A Brave and Strange Decision

I can’t help but admire the Scottish Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill, in facing down the ferocious rhetoric and phone calls from American officials including Hillary Clinton.  In today releasing Megrahi, the Libyan convicted of the Lockerbie bombings, MacAskill risked the ire of the American Government and many in his own country.

I think we know what would have happened had this particular power not been conveniently devolved to Scotland by Westminster.  The spineless creep Jack Straw will have hastened to assure Washington that it would get what it wanted, if indeed they did oppose Megrahi’s release.  I wonder whether State department officials compete to come up with the most degrading and ridiculous requests and demands, to see if the New Labour Atlanticists have a limit or capacity for independent thought.

Apparently not, and I’m hoping that they are cooking up some plan to have David Miliband ride backwards on a donkey, naked, into the UN General Assembly, or perhaps ask Gordon Brown to hold his breath for 10 minutes, or more cruelly for him and the rest of us, smile for one minute.

So MacAskill was brave, but was his decision correct?  I think so, but not for the curious reasons he gave at the press conference earlier today.  The decision to release Megrahi was correct solely because there is too much doubt about his guilt, because he was never given a fair trial where all evidence was presented, as the excellent work by the late Paul Foot showed.

While the American relatives of the Lockerbie victims seem content that Megrahi was the perpetrator and that he should therefore end his days in a Scottish prison, many of the British relatives are less convinced.  Both sets of relatives are clear that we haven’t learned the full truth of what happened, and that the US and UK governments will not let us find out.  The demand for a full, unrestricted inquiry is completely right of course, though the suffocating secrecy surrounding the murky actions of the British and American States means we will probably never get one until capitalism is overthrown.  Luckily that should be happening in 2010, so I hear.

So what of MacAskill’s decision today?  The right one for the wrong reasons.  MacAskill reasoned that Megrahi had received punishment from a ‘higher power’ in the form of his terminal cancer for his alleged crimes, and that it was the compassionate and merciful thing to send him home to die.  Wrong and wrong.

The first assertion is downright insulting, suggesting that cancer is somehow a punishment for wrongdoing, and invoking a God giving people cancer as divine justice.  This isn’t far removed from the kind of assertion that cost Glenn Hoddle the England job, namely that disabled people must have done something wrong in a previous life.  Illness and infirmity is a sign of immorality or criminality in this world view, a very offensive and dangerous one.  It also assumes Megrahi actually committed the bombings, a highly dubious conclusion.

The second assertion I have found troubling also.  If Megrahi had committed this atrocity, the idea that he should be allowed to go home to die does seem to clash with the fact that hundreds of innocent people were killed without warning and without a chance to say goodbye to loved ones.  If Megrahi had committed this crime, we shouldn’t feel compassion, he really should have ended his days in Greenock Prison.

In a way, those of us commenting on this affair are playing hide and seek in the dark.  We can only really guess at the intrigues and manoeuvres  behind the scenes.  Megrahi was clearly required to drop his second appeal in order to be released, and this was to stop any revelations coming out in that appeal.  The American Government probably support the release behind closed doors for this reason, the British government likewise.  As to who committed this terrorist act, they have got away with it for a variety of reasons we are not party to.  This is unacceptable.

One of the demands of the Left with regard to private companies is ‘Open the books’, and the opening of the State books would make very interesting reading.  State secrecy allows security and intelligence services to commit horrific and immoral actions under the cloak of darkness.  Our demand should always be for full-disclosure, and to encourage the development anjd defence of media such as WikiLeaks and IndyMedia so we can check, in a limited way, what the Masters of the Universe are up to.  One day what we find out might bring one of these Masters to justice for their crimes, in Iraq, or Afghanistan, or Palestine.  Or maybe Lockerbie.

Advertisements

4 Responses to A Brave and Strange Decision

  1. On state secrecy – wasn’t one of the things the Bolsheviks did after the Russian Revolution was publish all of Russia’s secret treaties – I know it’s not quite the same thing – but it shows a certain precedent.

  2. Mary Jane says:

    Overthrow of capitalism? 2010? That’s the spirit dear boy! Some good old-fashioned SWP optimism. Actually something tells me we’ll see a £40 billion cheque bounce sometime in early 2011. And a lot of politicians could be for the high jump.

    As it happens, Washington didn’t have to make Brown and Milliband look stupid. Those two clowns just done the job themselves in ways Washington could never imagine. A couple of recent reports from the Guardian web site:
    Gordon Brown sends a humble/ass-kissing letter to Gadaffi asking for him to show a bit of discretion when McGrahi arrives in Libya. Gadaffi, of course, made the letter public to the whole world.
    A short while later, Milliband tells everyone: “Commercial interests had nothing to do with Megrahi’s release. Such an attack is a slur on the government”.
    Are these two ‘politicians’ intentionally trying to be funny? Or are they really that thick? Are they even aware that all the evidence points to a cover-up? I’m also a bit mystified about how and why Gordon’s letter seems to have reached Gadaffi before McGrahi did.

    For a few days I’ve been waiting to see whether Jack Straw will crawl out from under his rock to say “McGrahi will die in jail”, you know, the way he did with Ronnie Biggs. And I half-expected Tony Blair to suddenly appear on the scene, like the good Christian he is, to stop everyone learning the truth, the way he did with the recent inquiry into the war in Iraq.

    No doubt a future Socialist inquiry would turn up the following, which I’ve learned from a couple of very reliable sources. Make of it what you will:
    – McGrahi was employed by a Libyan intelligence service, and was travelling with a fake passport. That’s not to say he wasn’t just a scapegoat.
    – A well-established terrorist group based in Damascus, Syria, had something to do with the Lockerbie attack, and they may have been the real perpetrators. This is part of what our own government is hiding. Why exactly, I haven’t the slightest.

    Whoever the culprits are, they murdered 270 civilians and got away with it, and our government is preventing us learning the truth of what happened. All this during the ‘War on Terror’. All this when the relatives of the victims deserve justice and the answers. So much for compassion.

  3. vengeanceandfashion says:

    LC – I think they did do that yeah, the key is to carry that on, very difficult in a situation of civil war perhaps, but only insects and mould thrive in darkness so I think it would be important.

    Mary Jane – I think with Brown and Miliband, they are politically thick, but more importantly they think the rest of us are thick and will fall for their lies and distortions. Their approval ratings suggest otherwise. Like you, I’m surprised no-one like Straw or Blair stuck their noses in, but I think they were quite happy to have passed a steaming heap of manure onto MacAskills desk, and let him take the flack.

  4. BigDave says:

    I seem to remember at the time that Syrian terrorists, sponsored by their “evil” government, were to blame, then some sort of deal was struck between Syria and the west, next thing they are chasing Libyans. I seem to remember many of the people in Lockerbie were reported as suspecting some sort of stitch up based around diplomatic needs. Of course with time the memory fades, and now of course, people assume that Megrahi is guilty.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: