Yesterday the convicted bomber of the 1988 Pan Am explosion which occurred in Lockerbie, Scotland was released from prison after eight years of his life sentence by Scottish officials on humanitarian grounds.
It was reported he was suffering from prostate cancer, and would be returned to his home country of Libya in order to die in his home country.
A great deal of the reporting in the mainstream media has struck me as odd, as one who remembers the Lockerbie incident quite well.
One, nothing in the report indicated just when the convicted bomber had been diagnosed with his cancer, and what his prospects for recovery were. As one who had a near relative diagnosed with the disease years ago, although it did eventually take his life, prostate cancer although difficult to cure can be treated in its early stages and also extend for several years the life of those so diagnosed.
The second was the reaction of Washington and the Obama Administration to the release. "Disappointed" was the term most used, and attributed to Mr. Obama, Mr. Holder, Ms. Clinton and the Republican House Chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee.
The third was the U.S. media then even following the release to Libya, which seemed to me simply another politically motivated story due to the reactions of Washington and the Obama Administration chastizing somewhat Scotland for the release, and warning that Mr. Obama felt that his homecoming should be "low key."
Having U.S. press reporting on the homecoming would seem that the U.S. itself had a hand in it not remaining low key, although from all reports the initial reception actually clearly was, since this incident was categorized as a "political" attack, although it appears that was the only lead that was ever pursued from my recollections.
Since this event happened 20 years ago, and Mr. Obama was then still in college, I wonder how much he remembers about the incident and also the rather sketchy details that were released thereafter, and in the eventual naming of this man as the perpetrator who was a Libyan intelligence officer at a time when U.S. relations with Libya were strained, to say the least.
To me at the time the entire investigation and news reports seemed a little too pat, based upon the fact that there was little "evidence" left of the plane and its contents at all at the crash site since it crashed shortly after takeoff.
Also reported were the advance attempts of the Obama Administration to present the United States’ official position that he should serve out his sentence in Scotland.
Of course, since the outset this man has consistently maintained his innocence all along.
Many of those who died were Americans, as the flight was a London to New York commercial flight.
But the case was heard in The Netherlands, and although an international panel found the accused guilty, the entire case for his guilt was based on circumstantial evidence in that the bomb was traced to his suitcase which was in the cargo hold.
More interesting is the fact that due to the questions still on his guilt, the Jerusalem News, U.S. and British sources started using it to place an Iran spin on this story.
It is clear there is a media agenda to demonize Iran and ratchet up the American people actively now being facilitated by the politicans and mainstream news sources in this country. Again for political and economic purposes and benefit, it would appear.
But as far as the convicted bomber, there was no corroborative testimy or eyewitnesses, which left many of the victims families themselves, especially in Scotland where it occurred and in which eleven people on the ground also perished, unconvinced that he was, in fact, guilty of the crime.
Three of the houses in Lockerbie were actually vaporized from all reports, due to the amount of jet fuel involved since it crashed within minutes of takeoff.
Since the standard in order to press for conviction in this country for any and all capital offenses is "within a reasonable doubt," after the statements of those on the Hill it simply also reinforces to me that we do have some in positions of high governmental office that, although lawyers themselves, are quick to demonize for political expediency.
And all I can say really as a citizen of the United States is that I sure would hate to have any of those now on the Hill on any jury panel in this country, since even some of those who lost their nearest and dearest are still willing to give this man, who still maintains his innocence, at least a measure of the benefit of the doubt.
Because it sounds to me, based on the timing of this release and lack of clear evidence involved in the original conviction, that this man just possibly may have been what they refer to in the detective novels as "the patsy" for some political agendas – given also the political strife that was also going on at that particular time in history with respect to that region.
As far as I am aware also, nothing publicly was ever released that might point to following up on whether maybe one of the passengers on the plane itself was the intended target, and that there truly was a more personal motivation rather than the broad based one that was presented to the public at the time during the proceeding due to the state of relations between Libya, Britain and the U.S. at the time.
There were some government officials and even military who were among the victims. The only real physical evidence was the suitcase, and due to the degree of the damage with the amount of jet fuel and fire involved, not much released in just how they identified it as the source of the bomb.
It appears nothing further will ever be publicly disclosed, but the reactions in Washington were telling given the circumstances of the conviction from one who remembers from the headlines some of the questionable circumstances surrounding it from the outset.
Leave Your Comments