mj.scuba Posted February 7, 2011 Share Posted February 7, 2011 If he thinks Labour have are responsible for a serious lack of judgement on the issue why has he ruled out a public enquiry? Why would we need an expensive public enquiry? You Labourites just love wasting money don't you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeadingNorth Posted February 7, 2011 Share Posted February 7, 2011 Why would we need an expensive public enquiry? Do you think the Libyans might send him back if an enquiry decides that he shouldn't have been released? I suspect not, myself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Bourne Posted February 7, 2011 Share Posted February 7, 2011 David Cameron has condemned Megrahi's release all along, he's no need to make any political capital, his stance on the issue has not changed and has always been known. Right.... Cameron's noble stance had nothing to do with him being in opposition at the time, did it... no, of course not x Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wednesday1 Posted February 7, 2011 Share Posted February 7, 2011 Why would we need an expensive public enquiry? You Labourites just love wasting money don't you? Double-dip Dave should put up or shut up. I wish you's just shutup! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeadingNorth Posted February 7, 2011 Share Posted February 7, 2011 Right.... Cameron's noble stance... I don't remember anything noble about it. He condemned the decision to release him on compassionate grounds, but I don't seem to recall him making any noise about a proper fair trial being conducted, or his appeal being expedited. He seemed happy to let the man rot in jail on an unsafe conviction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mj.scuba Posted February 7, 2011 Share Posted February 7, 2011 Right.... Cameron's noble stance had nothing to do with him being in opposition at the time, did it... no, of course not x Well there was no reason Gordon Brown could not have done the same, it was after all, a decision by the Scottish government......oh, apart from they were actively advising the Libyans on how to get him out, maybe that's why Brown didn't take the same line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vague_Boy Posted February 8, 2011 Share Posted February 8, 2011 How do you feel about this? No great surprise. The once vilified supporter of terrorism, Colonel Gaddafi is now our friend it seems. This is a man whose agents blew up the Pan Am plane over Lockerbie, ran guns to the IRA and one of whose diplomats shot a London policewoman. Maybe Saddam Hussein should have hired the Colonel's PR people? Isn't our national morality wonderfully selective and flexible? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phanerothyme Posted February 8, 2011 Share Posted February 8, 2011 Megrahi's not the bomber. This is common knowledge, surely? No it isn't and nor should it be. We should keep it all covered up? Well, I see your point, but I think that's a bit extreme. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mecky Posted February 8, 2011 Share Posted February 8, 2011 Where is the proof and what is your point. You want to look at newspaper reports, come back when you have proof and untill then you can make comments and accusations. "It says India on bus tyres but they dont go there". His point is he's a Tory trying to bash Labour at every opportunity. Would he have said this if a Conservative government had done it? No, I don't think he would have. He is just trying to persaude public opinion by constantly chipping away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alchresearch Posted February 8, 2011 Share Posted February 8, 2011 No great surprise. The once vilified supporter of terrorism, Colonel Gaddafi is now our friend it seems. This is a man whose agents blew up the Pan Am plane over Lockerbie, ran guns to the IRA and one of whose diplomats shot a London policewoman. Maybe Saddam Hussein should have hired the Colonel's PR people? Isn't our national morality wonderfully selective and flexible? But at what point do you try and ignore the errors of the past and start to build bridges? Or maybe we should still call Germany Nazis and maintain a cold front? Personally, I'd rather see dialogue with these states that aggrivation and tit-for-tat spats, just like with Northern Ireland. Yes, its bitter for Lockerbie and the families of everyone who was on that Pan Am flight, but if it prevents another Lockerbie.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.