Lockerbie Bomber to be set free to die with family

To be fair, Jesus also didn't exist.

 

The man Jesus or the son of God Jesus?

 

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.

 

McVeigh was executed 8 years ago.

 

Well, I hope we got tissue samples.

 

Albert Einstein voluntarily willed his body to science.

 

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.

 

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.

 

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.

 

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?

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.

Thanks and appreciate the civil debate.

 

What reason? What is the evidence?

 

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.

 

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.

 

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?

 

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

 

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?