The West’s ‘Profound Hypocrisy’ Over Lockerbie ‘Suspect’s’ Release: Le Quotidien d’Oran, Algeria
Aug 25th, 2009 | 7 responses
Is it possible that Western officials were surprised by the welcome given by Libyan despot Mouammar Qadaffi to Lockerbie bombing convict Abdels al-Megrahi? Or could it be that their outrage stems from the embarrassment they feel over the way the story has been covered by the Western media? Reflecting a swath of Muslim reaction to the story, K. Selim of Algeria’s Le Quotidien d’Oran suggests that the answer is certainly the latter.
For Le Quotidien d’Oran, K. Selim writes in part:
“Western governments are well aware of the nature of the Libyan regime. They knew it would make intense media use of the return of someone who, by assuming a sentence he considers unjust, permitted Libya to escape the state of international banishment to which it was confined. Tripoli, let’s not forget, gave in on practically everything: it signed its surrender and delivered secrets that put the father of the Pakistani bomb in serious difficulty. Therefore, no one could have expected that it wouldn’t seek compensation for its compromises by welcoming al-Megrahi home as a hero and portraying his return as a “victory.” This is all in the order of things and arguably, this is all part of the transaction. ‘Business as usual.’”
“‘In all of its commercial contracts for oil and gas with Great Britain, Mr. Megrahi was always on the negotiating table.’ So declared Seif al-Islam, son of Colonel Qadaffi, and there is no reason to disbelieve him. Tripoli has fully complied with its agreements. It is Western officials, embarrassed by the comments of their own press, who are indulging in an appalling duplicity.”
By K. Selim
Translated By Sandrine Ageorges
August 23, 2009
Algeria – Le Quotidien d’Oran- Original Article (French)
The release of Abdels Basset Ali Mohamed al-Megrahi and the triumphant welcome predictably prepared by Libyan authorities have provoked reactions of incredible hypocrisy from Western countries. Al-Megrahi was found guilty by a Scottish court on the basis of a dossier fabricated mostly by Western intelligence services. No one is yet in a position to assert that justice was done.
READ ON AT WORLDMEETS.US, your most trusted translator and aggregator of foreign news and views about our nation.
7 Responses to “The West’s ‘Profound Hypocrisy’ Over Lockerbie ‘Suspect’s’ Release: Le Quotidien d’Oran, Algeria”
of course! we just picked that poor, poor man out of a hat. and i'd be happy to agree, mr. selim, if you could only show me the evidence of said fabrication. no? fine. feel to stick it where the sun don't shine, then.
and i love that last line. “No one”? really? perhaps the people considering the evidence on the jury? works for me, anyway.
onleyone…..here's a hint: there was no jury.
okay, zedx, i'll bite: judge(s) then. so what? the only problem should be if there was no legal due process involved, or if the case wasn't based on the evidence. if the claim is that it was not in fact based on the evidence at hand – or that that evidence was somehow manufactured or doctored – then evidence of that should necessarily be asserted.
i'm all ears.
Well, that is a considerable difference as oppose to your assertion of a 'jury'. Have you have read the report from the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission? I would recommend you acquaint yourself with the writing on the matter of the original trial and the 'evidence' presented. Or not presented, as it would seem. By looking at the facts, the evidence which was placed before the court which should not have been (having already been wholly discredited), the evidence that was NOT placed before the court, it is not difficult to understand political expedience, not justice, as been uppermost. Briefly: Gauci, the Maltese shopkeepers evidence was obtained through financial reward. There is no evidence the suitcase was introduced at Malta. The 'microchip fragment' was discovered and indentified by a man who was forced to leave his profession after it was discovered he had been altering and fabricating evidence for years. Forget about the safety of your seat or the disapproval of your peers, I implore you to search your conscience and to apply some rational thought.
Go to wikipedia.org and enter “Cuban Flight 455″ and see who originated terror bombing airplanes, also, who all of the suspects worked for. Then I will cry you a river over a dying man going home.
zedx:
“assert”, hell. “considerable difference”? i was referring to whatever legal body was involved, whether jury, or panel of justices, or whatever you like. but fair enough. if the evidence is as sketchy as you claim – if it's such an open secret – it seems that it should've been reflected in the appeals process. but no, not with insufficient explanation as has been the case here, especially given the nature of the crime.
joeinhell:
tell me you're not serious. i responded to a nearly identical comment of yours on a related story– it must really hit your sweet spot for you to repeat it so much. or maybe you just need a different hobby than politics?
zedx:
i will say the original case does look sketchy at best (but “fabricated” is a loaded word)….