web analytics

STRAW AND MACASKILL TELL SENATE TO GET STUFFED

By ATWadmin On July 23rd, 2010

THE US Senate Committee on Foreign Relations has scheduled some rather odd hearings into the release almost a year ago of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi. Odd, because the committee “is responsible for overseeing the foreign policy agencies of the U.S. government”. Reviewing the judicial decisions of foreign powers would seem rather beyond that writ.

Still, they press on and the committee has invited former Justice Secretary Jack Straw and Scottish Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill to testify. As unusual as it is to agree with Trots and socialists, I absolutely applaud their decision to decline the invites.

I have a natural sympathy for the American sensibility and no-one is more willing than me to recognise the astonishing country generations of Americans have built across a vast land mass in such a short period of time. While many places struggle with plumbing after five thousand years, the Americans were on the Moon in two hundred because of their dynamism, hard work and relative liberty. It is a country of astonishing achievements then.

However, I have to say I’m becoming increasingly sick and tired of Washington and it’s arrogant stance that the world answers to it. MacAskill has given the committee exactly the right response to the invite:

“I am accountable to the Scottish Parliament and I’m elected by the Scottish people.

“That’s why when I was asked to appear before a Scottish Parliamentary committee on Megrahi, I did so, and that’s proper form.”

In other words – “get stuffed”.

The American founding myth is built on the idea of sovereignty and self-determination. For all its faults, the Scottish government is a lawfully constituted body which vested in MacAskill judicial powers. When he acted in the al-Megrahi case he did so openly and explained his decision; all terminally-ill prisoners in Scotland are released and al-Megrahi was treated no differently. Whether you agree with this decision or not, and I don’t, we know how and why the decision was made.

The US Senate Committee on Foreign Relations can simply find out all they need to know. It’s why they send thousands of people around the world to American embassies. Unfortunately it’s acting with an increasing arrogance and disrespect and even people like me are becoming increasingly ticked off. If the committee wants an explanation it can ask via the proper channels and the response will be full.

When the members sit on a dais and make ready to question the acts of other, sovereign governments, they can get stuffed.

47 Responses to “STRAW AND MACASKILL TELL SENATE TO GET STUFFED”

  1. Excelent post Pete

  2. Spot on.

  3. The Senators would have been in fine form, demagoguing before the cameras

    This MacAskill is a vile, filthy specimen though. The springing of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi from proper justice is what he will be forever known for.

  4. I think its vile and filthy to expect somebody to rot in prison for something they didn’t do.

  5. It seems that ‘justice’ and the ‘search for truth’, mean very different things to different people, and is far from being as universal as we are led to believe.

    That it might have also given Straw et al, a chance to ask a few questions in return, seems like an opportunity missed, to get the real truth re the actual perpetrators, as there has always been some doubt on that point.

    All that Blair’s, Straw’s and others, declining the invitation does is to heighten doubts and increase suspicion about the whole episode.

    As has been said on many occasions – ‘Ask me no questions, and I’ll tell you no lies!’

  6. porkchopxpress

    This release was supposedly done out of compassion for a man soon to die. Not due to any doubt about his guilt.

    You don’t have the slightest idea as to his guilt or innocence, nor do I. You’ve not read all the evidence, nor have I.

    They had a trial to determine that matter.

    MacAskill and his co-conspirators in the Scottish and British governments are parties to a miscarriage of justice.

  7. Well said Pete Moore. The US senate has a cheek "inviting" foreign ministers to account for their actions. We can imagine the reaction in Washington if Hillary Clinton was summoned to appear before a House of Commons select committee.

    However, it is becoming clear that the jocks were conned as to the medical condition of the prisoner. There is a story there to be told.

  8. I actually agree on the " cheek " comment.

    If a British minister of any kind was subject to the public abuse that would surely follow from the hyenas, jackals and babboons who populate the Senate, the British public and government would have a very bad reaction.

  9. "The US senate has a cheek "inviting" foreign ministers to account for their actions."

    Absolutely. Who the F*** do they think they are! The USA thinks that the world revolves around them. It doesn’t! Sort your own country out before you dare comment on anyone else!

  10. Has the British government ( not the namby pamby Scotch thing ) conducted any formal investigations into this?

  11. "Has the British government ( not the namby pamby Scotch thing ) conducted any formal investigations into this?"

    Has the US Federal Government ever investigated a Governor pardoning anyone?

  12. Phantom –

    No. A Scottish parliamentiary committee enquired into the al-Megrahi release but London has always kept a long way from it.

  13. "Has the US Federal Government ever investigated a Governor pardoning anyone?"

    Spot on! What a shower of hypothetical, self-serving bastards. The legal system in the USA is a disgrace. Look at what’s happening with BP and the oil leak in the Gulf;. The USA only cares about herself. Once we all appreciate this, things become a lot clearer.

  14. Matt

    Hope you’re not treated any patients today. You’re not at your most logical.

    Seamus

    Please provide the other cases of pardons of 747 bombers. Though there have been other pardons bordering on criminality ( good day, President Clinton ) that could have used an investigation.

    This Scotch pardon stunk like ten year old haggis from the moment it was announced.

  15. His original crime doesn’t come in to it. Justice power is a transferred matter. It is a matter for the Scottish Government and only the Scottish Government. The UK Government has no authority in it whatsoever. There was a relatively famous case where by Mike Huckabee pardoned an individual who later went on to rape a child and murdered 4 people. Why did the Federal Government not investigate that?

  16. There have been quite a few incidents where those pardoned went on to commit crime

    This was an major international terrorist incident involving a huge number of deaths where the pardon came after the fact, likely based on misdeeds and possibly fraud by multiple parties

    I would like to see a proper investigation that included the actions of the medical team and all the political actors

  17. "I would like to see a proper investigation that included the actions of the medical team and all the political actors"

    There all ready has been. The Scottish Parliament investigated the matter. End of.

  18. No, Seamus.

    Beginning of.

  19. There was one institution with the authority to release al-Megrahi. That was the Scottish Government, the institution of which justice power in Scotland is given to. There was one institution with the authority to scrutinise the release of al-Megrahi. That is the Scottish Parliament. So the only institution with the authority to scrutinise the release of al-Megrahi already has investigated it. The matter is thus closed.

  20. Phantom –

    As I said above, there was a Scottish parliamentary investigation. Without knowing much about it, I suspect this was more a case of checking procedure rather than an inquiry into the wisdom of the decision.

  21. Matt,

    "Who the F*** do they think they are! The USA thinks that the world revolves around them"

    It was an international incident, they surely have every right to attempt to resolve the many unanswered questions.

    "Sort your own country out before you dare comment on anyone else!

    Exactly the same sentiment I have had over the past few decades, when American politicians interfered in Irish matters that did not concern them, other than a vote or ten for the likes of the Kennedy’s. I never heard anyone tell the Yanks to mind their business the or since.. your protest all sounds a bit hypocritical to me!

  22. Ernest, as an Englishman I don’t believe you should be attacking the Americans for interfering in Irish matters. It is a bit of the pot calling the kettle black.

  23. From the earliest stages, this stunk of dishonesty.

    When the rumors came out of a possible release, the Scots govt said that " no final decision had been made " when of course it had been.

  24. Given the Scottish government is nothing more than a subsidary of the British ‘head office’, virtually a quango, financed by Westminster, in some faux attempt at a devolution that isn’t really, but might fool enough people to keep the peasants from being even more revolting than they might otherwise be! I would very surprised if Westminster had as little interest in the release as they would have us believe.

    All very convenient for Blair and Brown!

  25. "I would very surprised if Westminster had as little interest in the release as they would have us believe."

    I would be very surprised as well. But it was a decision taking by the Scottish Executive, run by the Scottish Nationalists (a party who despise Labour). If Labour had told Salmond and MacAskill to free al-Megrahi then the SNP would have screamed from the rooftops that the British Government are interfering in Scottish devolution to free a Terrorist.

  26. Seamus,

    Rubbish, any uprising of dissidents on British soil is very much our concern. If had not been for all those spastic Paddys in Boston and New York, – many of whom had never ever been to Ireland, the problem would as likely have failed for lack of financing. And , of course, Hollywood didn’t help by perpetuating the myth of saints and martyrs of ‘The Troubles’.

    Re your latest comment, – do you really think that Blair or Brown didn’t know that, and it conveniently allowed them to not have to interfere, – the Scots could be relied on to do what comes naturally to them – the wrong thing!

  27. Well I’ll look past the British soil part and move straight to the point. If the British hadn’t interfered in Irish affairs then there wouldn’t have been uprisings in the first place.

    "Re your latest comment, – do you really think that Blair or Brown didn’t know that, and it conveniently allowed them to not have to interfere, – the Scots could be relied on to do what comes naturally to them – the wrong thing!"

    Almost certainly. But that doesn’t mean that Westminster knew anything, forced the hand or covered anything up or anything else that needs to be investigated by 100 eijets who clearly have better things that they could be doing.

  28. >>any uprising of dissidents on British soil is very much our concern<<

    Ernest, if it were "British soil", there would not have been an uprising. As it is, the Irish and the American and the British, and for all I care the Chinese, governments had a right to interfere in what was clearly a political disaster.

  29. "Given the Scottish government is nothing more than a subsidary of the British ‘head office’, virtually a quango, financed by Westminster, in some faux attempt at a devolution that isn’t really, but might fool enough people to keep the peasants from being even more revolting than they might otherwise be! I would very surprised if Westminster had as little interest in the release as they would have us believe.

    All very convenient for Blair and Brown"

    Good post, Ernest.

    And another thing- how come all those boyos are always innocent? Who has seen the evidence?

    Oh, I can’t wait til Troll reads this thread, LOL

  30. Troll will twist himself into little knots over this thread. He doesn’t know who to attack first, the Scots for besmirching America’s position in the world or the Senate for overstepping their mandate.

  31. Seamus,

    " 100 eijets who clearly have better things that they could be doing."

    So you don’t see the the US investigation as having much to do with justice, and that it might be served by gettting at the truth? perhaps if the same criteria had been applied to the Bloody Sunday, and various other Inquiries, you might not have felt the same way. It isn’t only Irish victims who need closure.

    And just what would those better things be that those eejits could be doing? – it wouldn’t be saving the economy, or some such trivia would it, because I really think that would be far beyond their very limited intellectual skills.

  32. "So you don’t see the the US investigation as having much to do with justice, and that it might be served by gettting at the truth?"

    No I think its very much so more about laying boots into BP. They are itching for this to have anything to do with BP, who have basically become the American scapegoat for everything. Stanley McChrystal made those comment because BP made him do it.

    "perhaps if the same criteria had been applied to the Bloody Sunday, and various other Inquiries, you might not have felt the same way. It isn’t only Irish victims who need closure."

    No one ever said Lockerbie wasn’t a crime. No one ever said that the 270 people who died that day were gunmen and bombers.

  33. Noel.

    I agree about the political disaster. Every time the British have divided a territory on a ‘factional’ basis, it always ends in friction.

  34. I have a strong gut feeling that Blair, Brown, Straw et al are mired in corruption where the release of al-Megrahi is concerned and were 100% involved in advising on the decisions made in the Scottish Parliament. (How Ernest has hit the nail on the head re the ‘faux attempt at devolution’). After all we are only told what the Government wants us to hear.

    The more I see of Tony Blair the more I am convinced that there is a lot more we don’t know about him and his dealings whilst in and after he left office. The Kelly tragedy is a case in point. Perhaps time will tell and all will be revealed.

    I agree that a refusal by Straw to attend a Senate Foreign Relations Committee only adds to the suspicion surrounding the whole affair.

  35. Seamus,

    The BP disaster and the release of ‘The Bomber’ are just a coincidence. That one may enable an answer to the other, is immaterial, both are as a result of skulduggetry by those who should know better, but don’t.

  36. If it was about justice Ernest then the Senate would have called these hearings a year ago shortly after al-Megrahi’s release. They didn’t. The Senate only became interested when there was a hint of BP involvement and BP are the latest punching bag inside the Beltway.

  37. I’d say that Blair made some of his money the way Bill Clinton made some of his money.

    Funny how these politicians always wind up living in the big houses.

  38. I think the Senators are grandstanding and the invitation was correctly declined.

  39. Show me an uncorrupted politican and I’ll show you the same recently elected for the first time politician.

  40. For 99 percent of them they don’t get to the " elected " stage without making a series of moral compromises. Esp in America, where political bribery is legal

  41. It doesn’t help that $1.6 Billion were spent on the 2008 Presidential election and Barack Obama spent $7.39 on every single vote he got.

  42. Mahons,

    I think there probably is some capital to be gained by this grandstanding. I HATE and DETEST Schumer(sp). He is a phony baloney opportunist.

  43. Schumer is absolutely an opportunist.

    It’s no longer funny, but was said a while that the most dangerous place to stand in America was " between Schumer and a TV camera "

  44. " the most dangerous place to stand in America was " between Schumer and a TV camera "

    LOL indeed. I saw him speak at a dinner fundraising thing once- slithery snake I think was the consensus we arrived at.

  45. And he’s not only going to win in a landslide but also probably drag Gillibrand over the finishing line with him.

  46. Gillibrand is worse than Schumer. He at least has some few principles. She has none.

    At all levels of NY State politics we have incompetents, ciphers and / or criminals.

    Like California, we have every possible advantage – but we squander it away and a big reason is the class of politicians we have and what they do to distort and ruin the economy.

    North of the NYC suburbs, NY state has been in a decline since the 1950s. And the malfeasance of politicians is one of the reasons why this is so

  47. You don’t have the slightest idea as to his guilt or innocence, nor do I. You’ve not read all the evidence, nor have I.

    it seems you forget the thread just a few days ago where I linked to evidence which demonstrated how shaky his conviction was.