Morning:
13°c
Britain facing backlash over Lockerbie release
Ben Bailey24.08.09
The Scottish Justice Secretary will face more fierce criticism today over his decision to free the Lockerbie bomber.
Amid a deepening international backlash over the move, Kenny MacAskill will face his political opponents in the Scottish Parliament when members gather for an emergency debate.
Yesterday Scottish First Minister Alex Salmond was forced to again defend Abdelbaset Ali Al Megrahi's release in the face of blistering attacks from his predecessor Jack McConnell and the head of the FBI.
Mr Salmond, the leader of the Scottish National Party administration in Edinburgh, said Mr MacAskill had made the "right decision" for "absolutely the right reasons".
And he insisted that Scotland's relationship with the United States remained strong, despite fears the deepening row could have damaging repercussions for Scottish businesses and wider British-US relations.
Megrahi, who is terminally ill with cancer, was freed by Mr MacAskill on compassionate grounds after serving eight years of a life sentence. He returned home to Libya to jubilant scenes that included people waving Scottish flags.
Yesterday the US' top US military officer joined in the condemnation of the release.
Speaking on CNN's State of the Union show, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen said: "This is obviously a political decision."
Several US senators also pitched in, with Democrat Ben Cardin saying: "The terrorist shows no compassion and to give him a compassionate
release was wrong.
"I think it's very serious and I think there should be consequences."
A website boycottscotland.com has been set up. It said: "We urge all Americans to protest this action by boycotting the United Kingdom and Scotland in full.
"Don't travel to Scotland or do business there (or in the United Kingdom in general) and don't buy any British or Scottish products."
In London, UK ministers have expressed concern over the potential political damage because of Megrahi's release.
Employment Minister Jim Knight told Sky News yesterday: "I hope that there is no fallout from this for Scotland, and I hope that there is no fallout from this for the UK in terms or our relationship with the US which is a key relationship for us."
The Scottish Parliament returns today, a week early, for its emergency debate.
Former Scots Labour chief Mr McConnell said members needed to make clear that the decision did not have the support of the Scottish people.
"I think it's absolutely vital that the Scottish Parliament now takes action to limit that damage and to give a clear indication to the rest of the world that when the Scottish Government made this decision they were not acting with the support of the people of Scotland," he said.
Meanwhile, Gordon Brown continued to come under pressure from opposition parties to say whether he supported Megrahi's release. So far, UK ministers have refused to comment, sticking firmly to the line that it was a matter for the Scottish authorities.
But amid signs of increasing strains between London and Edinburgh, the Foreign Office dismissed suggestions that ministers in London had tacitly encouraged their Scottish counterparts to go ahead with the release.
In response to a letter from Mr MacAskill asking for advice on the legal position, Foreign Office Minister Ivan Lewis concluded: "I hope on this basis you will now feel able to consider the Libyan action in accordance with the provisions of the prisoner transfer agreement."
The Sunday Times quoted a source close to Mr MacAskill as saying: "That clearly means 'I hope on this basis you will feel able to approve the Libyan application'. That's the only conclusion you can take from it."
However, a Foreign Office spokeswoman said that Mr Lewis had explicitly stated in the letter that the Government was not making representations on whether Megrahi should be transferred to Libya.
"It is absolute rubbish to suggest that this letter provided any encouragement to transfer Megrahi to Libya," the spokeswoman said.
"It merely provided the British government's legal opinion, as requested by the Scottish government, in order to give Scottish ministers the information they had requested to enable them to make a decision."
Reader views (20)
I'd like to point out that this entire incident is an example of the contempt that the leaders in Scotland and England have for their own voters. No surprise there.
I'd also like to point out that this hideous betrayal of the victims of Lockerbie was engineered no doubt to sweeten the pot with terror-state Libya for economic and political reasons. Utterly disgusting.
And the rather childish reaction by certain American zealots comes as really no surprise. Perhaps now is a good time for the UK to pull out of this one-sided alliance? Exactly what we have come to expect.
How much more humiliation can the UK public take from this cabal of crooks who call themselves a government?
- Curt, Glasgow
Where is the compassion to the families of this man who blew their loved ones to smitherines? If he was given a life sentence, it is illogical to me that he would be released because he is dying.
By the way, I am a British expat and I am always bemused by the silly comments people make toward an entire nation based on one incident. To those of you suddenly vilifying the UK, ALL of your countries have done stupid and thoughtless things so grow up and stop throwing stones around your glass houses!
- Jh, Nashville TN
With what seems like weekly tributes to our dead service personnel coming back from the war on terrorism, America seems to have a very selective way of supporting its allies.
- Keith Allfrey, Staines, England
salmond... in the words of Michael Corleone...
Never turn against The Family...
- Paul Jardine, Bromley, Kent
With a bit of luck, this incident will permanently damage the "special relationship" Britain is meant to have with the USA. Who wants to be friends with the government of a country that starts wars without good reason and regards civilian deaths it causes as "collateral damage".
- Austen, London
Perhaps if the US hadn't shot down Iran Air Flight No. 655 none of this would have happened in the first place, and these "substantial US based operation[s]" wouldn't be having to treat Scotland as a "pariah" country.
- Mark H, London, England
As a board member of a substantial US based operation we have suspended talks with a particular Scottish agency concerning the establishment of a support center. This is largely due to the considered abhorrent action taken by the Scottish judiciary last week. In all probability we will establish our European center in Dublin, Ireland. From an economic standpoint there is little difference in the venue change, but politically it is necessary. Speaking with my colleagues within the same industry there is a consensus that Scotland is no longer a considered venue for the financial services industry and either growing or relocating now has a certain stigma that we do not need.
- Ian, New York, USA
The US slaughters 600 people in Vietnam and then has the gall to demonise Scotland. Calley got out after only three years of a life sentence and HE was guilty of the massacre. Oh, I was forgetting that Calley was a US terrorist with special permission from the CIA etc.
T H Leeds
- Awesome Geronimo, Leeds UK
It's interesting that the U.S are taking such an aggressive yet unspecific stance. It's a well known fact that there were a number of both FBI and CIA personnel on this flight and that there were other U.S Operations inplay that could have caused the plane to explode. It was very convenient to blame a 'rogue state' in the same way they blamed Iraq for having WMDs. Why isn't anyone in the states asking the right questions ?
- Hansel, London
The UK should feel embarrassed at this event. Our laws are based on precedent, so what kind of message does this release send? Our compassion may show that we are a civilised people but this man was convicted in what is presumably a fair and just Scottish legal system. Does this now mean that we need to release every prisoner at some point just because they may die in a UK prison? As a purely legal matter, what type of precedent does this set? If we wanted to show compassion, we could have arranged for his family to come and see him in prison before he died. In addition, if there were any doubts as to whether he was the only person involved, this could have still been pursued within the court system so we may know the full truth. Now with his appeal dropped, we may never know the truth. The Scottish justice minister also has argued that because of his cancer Al Megrahi is now facing a death sentence from a higher power - but don't we all?? we will all die one day - as an argument for release the cancer simply does not make sense. We will surely now see many prisoners petitioning for early release and on the basis of this precedent, would we not be bound to release them all?
- Abf, London
What is wrong with your country. I tell you what its full of do gooders and the English might have won the ashes but that is about all.
- Brian Fast, sydney, Australia
Had we left him in jail to die - what then? Leave his corpse in the cell to rot? Maybe embalm him so that he can stay their for ever?
What difference does it make where he dies? Surely the fact that he's in pain should satisfy even the most vengeful critic.
I had high hopes that a new regime in America would curb their opinion that they could dictate what the rest of the world does.
Sanctions? Reprisals? Bring on your backlash America - bullies don't scare us.
- Barry Chapman, Welwyn England
Funny really we have the Scottish making idiotic decisions north of the border and idiotic Scottish making decisions south of the border.
Time for a general election me thinks.
- Frank, Home Counties, England.
No more than Britain deserves.The Americans now know what a spineless shower we really are.I'm lovin' it.
- Steve, London
What does anyone expect from a Scottish parliment, we have seen Brown and Blair ruin this Country, RBS and other failed Scottish Banks or Building Societies bailed out and Chairmans given £millions so why not let their own people down by letting this killer go home free and a hero.
The sooner Scotland is given independence the better for Britain
- Mike, London England and once GREAT Britain
A trade deal between the UK and Libya over rules any terroist sentance, so it seems. You are sending the wrong signal to terroists who will now base themselves in countries who have important trade links with the UK.
Boycotting Scottish / GB comes as no surprise. Don't be surprised if US hackers start to attacking your IT networks, leading web sites, zombie attacks. This is what happened to Denmark after the prophet cartoons.
Why send him back to Libya who do not have any good cancer treatment hospitals. He would have had better cancer treatment in the UK.
- Frank, Copenhagen, Denmark
Scotland had better watch out, otherwise the big companies like Goodyear, Caterpillar and Singer will pull out . . . er, hang on a minute
- Paulo Uccello, London UK
I wondered why Jack Straw let Ronnie Biggs out of jail; after his refusal to let him out before, and then all of a sudden he changes his mind; was it because he knew something the rest of us did not know?
It makes sense that they could not let an alleged terrorist go free, whilst keeping a robber in jail.
Ok it may not be true, we all know Ronnie doesn’t have any oil, and he has no big contracts to pass around either, but it does make you wonder; doesn’t it?
- Mickinlondon, london.
Thats another fine mess you have gotten us into Gordon. Tough on crime and tough on the causes of crime (unless we have a trade deal with your country and we want oil and gas).
Gordon Brown's once proud nation is now the laughing stock of the world.
- David Cuff, Manchester
Do you think Libya would have set free a British subject under similar circumstances... unless , of course, there was some other politcal advantage in doing so? If that is the case true justice is a farce and an insult to the victims and their families.
- Strongbow Sullivan, Paris,France.
