Gordon Brown finally breaks silence on Lockerbie

Gordon Brown today broke his silence on the release of the Lockerbie bomber, saying that he was "angry and repulsed" at the scenes of jubilation in Libya.

The Prime Minister has been under pressure to comment ever since the Scottish Justice Secretary announced last Thursday that he was releasing Abdel Baset Ali al-Megrahi from a Scottish jail on compassionate grounds to go home to die.

The release, less than eight years into al-Megrahi's minimum 28-year term for bombing Pan Am flight 103 with the loss of 270 lives, has prompted outrage in America - and suspicions that the release was secretly negotiated by Westminster to free up trade relations with oil-rich Libya. But Mr Brown has until today refused to say anything to confirm or deny the suspicions.

The Conservatives have condemned Mr Brown's silence on the issue as cowardly, pointing out that he had found the time to comment on England's Ashes victory over Australia.

Click to expand...

Laila said:

-- Is it just chance a few days after the release .... Libya invests hundreds of millions into the city of London.

Click to expand...

Laila said:

Gordon Brown finally breaks silence on Lockerbie to condemn Libya - Times Online

Is it just me not buying it? Someone high up had something to do with it.
Is it just chance a few days after the release .... Libya invests hundreds of millions into the city of London.

Click to expand...

Anima said:

And when considers the fact that he's a Nationalist MSP, it'd seem very unlikely for him to take part in any deal that would primarily result in benefit for an English city.

Click to expand...

Anima said:

I doubt that, for the fact that final decisions about releasing Scottish prisoners can only be made by Kenny McAskill, the Justice Minister. Even if the government at Westminister wanted Megrahi released in exchange for Libyan investments, they couldn't do so without getting McAskill on board. And when considers the fact that he's a Nationalist MSP, it'd seem very unlikely for him to take part in any deal that would primarily result in benefit for an English city.

Click to expand...

Laila said:

Lol

It must be a smack in the face for him then.
London will most likely get the benefits if the investments stated above occurs and he gets all the blame. hehe

Click to expand...

F107HyperSabr said:

I think that something stinks in the State of Scotland..

Click to expand...

Anima said:

Well, who would put their reputation on the line to benefit a city in another country? From a political standpoint, it doesn't make much sense.

Click to expand...