Terrorism

David Aaronovitch’s column in the Times today is a curious beast indeed. Some sub-editor has given it the headline Complacency has crept up on us (yet again) which seems curious since the partially-successful prosecution of the men accused  – and guilty – of plotting to use “liquid bombs” to blow up transatlantic airliners would seem to suggest that complacency has not in fact crept up on us and that, quite rightly, the security services are doing the job they’re charged with. Now Aaronovitch is not responsible for the headline, nor for the sub-deck arguing that No amount of handwringing about civil liberties should distract us from the very clear and

David Miliband on the Today Programme on September 2nd: “We did not want him [Megrahi] to die in prison.” Ed Balls on the Today Programme on September 7th: “None of us wanted to see the release of al-Megrahi” Considering that Megrahi was sentenced to life imprison for his role in the Lockerbie bombing, I cannot see how both of these statements of the government’s view can be correct. If the government did not want him to die in prison, it wanted him to be released.

There’s still plenty, I’m afraid, that needs to be said about the decision to send the Lockerie bomber back to Libya. But, since many people think that there was a determination, come what may and regardless of circumstances, to free him let’s begin by asking how matters might have unfolded if Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi had not contracted terminal prostate cancer. Would he now be in Scotland or in Libya? Granted, this is a hypothetical but it may not be unreasonable to hazard that it might have gone like this: 1. The UK government and Libya would still have negotiated a Prisoner Transfer Agreement. 2. The Scottish government would still have

Roddy Forsyth deserves our congratulations for revealing this: One of the unforeseen consequences of Abdelbaset Ali Al-Megrahi’s incarceration in Greenock Prison was that, by his own account, in whiling away the hours by watching live football on the now-defunct Setanta network he became a Rangers supporter. No surprise that a man convicted of the worst terrorist atrocity in British history would forsake his local team – Morton – to support one of the Gruesome Twosome*. He and Rangers deserve one another. This, mind you, could run and run. Just as Celtic and Rangers supporters have co-opted other conflicts for their own ends (Huns** Rangers waving Israeli flags; Tims** Celtic sporting

So, I’ve got this correct, the initial reaction to Kenny MacAskill’s decision to free the Lockerbie bobmber was that this demonstrated nothing but the SNP’s provincialism. Small-toon politicians desperate to make a mark on the international stage and all that. Now we’re told that it was all just about grubby, if lucrative commercial interests and that London was quite happy to see al-Megrahi repatriated, whether on compassionate grounds or as a consequence of the Prisoner Transfer Agreement agreed with Libya. It’s possible that both of these theories to be partially true. However, if the Westminster government really did want to see Megrahi sent home to Libya, it’s quite possible that

I was wrong. I argued that people can disagree in good faith on the question as to whether Kenny MacAskill was correct to let Abdebaset Ali al-Megrahi return to Libya to die. I should hav known better. Those who think the decision mistaken appear to believe there are no reasons – none! – to support taking a different view. Douglas Carswell, for instance, thinks it awful that a lack of compassion (on Megrahi’s part) should be met by a degree of compassion (on the part of the Scottish legal system). That’s a valid point, but it’s equally valid to note that our justice system is not in fact predicated upon