To: Tulsa Ramjet
While the outrage is understandable, prior to the release it was common knowledge in UK that a pending appeal would quite likely show that the prisoner was framed by the British government.
Avoiding this embarassment may have been one reason for the release.
5 posted on
08/22/2009 12:41:48 PM PDT by
Sherman Logan
("The price of freedom is the toleration of imperfections." Thomas Sowell)
To: Sherman Logan
Excuse me, but it’s just not possible to “frame” the head of Libya’s secret police.
10 posted on
08/22/2009 12:56:23 PM PDT by
Deb
(Beat him, strip him and bring him to my tent!)
To: Sherman Logan
it was common knowledge in UK that a pending appeal would quite likely show that the prisoner was framed by the British government.
++++++++++++
If this is true, do we/they know who is responsible (besides Khadafi’s government?)
34 posted on
08/22/2009 1:43:26 PM PDT by
SeattleBruce
(God, Family, Church, Country & the Tea Party! Take America Back! (Objective media? Try TRAITORS.))
To: Sherman Logan
While the outrage is understandable, prior to the release it was common knowledge in UK that a pending appeal would quite likely show that the prisoner was framed by the British government. I know nothing of all this, but I have *heard* that there are some folks in Scotland (Lockerbie itself?) who thought he might be innocent.
71 posted on
08/22/2009 7:37:14 PM PDT by
sionnsar
(IranAzadi|5yst3m 0wn3d-it's N0t Y0ur5:SONY|Remember Neda Agha-Soltan|TV--it's NOT news you can trust)
To: Sherman Logan
So in other words the UK is filled with a bunch of nazi terrorist supporters? Only Nazi POS child molesting terror supporters believe he was framed.
86 posted on
08/23/2009 1:31:34 AM PDT by
rexgrossmansonlyfan
(Obama, Blagojevich, Stroger and Daley when Daley is the least corrupt of a group you have issues!)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson