al-Megrahi (left) gets hero's welcome on return to Libya with dictator Muammar Gaddafi's son, Saif
On August 20, 2009, Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, better known as the Lockerbie Bomber was freed by Scottish authorities on "compassionate grounds" after serving only 8 1/2 years of his life sentence for the terrorist murders of 270 people on Pan Am Flight 103 in 1988. Supposedly, al-Megrahi had "terminal prostate cancer" and had less than three months to live.
That was three months and 20 days ago, so the question should be asked, is he dead yet? And if not, why not?
On November 19, when al-Megrahi's three months were up, Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) wrote to British Prime Minister Gordon Brown insisting understandably that the convicted terrorist be sent back to prison in Scotland if still alive. “The bottom line is Megrahi should have never been released in the first place, but it would be even more outrageous if he were to be able to live a long and free life after his release," Schumer said. At that time, it was reported that while al-Megrahi had checked into a local hospital in Tripoli initially on his return to Libya, he had been released and was living at his family’s villa.
On October 21, hopes for al-Megrahi's quick demise were raised briefly when Sky News reported that he had died, but his lawyer promptly denied it:
It's absolutely untrue," said al-Megrahi's lawyer Tony Kelly, according to Reuters. "He's definitely not dead."
Kelly would not comment further on his client's health, other than to say: "He is alive and breathing," Reuters reported.
Lest there be any doubt about the mass murderer's still breathing air, a Libyan official told Reuters, "Megrahi's condition is stable. He's alive."
That's the last reasonably authoritative reference to al-Megrahi's health that this blogger can find anywhere. If the bomber is alive today, he's well past his promised expiration date and the Obama Administration should renew Senator Schumer's demand to send him back to prison.
The business about "compassionate grounds" had a stink about it from the start. Needless to say, the relatives of al-Megrahi's victims saw little reason to waste compassion someone who had served a measly eight years for killing 270 people. And the British press soon found out that a huge BP oil deal with Libya played at least a significant role in the decision by the U.K. and Scottish governments to release him “in the overwhelming interests of the United Kingdom."
Indeed, it would seem that the question must be raised and answered, does al-Megrahi have "terminal cancer" at all or was the whole thing a sham?
What do you think? Post a comment.
Welcome Dan Riehl and Hot Air readers
I think there was an implicit contract in his release, which would justify a different kind of "contract," Tony Soprano-style.
ReplyDeleteGREAT POST! I really like your blog!! Keep up the excellent work...
ReplyDeleteCommon Cents
http://www.commoncts.blogspot.com
ps. Link Exchange?
Excellent question. I doubt we'll get an answer any time soon though.
ReplyDeleteNice blog.
-A
Can we ship him to Gitmo now? Oh, and that bomber guy too!
ReplyDeleteAs he gets off the plane he says: OBAMASAMA!
ReplyDeleteIt's a scam. Never ever trust a politician unless their actions can be verified. They do not look out for the interest of the people. I wonder how much of this had the blessings of Obama????? Obama has not done a damn thing since in office or the Senate to support the people of America in any form or fashion. Typical Radical, Socialist progressive crap and our president stinks of it.
ReplyDeleteI've been checking on this for the past few months. The earliest deadline of "six weeks" is long gone, and the "three month" deadline has now come and gone.
ReplyDeleteThis is one of the few instances where the purveyors of "compassion in lieu of justice" have put a definite, verifiable timetable on demonstrating the veracity of their statements.
And as we can see, the "compassion" argument is demonstrably false, and those who released this terrorist should be forced to acknowledge their lies before the body public.
It was a sham, as I believe most of us knew from the get-go.
ReplyDeleteBlood for oil.
Tony Vahl here:
ReplyDeleteIt's an interesting question you raise -- whether he really had terminal cancer or not.
If the Libyans cared, they could say he was dead and no one would no the better. Who knows? Maybe their waiting for some kind of kickback from the Brits before making such an announcement.
Another point: the date of death is never guaranteed for anyone. We've all heard stories of cancer survivors who were given months to live and ended up having their cancer go into remission or whatever.
For all we know, this terrorist's prostate cancer was in the early stages, which is easily treatable. Since he had cancer, they used it as an excuse to send him to Libya ... where he may have received life-saving treatment.
The only time I've seen the world this screwed up was in history books. I never could have imagined living through the insanity we're seeing in these modern times.
this man should be shot in the head and same goes for those who released this man from prison.
ReplyDeletewhat ever happennned to common sense?
life means life! no matter what!
even if your country wants cheaper oil!
the brits and scots should be trailed.
Men of his age (57) diagnosed with prostate cancer generally die of old age first. Obviously only in the sense that we are ALL under sentence of death--the consequence of being alive--can one call his cancer "terminal".
ReplyDeleteInteresting that the medical opinion of only one prison doctor(possibly given under duress and unsupported by those of the four oncologists) was considered adequate grounds for this murderer's release. Some blatant palm-greasing took place somewhere....what wimps the Scots have become...
i hope megrahi lives as long as possible as i beleive he was rongly convicted
ReplyDeleteThis is very interesting article and nice question raised in this post.You doing great job..Thanks for sharing here.
ReplyDeleteDomain and Hosting Services Companies