White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber
 

I find this sickening. Aww, you mean a mass-murderer was going to have to die of cancer in prison? How terrible. :doh:

[URL="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/white-house-backed-release-of-lockerbie-bomber-abdel-baset-al-megrahi/story-e6frg6so-1225896741041"]White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber Abdel Baset al-Megrahi | The Australian[/URL]

[URL="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/scotland/7909248/US-preferred-compassionate-release-of-Lockerbie-bomber-says-Alex-Salmond.html"][/URL]

Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber
 

Well they were fine with him dying in Scottish prison, just not Libyan. For what reason I'm not sure. I'm sure Libyan prison systems are more harsh and also probably more susceptible to bribe-releases. Or maybe it's due to him not receiving decent care in a Libyan prison, which would be less palatable for me to accept. I wouldn't mind seeing the letter because it can sway either way.

Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber
 

[quote=tryfuhl;714067]Well they were fine with him dying in Scottish prison, just not Libyan. For what reason I'm not sure. I'm sure Libyan prison systems are more harsh and also probably more susceptible to bribe-releases. Or maybe it's due to him not receiving decent care in a Libyan prison, which would be less palatable for me to accept. I wouldn't mind seeing the letter because it can sway either way.[/quote]

I'm guessing they want to ship gitmo detainees to libya. Regardless, the Scotts are free to do as they please and the article title is misleading.

Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber
 

[quote=saden1;714086]I'm guessing they want to ship gitmo detainees to libya. Regardless, the Scotts are free to do as they please and the article title is misleading.[/quote]

After reading a few articles about this, I agree that the article title is a bit misleading. It's not like Obama and Co said, "hey, let the guy go." It still doesn't sit well with me that they weren't overly opposed to "compassionate release," and it doesn't excuse The Lord's BS about being "surprised, disappointed, and angry" about his release. He knew what was coming. Otherwise he and his ilk wouldn't be trying to keep said correspondence secret.

But hey, BP now gets to drill off of Libya. This whole thing stinks to high heaven.

Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber
 

[quote=GMScud;714066]I find this sickening. Aww, you mean a mass-murderer was going to have to die of cancer in prison? How terrible. :doh:

[URL="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/white-house-backed-release-of-lockerbie-bomber-abdel-baset-al-megrahi/story-e6frg6so-1225896741041"]White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber Abdel Baset al-Megrahi | The Australian[/URL]

[/quote]

Dude, not saying the guy deserves a break, but our current president and the last 3 presidents could be called mass murderers, and with a much larger body count. They can be brought up on war crimes by international law, but since they are presidents will never get nailed.

Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber
 

[quote=GusFrerotte;714095]Dude, not saying the guy deserves a break, but our current president and [B]the last 3 presidents could be called mass murderers[/B], and with a much larger body count. They can be brought up on war crimes by international law, but since they are presidents will never get nailed.[/quote]I call flat out bullshit. Not Bush 1, Clinton, Bush 2, or Obama should be called mass murders or war criminals. If I honestly felt the last four presidents were mass murders, I would resign my citizenship and find another country.

Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber
 

This is just a good example of how other governments view Obama "the community organizer" as a world leader. I'm guessing if we had a stronger pres in office this guy would still be behind bars. Thats just my gut feeling. Even if I'm wrong about that its just another lie Obama has made. I'm loosing count.

Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber
 

[quote=firstdown;714149]This is just a good example of how other governments view Obama "the community organizer" as a world leader. I'm guessing if we had a stronger pres in office this guy would still be behind bars. Thats just my gut feeling. Even if I'm wrong about that its just another lie Obama has made. I'm loosing count.[/quote]

So did Obama back the release or condemn, First and GMScud? It can't be both. I love how you and GMScud manufacture controversy with these bs Obama threads.

Do you guys watch the news -- at all? Or just scour the internet for sh*t to whine about?

Now here's some actual reporting on what Obama said about the release.

[URL="http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/07/20/obama.cameron.visit/index.html"]Obama, Cameron blast release of Lockerbie bomber - CNN.com[/URL]

Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber
 

I take it you didn't actually read the link in the OP 12th

Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber
 

[quote=GMScud;714087]After reading a few articles about this, I agree that the article title is a bit misleading. It's not like Obama and Co said, "hey, let the guy go." It still doesn't sit well with me that they weren't overly opposed to "compassionate release," and it doesn't excuse The Lord's BS about being "surprised, disappointed, and angry" about his release. He knew what was coming. Otherwise he and his ilk wouldn't be trying to keep said correspondence secret.

But hey, BP now gets to drill off of Libya. This whole thing stinks to high heaven.[/quote]

The Scotts have laws...the administration can voice its concerns to the Scottish Government but their courts and review boards make the decisions. If they're going to just transfer him it's completely worthless because they will free him. Now if you release him you can a) get oil, b) repatriation the some of Libyan gitmo detainees, c) it never hurts to look merciful, and d) it's not a battle worth fighting due to his impending death and lack of control.


You're confusing the being surprised at the decision that was made vs the knowledge of the choices they have in front of them and your own preferences. So yes, you can be surprised. It's all PR though...it really doesn't mean anything.


Would I have let him go? Hell no, especially if the evidence was overwhelming and he really is guilty. I'd put him in a see through box, put a camera outside that box and broadcast his imprisonment and slow death of cancer on the internet. Do I have to give him cancer medication?

Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber
 

[quote=12thMan;714157]So did Obama back the release or condemn, First and GMScud? It can't be both. I love how you and GMScud manufacture controversy with these bs Obama threads.

Do you guys watch the news -- at all? Or just scour the internet for sh*t to whine about?

Now here's some actual reporting on what Obama said about the release.

[URL="http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/07/20/obama.cameron.visit/index.html"]Obama, Cameron blast release of Lockerbie bomber - CNN.com[/URL][/quote]

You can include SS33 in that list too...it is really getting worse by the day and it's troubling to see their anger take over.

Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber
 

[quote=SmootSmack;714159]I take it you didn't actually read the link in the OP 12th[/quote]

I did, but it's not the link I really have an issue with, it's the title of the thread and ensuing and misleading attacks.

Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber
 

12th, maybe this is a little of the problem. From the CNN article you linked:
[QUOTE]Obama said most Americans were "surprised, disappointed and angry" about the decision to let al Megrahi go. "We should have all the facts," he added. "They should be laid out there." The decision "ran contrary to how we should be treating terrorists."[/QUOTE]

contrasted with this quote from the OP article:
[QUOTE]The US has tried to keep the letter secret, refusing to give permission to the Scottish authorities to publish it on the grounds it would prevent future "frank and open communications" with other governments.[/QUOTE]

So, do we lay it all out, or prevent the letter's disclosure. If Pres Obama thinks the letter should not be published, then he should state that some facts can't be released at this time, due to the strategic nature of the conversations, or national interests, or what ever he wants to say. But don't tell the national media that all the facts should be laid out, and at the same time have your administration trying to suppress a key letter.

Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber
 

[quote=12thMan;714157]So did Obama back the release or condemn, First and GMScud? It can't be both. I love how you and GMScud manufacture controversy with these bs Obama threads.

Do you guys watch the news -- at all? Or just scour the internet for sh*t to whine about?

Now here's some actual reporting on what Obama said about the release.

[URL="http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/07/20/obama.cameron.visit/index.html"]Obama, Cameron blast release of Lockerbie bomber - CNN.com[/URL][/quote]

That article is months after the fact and is only 6 days old and this happened how long ago. Funny how thay had harsh words but stop at that.

[B]Washington (CNN)[/B] -- U.S. President Barack Obama and British Prime Minister David Cameron on Tuesday blasted Scottish authorities' decision to release the convicted Lockerbie bomber last year and agreed on the need to push for a more transparent disclosure of the circumstances surrounding Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi's release.
[B]Cameron, however, said he is opposed to a British government investigation into the release. [/B]

Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber
 

[QUOTE]The US has tried to keep the letter secret, refusing to give permission to the Scottish authorities to publish it on the grounds it would prevent future "frank and open communications" with other governments.

In the letter, sent on August 12 last year to Scottish First Minister Alex Salmond and justice officials, Mr LeBaron wrote that the US wanted Megrahi to remain imprisoned in view of the nature of the crime.[/QUOTE]

If you believe the letter exists and the letter's content says we "Megrahi to remain imprisoned" what exactly in this "key letter" is being suppressed?

Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber
 

[quote=saden1;714163]You can include SS33 in that list too...it is really getting worse by the day and it's troubling to see their anger take over.[/quote]

You guys have very short memories because we had to read thread after thread of hate on Bush from you guys. Some of it was diserved but there was plenty of BS mixed in over the years. I don't hate Obama I just don't think he is a very good president.

Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber
 

[quote=firstdown;714174]You guys have very short memories because we had to read thread after thread of hate on Bush from you guys. Some of it was diserved but [B]there was plenty of BS mixed in over the years[/B]. I don't hate Obama I just don't think he is a very good president.[/quote]

You will find none by me. Feel free to go look for them. If you don't think he's a good president that's fine but at least be able to justify why you think that with sound reason and credible protests. If you guys keep crying wolf about every little stupid thing eventually no one will believe you.

Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber
 

I really don't know what this thread is about...start off with the impression that Obama admin released the bomber...then it was about "how he really wasn't surprised at the news".....now it's about "him not releasing a key letter" and how "he's not transparent." You guys and your arguments are a moving target but a slow moving target that's easy to pick off.

Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber
 

[quote=firstdown;714174]You guys have very short memories because we had to read thread after thread of hate on Bush from you guys. Some of it was diserved but there was plenty of BS mixed in over the years. I don't hate Obama I just don't think he is a very good president.[/quote]

I don't know who you guys are, but you won't find one thread, and I dare say, one post by me bashing Bush. I'd be surprised if you could dig up one. Now I've disagreed with him, I've been angry with him, don't like him, but I can't recall starting a thread just to gin up bs.

Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber
 

[quote=saden1;714180]I really don't know what this thread is about...start off with the impression that Obama admin released the bomber...then it was about "how he really wasn't surprised at the news".....now it's about "him not releasing a key letter" and how "he's not transparent." You guys and your arguments are a moving target but a slow moving target that's easy to pick off.[/quote]


They don't even know what the thread is about.

Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber
 

[quote=saden1;714178]You will find none by me. Feel free to go look for them. If you don't think he's a good president that's fine but at least be able to justify why you think that with sound reason and credible protests. If you guys keep crying wolf about every little stupid thing eventually no one will believe you.[/quote]

I did not start this thread and I really don't know if the letter is real or not. I do believe that with another pres in office there is a good chance this guy would still be behind bars. After you spend a year going around apologizing for anything and everything, bowing to dictators, etc.. you start to look weak and thats what he has done. The guy killed like 189 Americans and our president did not see to it that the guy stayed behind bars. Something is totaly wrong with that and I don't think that happens if Bush was in office.

Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber
 

I find this about as interesting as the Dez Bryant report. Overall, who cares, but it does show something about the character of Pres. Obama.

Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber
 

[quote=firstdown;714189]I did not start this thread and I really don't know if the letter is real or not. I do believe that with another pres in office there is a good chance this guy would still be behind bars. After you spend a year going around apologizing for anything and everything, bowing to dictators, etc.. you start to look weak and thats what he has done. The guy killed like 189 Americans and our president did not see to it that the guy stayed behind bars. Something is totaly wrong with that and I don't think that happens if Bush was in office.[/quote]

I suppose Obama admin could have told the Scots "don't release him or else" but don't tell me he didn't try to keep him locked behind bars. And your little dig at "community organizers" is really shameful especially in light of the fact that you're part of your community and help deaf kids annually. Shame on you.

Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;714192]I find this about as interesting as the Dez Bryant report. Overall, who cares, but it does [B]show something about the character of Pres. Obama.[/B][/quote]

Yes it does...how amazing he is!

Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber
 

[quote=saden1;714197]I suppose Obama admin could have told the Scots "don't release him or else" but don't tell me he didn't try to keep him locked behind bars. And your little dig at the "community organizers" is really shameful especially in light of the fact that you're part of your community and help deaf kids annually. Shame on you.[/quote]

Thats not a dig on him helping his community its a dig on his experience. You don't really know me but I encourage everyone to do some sort of volunteer work because I think it helps the person doing the volunteering as well as who they are helping. I believe I have encouraged other here to volunteer. He could have said release them or else but do you really think that the Scots would worry about Obama saying "or else"? I don't.

Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber
 

[quote=saden1;714198]Yes it does...how amazing he is![/quote]

Yes, that is EXACTLY what I was thinking. Like the Amazing Houdini! He can do one thing and make you see another.

Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber
 

[quote=firstdown;714199]Thats not a dig on him helping his community its a dig on his experience. You don't really know me but I encourage everyone to do some sort of volunteer work because I think it helps the person doing the volunteering as well as who they are helping. I believe I have encouraged other here to volunteer. He could have said release them or else but do you really think that the Scots would worry about Obama saying "or else"? I don't.[/quote]

How is being a community organizer a dig on his experience?

By the way, this is what the thread, and most Obama threads are really about. It took us a couple of pages to get here, but now we know.

Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber
 

[url=http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/07/25/obama-administration-reportedly-backed-lockerbie-release-transfer-libyan-prison/]FOXNews.com - White House Reportedly Preferred Scotland to Libya for Released Lockerbie Bomber[/url]

Fox news is actually reporting it right: "The Obama administration told Scottish officials last August that, although it opposed any release of the Lockerbie bomber, it would rather see him released in Scotland than transferred to a Libyan prison, according to a secret memo obtained by The Sunday Times in London." And the last statement of the release: "According to Britain's Daily Telegraph, Salmond on Sunday said the United States did not want al-Megrahi released."


So the Obama and the his administration never wanted him release and the title of this thread is misleading. end of story

Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber
 

[quote=firstdown;714199]Thats not a dig on him helping his community its a dig on his experience. You don't really know me but I encourage everyone to do some sort of volunteer work because I think it helps the person doing the volunteering as well as who they are helping. I believe I have encouraged other here to volunteer. He could have said release them or else but do you really think that the Scots would worry about Obama saying "or else"? I don't.[/quote]

You can take stabs at his experience but it speaks for itself...it takes more than experience to be a great leader, see Abe Lincoln, arguably the greatest president America has had...2 years as a congressman vs 7 years as a State Senator and 2 years as a US Senator.

You are right in that I don't know you well but what I do know is that in your posts you have this perception that being a community organizer has no value and isn't a meaningful experience.

What makes you think that if Obama said "or else" no one will listen? Just ask Benjamin Netanyahu. You know, Bush has been telling the Iranians and North Koreans for ears "or else" through out his presidency and it didn't amount to sh*t.

Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;714201]Yes, that is EXACTLY what I was thinking. Like the Amazing Houdini! He can do one thing and make you see another.[/quote]

Has he mastered the art of Jedi mind tricks? If he has he can bring peace to the galaxy.

Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber
 

Peace is the ultimate goal of course. Maybe one day we will hear a version of this:

[QUOTE]"It is with great reluctance that I have agreed to this calling. I love democracy. I love the Republic. But I am mild by nature, and do not wish to see the destruction of democracy. The power you give me I will lay down when this crisis has abated. And as my first act with this new authority, I will create a Grand Army of the Republic to counter the increasing threats of the Separatists."[/QUOTE]

I have no doubt you will stand with him at that point

Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;714214]Peace is the ultimate goal of course. Maybe one day we will hear a version of this:



I have no doubt you will stand with him at that point[/quote]

If the Scots aren't with us they're against us. Execute order 66.

Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber
 

[quote=12thMan;714164]I did, but it's not the link I really have an issue with, it's the title of the thread and ensuing and misleading attacks.[/quote]

Well to be fair, Scud did create the thread title based directly on the article title and did later admit to maybe being a bit overzealous on the thread title.

Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber
 

[quote=12thMan;714182]I don't know who you guys are, but you won't find one thread, and I dare say, one post by me bashing Bush. I'd be surprised if you could dig up one. Now I've disagreed with him, I've been angry with him, don't like him, but I can't recall starting a thread just to gin up bs.[/quote]

I think we all know there's one person here who digs up bs on one side and one who digs up bs on the other...for the sole purpose of digging up bs. This thread is hardly starting one just to gin up bs.

Now have others on occasion? Sure. And are political threads basically retarded? Absolutely. Does anyone actually say "hey, you know what. Even though I disagree with you fundamentally you actually make a good point? Almost never

Thank goodness training camp is just a couple of days away

Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber
 

[quote=saden1;714217]If the Scots aren't with us they're against us. Execute order 66.[/quote]

Don't we need to amend the UN [URL="http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Security_Act_amendment"]Security Act[/URL] first to give LO full supremacy?

Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber
 

[quote=SmootSmack;714223]Well to be fair, Scud did create the thread title based directly on the article title and did later admit to maybe being a bit overzealous on the thread title.[/quote]

Fair enough.

Yes, thank God for training camp.

Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;714229]Don't we need to amend the UN [URL="http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Security_Act_amendment"]Security Act[/URL] first to give LO full supremacy?[/quote]

If Operation Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom has taught us anything it is that the Security Council is easily swayed. With Lord Obama the Sith will reign once more... The Force is strong with him.

Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber
 

BP wanted to get back into Libya. Libya wanted their "hero" out of the slammer. BP was a big contributor to President Hussein. Seems pretty cut and dry to me. I don't see why this would be a shock to anyone? It's just business!

Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber
 

Ya know when Olie North was questioned by the Gov. he was asked why he purchased a $60,000 alarm system for his home and he basically said he had received death threats. They asked him who would scare him that much? And he said Osama Bin Laden. They asked what would he have them do about Osama and he said assassinate him.

I'll give you another nugget... The Senator who questioned Olie was Al Gore. Then during the Isreal/Palistine agreements on freeing political prisoners Palistine requested the release on one specific prisoner and Isreal said no cause he actually partook in a bombing. Pres. Clinton stepped in and talked Isreal into releasing the guy. Wouldn't you know he was the pilot of the second plane that hit the second tower.

This guy should not have been released. He didn't care about anyone on the plane that died so why should anyone care about his feelings or his families or whether he's comfortable? Let his but rot in prison. Our luck his old ass signs up for a suicide mission.

Re: White House backed release of Lockerbie bomber
 

[quote=SBXVII;714364]Ya know when Olie North was questioned by the Gov. he was asked why he purchased a $60,000 alarm system for his home and he basically said he had received death threats. They asked him who would scare him that much? And he said Osama Bin Laden. They asked what would he have them do about Osama and he said assassinate him.

I'll give you another nugget... The Senator who questioned Olie was Al Gore. Then during the Isreal/Palistine agreements on freeing political prisoners Palistine requested the release on one specific prisoner and Isreal said no cause he actually partook in a bombing. Pres. Clinton stepped in and talked Isreal into releasing the guy. Wouldn't you know he was the pilot of the second plane that hit the second tower.

This guy should not have been released. He didn't care about anyone on the plane that died so why should anyone care about his feelings or his families or whether he's comfortable? Let his but rot in prison. Our luck his old ass signs up for a suicide mission.[/quote]

You're a conspiracy theorist!