question is a resounding yes. Many people were killed at Lockerbie and they deserve justice. If we stand for anything it is that we believe they should have it.

    If agencies of our governments conspired to suppress evidence, for whatever reason then they are as guilty as those who actually committed the atrocity. We should not settle for that, because that is not what we are about.

    It’s astonishing how Libya have been able to milk this entire situation. They accepted a guilt that seems may not be theirs (what deals were struck?), paid compensation to the victims, were allowed back into the international fold and can now sell their oil.

    Trade is everything it seems.

  26. Conservative Cabbie on September 8th, 2009 2:06 pm

    Ronnie

    Not knowing if someone is guilty but being satisfied with their conviction is quite a step back from that.

    Hey, if you want to pervert my comment, you go right ahead. In courts up and down the land yesterday, people were no doubt being convicted of crimes. I’m assuming you are not au fait with the details of their convictions. are you therefore dissatisfied with their convictions? That is your logic.

  27. Martin Meenagh on September 8th, 2009 2:10 pm

    Ronnie, how could I disagree with you? But things at that level of undisclosed warfare that terrorism lives in, and in the energy business in general, are very nasty indeed.

    I suppose the answer is that which, funnily enough, Rudi Giuliani and Robert Kennedy answered differently when prosecuting mobsters. If you are dealing with bad men, and bad organisations, can you do bad things? Giuliani’s answer was , ‘no, you have to be straight as a die’. He still managed to put them in jail, and in doing so caused a chain reaction that had them eating each other.

    Kennedy’s answer was, ‘yes, but you have to be prepared to be worse than them’. Kennedy then found out that that created all sorts of other, metastasizing problems, and also that he just couldn’t be….

  28. Ronnie on September 8th, 2009 2:41 pm

    Yes Martin, once you become like them (’doing it the sshhikago way’) you lose the plot and then you them. We are fighting for our values and we have to use them, or we loose.

Leave a Reply