Lockerbie Bomber to be set free to die with family

[pgabriel]

link (http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/top/all/6579999.html)

GLASGOW, Scotland — Freed Lockerbie bomber Abdel Baset al-Megrahi boarded a plane waiting at Glasgow Airport to take him home to Libya on Thursday.

Al-Megrahi walked slowly up the steps of the Airbus operated by Libyan airline Afriqiyah. He was convicted in 2001 of taking part in the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 on Dec. 21, 1988, killing 270 people.

The airliner exploded over Scotland, and all 259 people aboard and 11 on the ground died when it crashed into the town of Lockerbie.

Scottish officials said they were freeing him on compassionate grounds. Al-Megrahi has terminal prostate cancer and has been given less than three months to live.

The U.S. opposed the release and families of some Lockerbie victims reacted angrily to the decision[/quote]

[quote]

[JayZ750]

I don't understand letting someone free because they're about to die, ESPECIALLY if convicted for life, as one can only assume this guy was.

A ten year sentence where the person is well into it, but gets cancer and is about to die, well, I'd be less upset about that person going free, but when your serving life in prison, then it should mean life in prison.

[Go_Korea]

Did the 200+ people on the plane get to die with their family?

This is stupid.

Do they do this often with others that are convicted for life?

[Big MAK]

I don't understand letting someone free because they're about to die, ESPECIALLY if convicted for life, as one can only assume this guy was.

A ten year sentence where the person is well into it, but gets cancer and is about to die, well, I'd be less upset about that person going free, but when your serving life in prison, then it should mean life in prison.

Agreed. Let him sit there a rot from the inside out. Let him suffer every second of the rest of his life, he deserves it.

[Air Langhi]

Apparently he claimed he was innocent and there is evidence to show he might be. If he is about to die, I would much rather let an guilty man walk free than leave an innocent man in jail.

[Space Ghost]

While we're at it, why don't we torture terrorist too! You're either humane or inhumane ... pick one.

[s land balla]

Apparently he claimed he was innocent and there is evidence to show he might be. If he is about to die, I would much rather let an guilty man walk free than leave an innocent man in jail.

Agreed.

[rocketsjudoka]

I have mixed feelings about this. While I think that for such a heinous crime his sentence should be served to the end but at the sametime I don't think keeping him locked up until he is a corpse serves any deterrent purpose or makes the world a safer place.

[thumbs]

IMO the Scots should have left in solitary confinement with a film crew to document the last months of his miserable life. Then perform an extensive autopsy before shipping his body home in a box minus appropriate pieces to keep for future study.

[rocketsjudoka]

IMO the Scots should have left in solitary confinement with a film crew to document the last months of his miserable life. Then perform an extensive autopsy before shipping his body home in a box minus appropriate pieces to keep for future study.

And that will accomplish what?

[Uprising]

I kills 270 people who were flying, potentially to see their loved ones.....

And he's being flown to be with his loved ones.......hmmmm....boom

[thumbs]

And that will accomplish what?
The world would have proof he wasn't mistreated in his last days. He would help medical science better understand the final stages of prostate cancer. Future generations would have tissue samples of his brain to help understand the anomalies and abberations of the criminally insane. The families of his victims get to confirm that he died in the way the Scottish court specified (his 27 year minimum is not yet satisfied). Is that enough?

[s land balla]

I'm no medical expert, but I'm sure whatever symptoms he's having of untreated cancer while in prison aren't too pleasant for the prison guards to see/have to deal with.

[pouhe]

IMO the Scots should have left in solitary confinement with a film crew to document the last months of his miserable life. Then perform an extensive autopsy before shipping his body home in a box minus appropriate pieces to keep for future study.

If you wanna know why some people oppose the death penalty, torture, or harsh prison conditions, it's comments like this. Though clearly a joke, this tend to betray one's own blood lust or appetite for human suffering, rather than any sense of "justice."

[Sweet Lou 4 2]

The world would have proof he wasn't mistreated in his last days. He would help medical science better understand the final stages of prostate cancer. Future generations would have tissue samples of his brain to help understand the anomalies and abberations of the criminally insane. The families of his victims get to confirm that he died in the way the Scottish court specified (his 27 year minimum is not yet satisfied). Is that enough?

I never understood the eye for an eye mentality.

If you think the act was heinous and dispicable, and the people who carry it out are animals, then it's ok to stoop down to become them as well?

What happened to Christian values? Why is it that religion only matters in applying it to everyone but not when it comes to our enemies.

The guy is going to die. He's life is over. Whether he dies in a prison or goes home - what does it matter? His life is over. No more justice can be extracted from the situation without making a mockery of those who claim to be a victim.

[thumbs]

If you wanna know why some people oppose the death penalty, torture, or harsh prison conditions, it's comments like this. Though clearly a joke, this tend to betray one's own blood lust or appetite for human suffering, rather than any sense of "justice."
Disagree. He can repay humanity in part with a final contribution to scientific inquiry. Also, what if there is a cure for cancer in the next three months? He would get off scot free (pun intended).

[vlaurelio]

The world would have proof he wasn't mistreated in his last days.?

isn't putting him in solitary confinement actually mistreating him?

He would help medical science better understand the final stages of prostate cancer.

it's impossble to do this right now with volunteers?

Future generations would have tissue samples of his brain to help understand the anomalies and abberations of the criminally insane.

so you're saying the only thing he's guilty of is being insane/crazy

The families of his victims get to confirm that he died in the way the Scottish court specified (his 27 year minimum is not yet satisfied).

so you read the family's minds? it's also funny that all the cruel extras you've added weren't even specified by the Scottish courts

[thumbs]

I never understood the eye for an eye mentality.

If you think the act was heinous and dispicable, and the people who carry it out are animals, then it's ok to stoop down to become them as well?

What happened to Christian values? Why is it that religion only matters in applying it to everyone but not when it comes to our enemies.

The guy is going to die. He's life is over. Whether he dies in a prison or goes home - what does it matter? His life is over. No more justice can be extracted from the situation without making a mockery of those who claim to be a victim.
Sweet Lou, Id am actually sympathic to your viewpoint, especially if you are pro-life. I've always had a hard time reconciling the views of people who are quite willing to kill an innocent baby in the mother's womb but who are adamantly opposed to executing a convicted murderer in the manner prescibed by a jury of his or her peers.

However, his life is not over until its over. If he is going to die, let him die in prison rather than the comfort of Khaddafi's palace.

[thumbs]

Isn't putting him in solitary confinement actually mistreating him? It's impossble to do this right now with volunteers? So you're saying the only thing he's guilty of is being insane/crazy. So you read the family's minds? it's also funny that all the cruel extras you've added weren't even specified by the Scottish courts
1) It wouldn't be solitary if there was a film crew around 24/7.
2) Volunteers are not nearly so accessible 24/7.
3) To commit murder IMO you must be somewhat emotionally disturbed.
4) Mind reading is not necessary when they are making their views known on any number of television stations.
5) What cruel extras? He was sentenced to death with no possibility of parole for 27 years. Only eight years have passed. As to the autopsy, he will be dead when that occurs.

[vlaurelio]

1) It wouldn't be solitary if there was a film crew around 24/7.

you're the one who called it solitary not me


2) Volunteers are not nearly so accessible 24/7.


volunteers who are already confined in a hospital?


3) To commit murder IMO you must be somewhat emotionally disturbed.


so why not do this to all convicts? lets say tim mcveigh


4) Mind reading is not necessary when they are making their views known on any number of television stations.


you have a quote or link?


5) What cruel extras? He was sentenced to death with no possibility of parole for 27 years. Only eight years have passed. As to the autopsy, he will be dead when that occurs.

are you denying that you added these yourself?

IMO the Scots should have left in solitary confinement with a film crew to document the last months of his miserable life. Then perform an extensive autopsy before shipping his body home in a box minus appropriate pieces to keep for future study.

[thumbs]

Are you denying that you added these yourself?
Are you saying he was a member of the general prison populace? I'd be very surprised, but I'll concede that point if your provide a link to show he was not isolated. The film crew is just a way to show that he died naturally and without duress -- a safeguard for this convicted murderer.

As far as Timothy McVeigh, yes, he is as crazy as any other murderer. I wouldn't object if the federal government gathered all convicted murderers in one secluded spot (an Aleutian island?) where they could be studied at length. Just because my conjecture (they must be crazy to commit murder -- as opposed to justifiable self defense) might or might not be true, they should not be released IMO to prey upon society.

[JuanValdez]

If he was in prison for some generic crime, like armed robbery or drug smuggling, wouldn't they probably let him die in prison? There are thousands who die in incarceration with no one thinking twice about it. How sad for them that the famous get perks, even in the penal system.

[SamFisher]

If he was in prison for some generic crime, like armed robbery or drug smuggling, wouldn't they probably let him die in prison? There are thousands who die in incarceration with no one thinking twice about it. How sad for them that the famous get perks, even in the penal system.

Not that I know one way or the other about Scottish prisons and clemency/terminally ill inmate policies, but how do you know this is an unusual practice motivated by celebrity?

[rocketsjudoka]

If he was in prison for some generic crime, like armed robbery or drug smuggling, wouldn't they probably let him die in prison? There are thousands who die in incarceration with no one thinking twice about it. How sad for them that the famous get perks, even in the penal system.

This is the Scottish penal system where this might not be that unusual of a situation. The judge said that this ruling was in line with Scottish values.

[rocketsjudoka]

The world would have proof he wasn't mistreated in his last days. He would help medical science better understand the final stages of prostate cancer. Future generations would have tissue samples of his brain to help understand the anomalies and abberations of the criminally insane. The families of his victims get to confirm that he died in the way the Scottish court specified (his 27 year minimum is not yet satisfied). Is that enough?

First off I presume that Scotland has a similar provision against cruel and unusual punishment so disecting his body and using it for science against his families wished might be considered cruel and unusual. For instance the PRC has been criticized for using the bodies of executed prisoners for medical reasons.

Second if under Islam that might be considered as desecration of the body which might piss of some other crazy Muslims to carry out another Lockerbie.

[JuanValdez]

This is the Scottish penal system where this might not be that unusual of a situation. The judge said that this ruling was in line with Scottish values.

That may be. If they're letting people on death's door go as a general rule, then so be it.

[Steve_Francis_rules]

you have a quote or link?


The article in the first post says that many family members of the victims are upset that this guy is getting out.

[Rocket River]

3 months.

Not to be too cynical but . . .. If they are convinced he did it [was a terrorist]
They let him out with just enough time to strap one more on for the team
Get one more punch in . . before he checks out

Rocket River

[thumbs]

First off I presume that Scotland has a similar provision against cruel and unusual punishment so disecting his body and using it for science against his families wished might be considered cruel and unusual. For instance the PRC has been criticized for using the bodies of executed prisoners for medical reasons.

Second if under Islam that might be considered as desecration of the body which might piss of some other crazy Muslims to carry out another Lockerbie.
Once you're dead, you're beyond torture (cruel and unusual punishment), wouldn't you say? Also, once you are a convicted prisoner, you become a ward of the state. Ergo, the body belongs to the state.

As far as the family is concerned, they should have stopped him from committing such a horrid crime. Other "crazy Muslims" will carry out an attack regardless. In fact, his hero's welcome in Libya IMO inspires his fellow terrorists to exceed his Lockerbie "fame," whereas taking samples from his brain and genitalia might be a far more effective preventative, although I believe we should have the samples for future research. This might save a life in the future, but it can do no harm in the present.

[rocketsjudoka]

Once you're dead, you're beyond torture (cruel and unusual punishment), wouldn't you say? Also, once you are a convicted prisoner, you become a ward of the state. Ergo, the body belongs to the state.

That is not the standard that most countries considered civilized. As noted the PRC is criticized for taking that sort of attitude.

As far as the family is concerned, they should have stopped him from committing such a horrid crime. Other "crazy Muslims" will carry out an attack regardless. In fact, his hero's welcome in Libya IMO inspires his fellow terrorists to exceed his Lockerbie "fame," whereas taking samples from his brain and genitalia might be a far more effective preventative, although I believe we should have the samples for future research. This might save a life in the future, but it can do no harm in the present.

So since there are crazy muslims out there we just go ahead and insult them even more by desecrating someone's body? Did it bother you when Somalis were dragging the body of US soldiers through the streets of Mogadishu?

[vlaurelio]

you're one crazy wingnut

Once you're dead, you're beyond torture (cruel and unusual punishment), wouldn't you say? Also, once you are a convicted prisoner, you become a ward of the state. Ergo, the body belongs to the state.

whereas taking samples from his brain and genitalia might be a far more effective preventative

[durvasa]

I'll probably get blasted for this, but I think its hypocritical for the US to make a big deal about this release when its pretty well known we funded terrorists throughout the 80s. The guy was acting as an agent of his government, right?

He'll be dead in 3 months. Let him live the rest of his miserable life on someone else's dime.

[thumbs]

you're one crazy wingnut
I can't deny the craziness, but I take offense at the wingnut insult (although if you had regard for the English language you would know a wingnut is actually an important, useful cog in machinery). You believe that, once you're dead, you can be tortured?

In your second example, you take a phrase out of context without considering the rest of what I said. So, doesn't that make you absurd? Prove your case. Don't just throw out undeserved insults.

[thumbs]

That is not the standard that most countries considered civilized. As noted the PRC is criticized for taking that sort of attitude.?
That a convicted prisoner is NOT a ward of the state? Or that taking small tissue samples is the same as dragging a body through the streets?

So since there are crazy muslims out there we just go ahead and insult them even more by desecrating someone's body? Did it bother you when Somalis were dragging the body of US soldiers through the streets of Mogadishu?
If you notice, I was quoting "crazy muslims" from the post to which I was responding.

[Rashmon]

I can't deny the craziness, but I take offense at the wingnut insult (although if you had regard for the English language you would know a wingnut is actually an important, useful cog in machinery). You believe that, once you're dead, you can be tortured?

In your second example, you take a phrase out of context without considering the rest of what I said. So, doesn't that make you absurd? Prove your case. Don't just throw out undeserved insults.

All that wingnut email crap you've been reading is starting to show up more in your thought processes and reveal itself in your posts.

[thumbs]

All that wingnut email crap you've been reading is starting to show up more in your thought processes and reveal itself in your posts.
To which important, useful (i.e. wingnut) emailers are you referring? My tea partiers are pretty serious, responsible folk. The hate mongers get weeded out pretty quickly. I do get diverse views from both sides of the fence, and some are very passionate. However, I see no difference between their passion and the passions exhibited here in the D&D -- except my tea partiers are less prone to insulting language. even to those with whom they profoundly disagree.

[vlaurelio]

The hate mongers get weeded out pretty quickly.

really? so you're a really sympathetic person compared to them?

IMO the Scots should have left in solitary confinement with a film crew to document the last months of his miserable life.

Then perform an extensive autopsy before shipping his body home in a box minus appropriate pieces to keep for future study.

Future generations would have tissue samples of his brain to help understand the anomalies and abberations of the criminally insane.

Other "crazy Muslims" will carry out an attack regardless... whereas taking samples from his brain and genitalia might be a far more effective preventative...

[thumbs]

really? so you're a really sympathetic person compared to them?
I'd say equally sympathetic, despite being more sympathetic toward his victims than the terrorist. Now, where is your argument? State your case without weaseling around with sniper questions.

[bigtexxx]

Apparently the killer was met by cheering Libyan crowds upon his release. That is disgusting.

The Scots should be ashamed of themselves for letting this scum go. Imagine if one of your family members died in that plane tragedy. What a piece of schit that guy is

[bigtexxx]

I'd say equally sympathetic, despite being more sympathetic toward his victims than the terrorist. Now, where is your argument? State your case without weaseling around with sniper questions.

Good luck getting anything meaningful out of vlaurelio. Don't hold your breath

[Vinsanity]

Nothing wrong with a little bit of humanity.

It seems like the Christian right are the ones who are most upset with this. These people like bigTexx want him to rot in jail and suffer. They are foaming at the mouth, wanting an eye for an eye, when clearly their religion teaches to forgive their enemies. I don't get it.

[rocketsjudoka]

That a convicted prisoner is NOT a ward of the state? Or that taking small tissue samples is the same as dragging a body through the streets?

Desecration of a body is desecration. You are talking about taking samples of his brain and his genitalia. TO many that would be considered desecration.

In regard to the ward of state argument then do you are agree that the PRC is right to use the bodies of executed prisoners for medical purposes?

[bigtexxx]

Nothing wrong with a little bit of humanity.

It seems like the Christian right are the ones who are most upset with this. These people like bigTexx want him to rot in jail and suffer. They are foaming at the mouth, wanting an eye for an eye, when clearly their religion teaches to forgive their enemies. I don't get it.

don't you think a little remorse might be helpful? he didn't show any

[vlaurelio]

don't you think a little remorse might be helpful? he didn't show any

what happened with unconditional love/forgiveness?

[Vinsanity]

don't you think a little remorse might be helpful? he didn't show any

The people who nailed Jesus to the cross didn't show any remorse. And he forgave them.

[rhino17]

How pathetic. He served he damn years and killed nearly 300 people. I hope he gets hit by a truck tomorrow.

[bobrek]

Nothing wrong with a little bit of humanity.

It seems like the Christian right are the ones who are most upset with this...

Is the current U.S. Government "Christian right"? I think many folks across all spectrums are equally disturbed by this.

[Sweet Lou 4 2]

Sweet Lou, Id am actually sympathic to your viewpoint, especially if you are pro-life. I've always had a hard time reconciling the views of people who are quite willing to kill an innocent baby in the mother's womb but who are adamantly opposed to executing a convicted murderer in the manner prescibed by a jury of his or her peers.

However, his life is not over until its over. If he is going to die, let him die in prison rather than the comfort of Khaddafi's palace.


Let's set abortion aside for a moment...

1. The man is not a threat to anyone at this stage. In 90 days, according to Christianity - he will meet his maker no? If you are a Christian and believe in the tenets of Christianity, should you not also believe that is enough?

2. You realize that this guy was never convicted of being the "bomber" - m erely of being involved, right? And that the witness that testified against him was paid 2 million by the prosecution - to the point where the Scotish Appeals court said in reveiw of the case, "A travesty of justice may have occurred here". In other words, the guy may have very well been innocent.

There are other annomalies, but it appears the real culprits got away in order to satisfy the need to get someone, if anyone.


Justice will never prevail here. There is no such thing as justice, it's a made up imaginary thing anyway. The guys has often said his heart goes out to the victims families, even AFTER he landed on Libyan soil.

Most likely, he was a fall guy. In any case, it's moot. Making a guy with terminal cancer suffer even more is a bit inhumane.

[Refman]

I am surprised that he hadn't been killed in prison. Honestly.

[ChrisBosh]

there are some reports that the release has something to do with trade links....

The release of the Lockerbie bomber was tied to trade deals between Libya and the UK, reports quote the son of Libyan leader Colonel Gaddafi saying.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8215554.stm


.......now this should piss people off, I highly doubt that it's not true, oil has a way of people selling their souls...aka the Iraq invasion.

[Mr. Brightside]

A distant cousin of mine was on that flight that crashed. She was a student at the time returning home from vacation. I remember while I was still quite young at the time that the media started calling non stop throughout the night for my parents reaction. But I don't really care that this fellow is being released. Its time to move on.

[baller4life315]

Is there a precedent for this type of thing? If not, that is my only real objection to this idea. What's to stop the next guy from requesting this courtesy? Domino effect?

[DaDakota]

Scotland and the UK are their own country, they can do what they want.....

The guy is going to die anyway, but they should have made it much less public, IMO.

DD

[Refman]

I am sorry that he has cancer. He has a life sentence for killing almost 300 innocent people in an act of cowardice and extremism.

You do not have to be inhumane. He can be kept in a hospital ward, being given medication to manage his pain in his final days.

Releasing this monster should not have been an option.

[vlaurelio]

I am sorry that he has cancer. He has a life sentence for killing almost 300 innocent people in an act of cowardice and extremism.

You do not have to be inhumane. He can be kept in a hospital ward, being given medication to manage his pain in his final days.

Releasing this monster should not have been an option.

I agree with this. Or just let him sentence his complete.

I just don't agree with "having a camera crew document the remainder of his miserable life" or "cutting off parts of his genitalia and brains and send his body back to his family incomplete".

[Surfguy]

Why are some saying this guy was more of a scapegoat than one who actually perpetrated this crime? Was he not found guilty in a court of law? Surely, there was evidence that ties him directly to the bombing...and it wasn't circumstantial? The guy acts like he was been wrongly imprisoned this whole time...based on his statements.

I was watching Wolf Blitzer give the guy who released him a hard time on CNN. I don't think it has anything to do with anything else other than the person who released him showing compassion to this guy given his circumstances. He said as much during the interview and said he wasn't influenced by anyone or anything. He was also asked if it had been one of his children on that plane...would he still release the guy. And, he said yes because of the morals and values he believes in.

As far as my feelings, if he truly is guilty of bombing a plane that killed 270 people...I don't think he deserves any compassion whatsoever. Where was his compassion when he killed all those people? They never got time to go home and be with family prior to their deaths. They just got snuffed out in an instant. By releasing him, it begins to imply in my mind whether this guy was a direct perpetrator or just a scapegoat? But, I don't have the evidence in front of me, either, nor did I watch the trial. It would be like releasing a perpetrator of 9/11 in my mind. I just can't agree with it.

[pouhe]

I am surprised that he hadn't been killed in prison. Honestly.

I would've thought he was in some sort of max security wing. Even not, I've only ever heard of child-killers being genuine targets for other prisoners. I don't know what kind of inverted moral code a max-offender prison sub-culture would have, to what extent would other murderers, rapists or other violent criminals would or wouldn't empathize with or relate to a terrorist?

[pouhe]

Nothing wrong with a little bit of humanity.

It seems like the Christian right are the ones who are most upset with this. These people like bigTexx want him to rot in jail and suffer. They are foaming at the mouth, wanting an eye for an eye, when clearly their religion teaches to forgive their enemies. I don't get it.

I'd rather not use a person's (assumed) faith against them to judge their behavior. I'll take religious hyprocrites over religious zealots every day of the week.

[TECH]

How many experts agree that he'll be dead in 3 months? Watch him live...

[pgabriel]

So was this an oil (http://blogs.abcnews.com/theworldnewser/2009/08/lockerbie-bomber-release-accusations-about-oil.html) deal

Samantha Fields reports from London:

Today’s release of Abdel Basset Ali al-Megrahi, the Libyan man convicted of the 1988 bombing of Pan Am flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland that killed 270 people, has touched off a firestorm of emotion on all sides. It has also sparked speculation that his release – on compassionate grounds – was motivated, in part, by a desire to improve political and business relations with oil-rich Libya.

British oil giant BP signed a $900 billion contract with Libya in 2007. Since then, recent media reports have indicated, the company has been facing obstacles getting permits, and work has been moving slowly.

BP denies this. “Things have been going well since we started,” said Robert Wine, a spokesman for the company. The company is currently in the last stages of its seismic work – geological mapping way below the surface. “It’s our biggest exploratory program in the world. The biggest we’ve ever had.”

Al-Megrahi’s release, Wine said, will “have no impact whatsoever” on BP’s projects.

Manouchehr Takin, the Senior Petroleum Upstream Analyst at the Center for Global Energy Studies in London, agrees. Though al-Megrahi’s release has “emotionally attracted a lot of attention globally,” Takin said, “as far operations and business in Libya are concerned, I don’t think it makes much difference.”

Libya is currently the most oil-rich nation in Africa, with reserves of 43.6 billion barrels. Nigeria though, which has reserves of 36.2 billion barrels, is producing more oil than Libya, which until recent years was considered a “rogue state” for its suspected connections to terrorism.

“Obviously Libya can produce more,” said Takin, “but it takes time.”

When sanctions on Libya were lifted several years ago, there was an expectation among many foreign companies that the oil would begin flowing quickly. But activity in Libya has moved slowly – something that does not surprise Takin.

“Libyans have been dealing with foreign companies for years,” he said. “They’re shrewd,” and known for being tough when it comes to negotiating contracts.

Whether or not al-Megrahi’s release is a political move, Takin said, it’s “a minor point on the scale of business and trade. It’s more an individual case of compassion on the part of some.”

[TheBigAristotle]

The people who nailed Jesus to the cross didn't show any remorse. And he forgave them.

To be fair, Jesus also didn't exist.

[bobrek]

To be fair, Jesus also didn't exist.

The man Jesus or the son of God Jesus?

[thumbs]

I agree with this. Or just let him sentence his complete.

I just don't agree with "having a camera crew document the remainder of his miserable life" or "cutting off parts of his genitalia and brains and send his body back to his family incomplete".

You are undoubtedly the most irresponsible poster on the board. If you are going to quote a post in the thread, at least do it accurately. I defy you to name the post number where someone said "cutting off parts of his genitalia and brains and send his body back to family incomplete."

An autopsy is something that is routinely done in this and other civilized countries when death occurs in prison or is suspicious. Keeping the tissue samples could help to save cancer victim lives in the future and/or to better understand the criminally insane. When Timothy McVeigh dies, the same should be true of him. Heck, we have massive parts of Albert Einstein's brain and organs left that researchers still study to this day.

Recording his last days -- for instance from eye in the ceiling cameras like in department stores or Las Vegas -- could prove invaluable to teach us how to deal with prisoners in solitary confinement. It's not like he had a right to privacy in prison.

Neither is torture. It's not like sending his torso back minus his head or genitalia. Autopsy slices are typically quite small and barely noticeable if at all. So, come back with logical arguments and quit making up things as you go along. Please, grow up.

[bobrek]

When Timothy McVeigh dies, the same should be true of him. ....

McVeigh was executed 8 years ago.

[thumbs]

McVeigh was executed 8 years ago.
Well, I hope we got tissue samples.

[rocketsjudoka]

Heck, we have massive parts of Albert Einstein's brain and organs left that researchers still study to this day.

Albert Einstein voluntarily willed his body to science.

[bobrek]

Albert Einstein voluntarily willed his body to science.

Due to prison policy, McVeigh's request to donate his organs was denied.

[thumbs]

Due to prison policy, McVeigh's request to donate his organs was denied.
This seems to be a policy without merit. Medical science always needs organs and tissue samples to study.

[Sweet Lou 4 2]

I am sorry that he has cancer. He has a life sentence for killing almost 300 innocent people in an act of cowardice and extremism.

You do not have to be inhumane. He can be kept in a hospital ward, being given medication to manage his pain in his final days.

Releasing this monster should not have been an option.


What if he is innocent? There is a reason to believe this is the case and he was in an appeals process. The trial was somewhat a sham.

[thumbs]

Albert Einstein voluntarily willed his body to science.
Agreed. He thought his tissues might be of help to mankind. When a legitimate court convicted Al-Megrahi of the heinous murder of innocent civilians, he became a ward of the state. The state chose to let him go, which I feel was very wrong, but indeed was their perogative. However, had they chosen to keep him for the duration of his sentence, his body remained state "owned" and therefore within legal jurisdiction requiring an autopsy.

Do you object to autopsies of Muslims? Do you not believe in medical research? What if a Muslim is murdered? Taking tissue samples is not desecration like terrorists who behead people with whom they don't agree.

BTW, I respect your questions and responses because they have legitimacy and I hope my answers and return questions reflect that respect.

[rocketsjudoka]

Agreed. He thought his tissues might be of help to mankind. When a legitimate court convicted Al-Megrahi of the heinous murder of innocent civilians, he became a ward of the state. The state chose to let him go, which I feel was very wrong, but indeed was their perogative. However, had they chosen to keep him for the duration of his sentence, his body remained state "owned" and therefore within legal jurisdiction requiring an autopsy.

I don't understand British law fully so I can't say if an autopsy is mandated but what you are asking for is more than an autopsy but that his body be used without his or his families approval for medical research and samples kept. That is an ethical standard that hasn't been supported in most Western societies. As I asked you before do you agree then with the PRC, which just off the top of my head, is the only country that does what you are suggesting, considering a prisoner's body to be the property of the state?

Do you object to autopsies of Muslims? Do you not believe in medical research? What if a Muslim is murdered? Taking tissue samples is not desecration like terrorists who behead people with whom they don't agree.

I'm not a Muslim so I can't say exactly what they consider to be desecration but I know that some Jewish sects have the belief that every part of the body has to be buried so deliberately keeping parts of the body, even small tissue samples, would be considered desecration. I suspect that many Muslims hold similar beliefs.

Consider though the political implications of what you are suggesting. Consider that if Iran agreed with that standard and they kept the three Americans they are holding until they died and then kept parts of them for medical research. Don't you think there would be an outcry from Americans?

Also in regard to whether I believe in medical research of course I do but that is a straw man since I'm sure even you believe that medical research has be conducted ethically. Like it or not it is an established ethic that bodies, even of condemed prisoners, aren't used for experimentation without approval prior to death or from the person's families. In fact to do so is considered ghoulish and a crime.

BTW, I respect your questions and responses because they have legitimacy and I hope my answers and return questions reflect that respect.

Thanks and appreciate the civil debate.

[Refman]

What if he is innocent? There is a reason to believe this is the case and he was in an appeals process. The trial was somewhat a sham.
What reason? What is the evidence?

[Sweet Lou 4 2]

What reason? What is the evidence?

That the key witness against him was paid over a million dollars BEFORE he testified.

[Refman]

That the key witness against him was paid over a million dollars BEFORE he testified.
IIRC, he accepted responsibility. Later, Libya confirmed this and accepted the responsibility for sending him to do it.

Am I wrong on this? I very well may be. If I am, please let me know how it went down.

[Air Langhi]

IIRC, he accepted responsibility. Later, Libya confirmed this and accepted the responsibility for sending him to do it.

Am I wrong on this? I very well may be. If I am, please let me know how it went down.

I don't think he ever accepted responsibility. It looked like Lybia took blame so they could get something out of it. In any case he was just a man following orders. There have been soldiers who have done terrible things who walk free.

[Sweet Lou 4 2]

IIRC, he accepted responsibility. Later, Libya confirmed this and accepted the responsibility for sending him to do it.

Am I wrong on this? I very well may be. If I am, please let me know how it went down.

He never accepted responsibility - always claimed his innocence. Libya never confirmed this - they took responsibility for the bombing but never said who carried it out.

He was a fall guy.

[Refman]

He never accepted responsibility - always claimed his innocence. Libya never confirmed this - they took responsibility for the bombing but never said who carried it out.

He was a fall guy.
I knew it...Lee Majors is that you? :eek: :D

[Sweet Lou 4 2]

I knew it...Lee Majors is that you? :eek: :D

i know wikipedia isn't authoritative, but it gives the basic information and i am tired.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pan_Am_Flight_103

The clothes were traced to a Maltese merchant, Tony Gauci, who became a key prosecution witness, testifying that he sold the clothes to a man of Libyan appearance, whom he later identified as Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi. However, an official report providing information not available during the original trial stated that Gauci had seen a picture of al-Megrahi in a magazine which connected al-Megrahi to the bombing, a fact which could have distorted his judgment.[29]

A circuit board fragment, allegedly found embedded in a piece of charred material, was identified as part of an electronic timer similar to that found on a Libyan intelligence agent who had been arrested 10 months previously, carrying materials for a Semtex bomb. The timer allegedly was traced through its Swiss manufacturer, Mebo, to the Libyan military, and Mebo employee Ulrich Lumpert identified the fragment at al-Megrahi's trial. Mebo's owner, Edwin Bollier, later revealed that in 1991 he had declined an offer from the FBI of $4 million to testify that the timer fragment was part of a Mebo MST-13 timer supplied to Libya. On 18 July 2007, Ulrich Lumpert admitted he had lied at the trial.[30] In a sworn affidavit before a Zurich notary public, Lumpert stated that he had stolen a prototype MST-13 timer printed circuit board from Mebo and gave it without permission on 22 June 1989, to "an official person investigating the Lockerbie case".[31] Dr Hans Köchler, UN observer at the Lockerbie trial, who was sent a copy of Lumpert's affidavit, said: "The Scottish authorities are now obliged to investigate this situation. Not only has Mr Lumpert admitted to stealing a sample of the timer, but to the fact he gave it to an official and then lied in court".

In a documentary entitled "Lockerbie revisited" aired on 27 April 2009, the film's director and narrator, Gideon Levy, interviewed officials involved with the case. Former FBI laboratory scientist Fred Whitehurst described the FBI laboratory itself as a "crime scene", where an unqualified colleague Thomas Thurman would routinely alter his scientific reports. The interviews also revealed that the timer fragment had never been tested for explosives residue due to "budgetary reasons". Thurman, who led the forensic investigation and identified the fragments' Libyan connection, confirmed that it was the "only real piece of evidence against Libya" and when asked of the importance of the timer in the conviction of al-Megrahi, FBI Task Force Chief Richard Marquise stated, "It would be a very difficult case to prove ... I don't think we would ever (have) had an indictment".[32]

Investigators also discovered that an unaccompanied bag had been routed onto PA 103, via the interline baggage system, from Luqa airport on Air Malta flight KM180 to Frankfurt, and then by feeder flight PA 103A to Heathrow. This unaccompanied bag was shown at the trial to have been the suitcase that contained the bomb. In 2009 it was revealed that security guard Ray Manley had reported that Heathrow's Pan Am baggage area had been broken into 17 hours before flight 103 took off. Police lost the report and it was never investigated or brought up at trial.[33]

[edit] Trial, appeals and release
Main article: Pan Am Flight 103 bombing trial

On 3 May 2000, the trial of the two Libyans, Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi and Lamin Khalifah Fhimah, accused of the 1988 PA103 bombing, began. Megrahi was convicted of murder on 31 January 2001, and was sentenced to life imprisonment. His co-accused, Fhimah, was found not guilty.[34] Megrahi's appeal against conviction was later rejected on 14 March 2002.

Megrahi's lawyers applied to the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) on 23 September 2003 to have his case referred back to the Court of Criminal Appeal for a fresh appeal against conviction. The application to the SCCRC followed the publication of two reports in February 2001 and March 2002 by Hans Köchler, who had been an international observer at Camp Zeist, Netherlands appointed by the Secretary-General of the United Nations. Köchler described the decisions of the trial and appeal courts as a "spectacular miscarriage of justice".[35] Köchler also issued a series of statements in 2003, 2005, and 2007 calling for an independent international inquiry into the case and accusing the West of "double standards in criminal justice" in relation to the Lockerbie trial on the one hand and the HIV trial in Libya on the other.[36][37][38]

On 28 June 2007 the SCCRC announced its decision to refer Megrahi's case to the High Court for a second appeal against conviction.[39] The SCCRC's decision was based on facts set out in an 800-page report that determined that "a miscarriage of justice may have occurred".[40] Köchler criticised the SCCRC for exonerating police, prosecutors and forensic staff from blame in respect of Megrahi's alleged wrongful conviction. He told The Herald of 29 June 2007: "No officials to be blamed, simply a Maltese shopkeeper."[41] Köchler also highlighted the role of intelligence services in the trial and stated that proper judicial proceedings could not be conducted under conditions in which extrajudicial forces are allowed to intervene.[42]

[dmc89]

Just came in from Reuters UK:

Lockerbie bomber release "linked to oil deal".

Britain agreed to include Lockerbie bomber Abdel Basset al-Megrahi in a prisoner transfer deal with Libya because of "overwhelming interests" shortly before an oil deal was sealed with Tripoli.

http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE57T0UC20090830

Looks like a $900 million deal for BP trumps the killing of 270 people (even if he were innocent, it's just as bad)..

[Refman]

Just came in from Reuters UK:

Lockerbie bomber release "linked to oil deal".

Britain agreed to include Lockerbie bomber Abdel Basset al-Megrahi in a prisoner transfer deal with Libya because of "overwhelming interests" shortly before an oil deal was sealed with Tripoli.

http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE57T0UC20090830

Looks like a $900 million deal for BP trumps the killing of 270 people (even if he were innocent, it's just as bad)..
Everything in this world is for sale...why is that so surprising?

[Ottomaton]

Why are some saying this guy was more of a scapegoat than one who actually perpetrated this crime? Was he not found guilty in a court of law? Surely, there was evidence that ties him directly to the bombing...and it wasn't circumstantial? The guy acts like he was been wrongly imprisoned this whole time...based on his statements.


I'm not sure how much faith I put in it, but here is the case, via the human province (http://humanprovince.wordpress.com/2009/08/27/outraged-for-the-wrong-reasons/). If you need the Cliff Notes, I placed them under the story.



Outraged for the wrong reasons

There has been a lot written about Scotland’s decision to release al-Megrahi, the Libyan who was convicted of the 1988 bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie and subsequently released, to the delight of Tripoli, on humanitarian grounds because he is in the terminal stages of cancer. Some has looked at the matter from a different angle (Scottish-English relations (http://www.lrb.co.uk/blog/2009/08/26/glen-newey/into-the-colonels-tent/), rule of law versus politics (http://walt.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2009/08/26/on_politics_and_the_rule_of_law)), but most of it has been full of boilerplate outrage and not particularly interesting.

What most of this coverage has in common, though, is the assumption that al-Megrahi is guilty. No one seems to be talking at all about the fact that he had been granted an appeal (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/south_of_scotland/7671391.stm), because last year, the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) (http://www.sccrc.org.uk/aboutthecommission.aspx), a public body funded by the Scottish Government Criminal Justice Directorate, found that al-Megrahi may have been the victim of a miscarriage of justice (http://www.sccrc.org.uk/ViewFile.aspx?id=293). The only two accounts of the affair I’ve seen that take this into consideration have been by Hugh Miles (http://www.lrb.co.uk/blog/2009/08/17/hugh-miles/quid-pro-quo/) and Robert Fisk (http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/fisk/robert-fisk-for-the-truth-look-to-tehran-and-damascus-ndash-not-tripoli-1775813.html).

Miles, of course, wrote about the case two years ago, and I remember being surprised that his piece in the LRB (http://www.lrb.co.uk/v29/n12/mile01_.html) didn’t make more waves. Accoridng to Miles, there has been an obvious quid pro quo (http://www.lrb.co.uk/blog/2009/08/17/hugh-miles/quid-pro-quo/):


<blockquote>It’s no secret the Libyans didn’t want their man to die in prison. They made it clear to the UK authorities that if he did, relations between the two nations would be badly damaged, which would place the $900 million joint venture (http://www.bp.com/genericarticle.do?categoryId=2012968&contentId=7033600) between BP and the Libya Investment Corporation in jeopardy.

Despite deep mutual mistrust, the two sides managed to fix up an uneasy quid pro quo in negotiations behind closed doors. The convicted mass-murderer would be released on compassionate grounds if he promised to drop his appeal. Plainly the authorities were not too bothered about concealing the fact that a deal was done: the two announcements came almost simultaneously.

This suits both sides: the Libyans get Megrahi back while the British authorities are spared the potential fiasco of his being acquitted, which would inevitably lead to calls for a public inquiry into Lockerbie, not to mention the possibility of having to give Gaddafi back the $2.7 billion he paid in compensation.
</blockquote>

Fisk gives us another view, managing to remind us, as he is wont to do, that he was around when the whole thing went down in the first place (http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/fisk/robert-fisk-for-the-truth-look-to-tehran-and-damascus-ndash-not-tripoli-1775813.html):

<blockquote>It was Megrahi’s decision – not that of his lawyers – to abandon the appeal that might have told us the truth about Lockerbie. The British would far rather he return to the land of the man who wrote The Green Book on the future of the world (the author, a certain Col Muammar Gaddafi, also wrote Escape to Hell and Other Stories) than withstand the typhoon of information that an appeal would have revealed.

…Megrahi’s lawyers had delved deeply into his case – which rested on the word of a Maltese tailor who had already seen a picture of Megrahi (unrevealed to us at the time) so he could identify him in court – and uncovered some remarkable evidence from the German police.

… [T]hey went a long way towards establishing that a Lebanese who had been killed in the Lockerbie bombing was steered to Frankfurt airport by known Lebanese militants and the bag that contained the bomb was actually put on to the baggage carousel for checking in by this passenger’s Lebanese handler, who had taken him to the airport, and had looked after him in Germany before the flight.

I have read all the interviews which the German police conducted with their suspects. They are devastating. There clearly was a Lebanese connection. And there probably was a Palestinian connection. How can I forget a press conference in Beirut held by the head of the pro-Syrian “Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine” [sic] (they were known, then, as the “Lockerbie boys”) in which their leader, Ahmed Jibril, suddenly blurted out: “I’m not responsible for the Lockerbie bombing. They are trying to get me with a kangaroo court.”

Yet there was no court at the time. Only journalists – with MI6 and the CIA contacts – had pointed the finger at Jibril’s rogues. It was Iran’s revenge, they said, for the shooting down of a perfectly innocent Iranian passenger jet by the captain of the American warship Vincennes a few months earlier. I still happen to believe this is close to the truth.

But the moment Syria sent its tanks to defend Saudi Arabia after Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait in 1990, all the MI6 truth-telling turned into a claptrap of nonsense about Col Gaddafi.
</blockquote>

It should be noted, though, that Fisk is mixing up his Palestinian factions. The Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) was George Habash’s group, while Ahmad Jibril’s outfit, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine – General Command (PFLP-GC) broke away from Habash in 1968. (In all fairness, though, t’s sometimes confusing to wade through the various splinter groups and their acronyms, or as the Monty Python boys would call them: splitters (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iS-0Az7dgRY).)

So it’s worth taking a look at the SCCRC’s press release (http://www.sccrc.org.uk/ViewFile.aspx?id=293) (the full report isn’t publicly available), which states:

<blockquote> This has been a difficult case to deal with. The Commission’s enquiry team have worked tirelessly for over three years. Some of what we have discovered may imply innocence; some of what we have discovered may imply guilt. However, such matters are for a court to decide. The Commission is of the view, based upon our lengthy investigations, the new evidence we have found and other evidence which was not before the trial court that the applicant may have suffered a miscarriage of justice. The place for that matter to be determined is in the appeal court, to which we now refer the case.</blockquote>

Of course, this is not to say that al-Megrahi is innocent, just that there were reasonable and sufficient grounds for him to appeal the conviction. But instead of a legal appeal that would have brought who knows what new evidence to light, a deal was struck between London and Tripoli. Did the Libyans have anything to do with Lockerbie? Were they framed to keep Damascus’s support for the 1991 invasion of Iraq? Was it a hit that was outsourced by Iran to the PFLP-GC through Damascus to avenge the Iranian civilian carrier that had been downed by the US?

An appeal could have answered these questions. Again, according to Miles (http://www.lrb.co.uk/v29/n12/mile01_.html):

<blockquote>If al-Megrahi is exonerated, many tricky questions will resurface, not least what to do about the $2.7 billion compensation paid by Libya to the relatives of the victims of the bombing. And then, of course, there is the question of who really bombed Flight 103.

In the first three years following the bombing, before a shred of evidence had been produced to incriminate Libya, the Dumfries and Galloway police, the FBI and several other intelligence services around the world all shared the belief that the Lockerbie bombers belonged to the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine General Command (PFLP-GC), a Palestinian rejectionist organisation backed by Iran. The PFLP-GC is headed by Ahmed Jibril, a former Syrian army captain; its headquarters are in Damascus and it is closely allied with the Syrian president and other senior Syrian officials. In the 1970s and 1980s the PFLP-GC carried out a number of raids against Israel, including a novel hang-glider assault launched from inside Lebanon. Lawyers, intelligence services and diplomats around the world continue to suspect that Jibril – who has even boasted that he is responsible – was behind Lockerbie.

The case against Jibril and his gang is well established. It runs like this: in July 1988, five months before the Lockerbie bombing, a US naval commander aboard USS Vincennes in the Persian Gulf shot down an Iranian airbus, apparently mistaking it for an attacker. On board Iran Air Flight 655 were 270 pilgrims en route to Mecca. Ayatollah Khomeini vowed the skies would ‘rain blood’ in revenge and offered a $10 million reward to anyone who ‘obtained justice’ for Iran. The suggestion is that the PFLP-GC was commissioned to undertake a retaliatory bombing.

… Other evidence has emerged showing that the bomb could have been placed on the plane at Frankfurt airport, a possibility that the prosecution in al-Megrahi’s trial consistently ruled out (their case depended on the suitcase containing the bomb having been transferred from a connecting flight from Malta). Most significantly, German federal police have provided financial records showing that on 23 December 1988, two days after the bombing, the Iranian government deposited £5.9 million into a Swiss bank account that belonged to the arrested members of the PFLP-GC.

The decision to steer the investigation away from the PFLP-GC and in the direction of Libya came in the run-up to the first Gulf War, as America was looking to rally a coalition to liberate Kuwait and was calling for support from Iran and Syria. Syria subsequently joined the UN forces. Quietly, the evidence incriminating Jibril, so painstakingly sifted from the debris, was binned.</blockquote>

Now though, it seems we’ll never know. So in a sense, all of the outraged coverage of the release is correct. We should be outraged. But we should be outraged, because the truth is being sidestepped for political expediency by everyone involved.



The Cliff Notes


Last year, The Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission found that al-Megrahi may have been wrongly convicted, and al-Megrahi had an appeal underway.


The Libyans indicated to the British government that a major oil deal would be killed unless something were done about al-Megrahi. So just whitewashing the appeal wasn't an option. But, as you see below, allowing the appeal would have had some negative consequences.


If al-Megrahi were found innocent, would the UK return the $2.7 billion that Libya paid as restitution?


More than returning the cash, a new trial would also result in some embarrassing evidence coming to light in public as part of the defense, which the UK would not be happy with. That evidence is the next point:


There is some evidence that a pro-Syrian Lebanese-Palestinian group, the PFLP, may have been involved. Evidence includes the PFLP being known around Lebanon as "the Lockerbie boys", and a $10 million transfer from Iran to the PFLP 2 days after the bombing, after the Ayatollah had promised $10 million to whoever took revenge for the USS Vincennes incident.


The supposed reason that the UK covered this up was because publically trumpeting Syrian involvement and the resultant demands for restitution would have been deleterious to Syrian support for the First Gulf War.


So, stuck between a rock and a hard place, the UK struck a deal which required al-Megrahi dropped his appeal. al-Megrahi and the Libyans were appeased, but the UK didn't have to return the restitution, or have it's potentially embarassing laundy rifled through by the rest of the world.

[pgabriel]

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Ottomaton again.

[Shroopy2]

Justice will never prevail here. There is no such thing as justice, it's a made up imaginary thing anyway. The guys has often said his heart goes out to the victims families, even AFTER he landed on Libyan soil.

I never understood the eye for an eye mentality.

If you think the act was heinous and dispicable, and the people who carry it out are animals, then it's ok to stoop down to become them as well?

What happened to Christian values? Why is it that religion only matters in applying it to everyone but not when it comes to our enemies.

The guy is going to die. He's life is over. Whether he dies in a prison or goes home - what does it matter? His life is over. No more justice can be extracted from the situation without making a mockery of those who claim to be a victim.
The big soup spoon just swirls humans around the big soup bowl and we just swirl along drifting wherever the inertia takes us. So now justice is a human construct with no real base in existence.

Forget the Lockerbie bomber, put him aside. I dont quite know your full meaning from those statements, I'm just choosing to get on a soapbox from it.....If you have a fleet of cars and you know 1 has NO brakes and they cant be fixed, and you know that car has already crashed, you take that car off the road.

Someone breaks into your house with a gun aimed at your head and your family's head, you shoot him preemptively. You carried out justice before it got to a jury. Should you have done the Christian thing and not stoop to his level of committing an animalistic act similar to what he would have done? The only difference between his life being taken upon incident and a judicial panel deciding his life is its a much much longer more drawn out process in the system..

I'm as pacifist and forgiving of enemies, stupidity and evil as anyone actually. I'm a bit of a wimp, I'm not a fighter. I just think... unfortunately there's come irreversibly bad people. You have to label them bad people and they dont get the benefit of the doubt as being born pure but turning bad, being good at heart but just doing a momentarily bad thing.


A child molester poses risks to the community because they will commit their act AGAIN on other innocent people. Thats why we lock people up for long periods of time, or forever. If you let that person loose based on forgiveness and that person takes down more people, thats on YOUR conscience. Take that busted car off the road, dont let it endanger more people. The only reason any Lockerbie bomber gets to sit in a cell is because nobody knew what they were up to before they could be shot dead in their tracks. An eye for an eye might be unreasonable. But a hair for an eye doesnt always make sense either.

[rocketsjudoka]

Almost three years and a revolution later the convicted Lockerbie bomber passes away.

http://worldnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/05/20/11778030-lockerbie-bomber-megrahi-dies-in-libya?lite

Lockerbie bomber Megrahi dies in Libya

Updated at 5:55 a.m. ET: TRIPOLI - The former Libyan intelligence officer convicted of the 1988 Lockerbie bombing that killed 270 people has died, his son told NBC News on Sunday. He was 59.

Abdel Baset al-Megrahi died at home after a long battle with cancer. His health had deteriorated quickly, his brother Abdel Hakim had told Reuters.

Al-Megrahi was convicted in 2001 of the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 as it flew to New York from London. All 259 people aboard the airliner were killed and 11 others on the ground in the town of Lockerbie, Scotland, died from falling wreckage.

Britain freed him in 2009 on compassionate grounds because he was suffering from advanced terminal prostate cancer and thought to have months to live.

His release angered many relatives of the victims, 189 of whom were American, and the Obama administration criticized the decision.

A number of U.S. politicians have pressed for his extradition to the United States, something Libya's ruling National Transitional Council said it would not do.

Megrahi, who served as an intelligence agent during the rule of Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi, denied any role in suspected human rights abuses in his home country before Gaddafi's fall and death in a popular uprising last year.

In April, Al-Megrahi's condition worsened and he was taken to a private hospital to receive a transfusion of eleven liters of blood, but subsequently felt strong enough to return home.

[Mathloom]

Edit: Just realized it's an old thread and he passed yesterday.

[Rocket River]

*shrug*
I remember when folx thought the old guy who killed Medgar Evers was too old to prosecute.

this is not surprising.

Rocket River