Everything we do should with criminals should be tempered by mercy and that’s why I’m against the death penalty. So in that I agree with Cardinal Keith O’Brien of Scotland. But Cardinal O’Brien’s defense of the release of the Lockerbie bomber who killed 270 people seems a wee bit overboard if you ask me. OK. Maybe more than a wee bit.
By releasing the Lockerbie bomber (who it turns out wasn’t as sick as we were led to believe) Western civilization told the world that we don’t have the stones to even stand up for our slaughtered dead or even the will to protect the living.
Seriously, if you’re someone considering getting into the jihad business doesn’t this scream weakness to you? The man was complicit in the death of hundreds of people and now he’s doing a victory lap.
The Daily Mail reports:
Scotland’s Roman Catholic leader attacked America’s ‘culture of vengeance’ today as he defended the release of the Lockerbie bomber.
Cardinal Keith O’Brien said despite the ‘gratuitous barbarity’ of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi – who the Scottish Government freed last year on compassionate grounds – ministers were right ‘to affirm our own humanity’.
He accused the American justice system of being based on ‘vengeance and retribution’ and said he was glad to live in a country where ‘justice is tempered with mercy’….
Writing in Scotland on Sunday newspaper, Cardinal O’Brien said: ‘In Scotland over many years we have cultivated through our justice system what I hope can be described as a “culture of compassion”.
‘On the other hand, there still exists in many parts of the US, if not nationally, an attitude towards the concept of justice which can only be described as a ‘culture of vengeance’.’
He added: ‘Scotland’s legal system allowed the Scottish justice secretary to release Megrahi on compassionate grounds, following due process and based on clear medical advice.’
The religious leader urged US Senators wanting to question Scottish and British government ministers to instead ‘direct their gaze inwards’.
Highlighting the 1,226 people executed in the US since 1976, the cardinal added: ‘Perhaps the consciences of some Americans, especially members of the US Senate, should be stirred by the ways in which ‘justice’ is administered in so many of their own states.’…
He concluded: ‘I believe that only God can forgive and show ultimate compassion to those who commit terrible crimes and I would rather live in a country where justice is tempered by mercy than exist in one where vengeance and retribution are the norm.’
I’m all about mercy but this guy shouldn’t be walking the streets. He just shouldn’t.
And the release that was based on “clear medical advice” seems to be a bit of a sham now. Doctors said the terrorist had three months to live. We’re coming up on a year now where he’s had time to be with his family, a mercy he didn’t show to his victims.
What about the mercy for the families of the 270 dead?
August 9, 2010 at 7:50 am
The Lockerbie bombing was a terrible event and of course all our sympathy must be with the victims and their families.
However, al-Megrahi had launched an appeal against his conviction, and I believe was supported in this by Jim Swire, whose daughter was killed by the bomb, and who has long campaigned for the truth to be told about what happened. Apparently the powers that be did not want the appeal to be heard because of some of the evidence that would be presented, and hence al-Megrahi was instead released on compassionate grounds, provided he dropped his claims to innocence.
August 9, 2010 at 4:35 pm
Seems a bit puffed up and pompous to use this event as a reason to beat on the United States. Painting "we Scots" as merciful, and those bad old Americans as "vengeful" is just overly simplistic. It comes off as kind of silly and self-righteous.
August 9, 2010 at 5:36 pm
Um, pardon me for my "impertinence," Cardinal. Life in prison until death is not the death penalty. It's spending the rest of one's life in prison until God decides to "call him home."
August 9, 2010 at 5:44 pm
It is not "vengeful" to execute a criminal such as the Lockerbie bomber. It is just. If he had been executed, this mess wouldn't have happened and the families and friends of the 270 dead would have closure. (If you study the concept of justice, it includes punishment and reparation. It is very simplistic to replace the word "punishment" with "revenge".
August 9, 2010 at 6:12 pm
"…I would rather live in a country where justice is tempered by mercy than exist in one where vengeance and retribution are the norm.'
What country is he talking about there? The US: uncompassionate and unmerciful? He must be joking! For all of our (very deep and manifold) flaws, we are still the most generous of countries.
Compassion is not letting a mass murdering terrorist be rewarded with a hero's welcome. That is his definition of compassion and mercy?! What an….well anyway, that is just wrong.
He says only God can forgive. True enough, but it also true that only God can truly punish and God will mete out perfect justice. But…is that any reason to NOT deliver human justice as well? Didn't Jesus say "render unto Caesar"? Was He only talking about taxes?
FACT: Letting this man go based on A LIE about his medical condition is EVIL. When you are claiming to do good and it's based on a lie it's an EVIL.
FACT: Human justice is a form of compassion for the victims of crimes and for the society at large. It serves as a disincentive to further crime. Letting out a mass murderer and rewarding him eliminates the disincentive and breeds chaos and maybe more acts of the same.
So:
Lying to release mass murderer of innocents – Good?
Encouraging more terrorism – Good?
This guy is a CARDINAL? Are we sure this isn't really Craig Ferguson? More importantly what's really in haggis anyway?
Either way this isn't mercy, this is vile, disgusting callousness.
August 9, 2010 at 6:23 pm
Jimbo, I think you urgently need to learn the difference between "FACTS" and subjective opinions.
Matthew – is there any evidence this guy is literally "walking the streets", let alone doing a "victory lap"? He's a very ill man. It's also worth making the point that some relatives of the victims supported his release, so any question along the lines of "what about mercy for the relatives?" has to bear that in mind.
August 9, 2010 at 8:00 pm
James Kelly: Wow, like magic! All you have to do is mention Scottish Clowns and one shows up!
First, thanks for not disagreeing with the vast bulk of what I wrote. I'd hate to have to respond to that, too, and it is edifying to have you at least tacitly agree with it.
Perhaps you could intelligently dispute what it is you disagree with? Or are you…as I suspect, just taking pot shots from on high at "ignorant Americans" then running off.
I don't know you, but if you think that a good end can justify an evil means, then not only do you put yourself squarely in the same camp as nearly every totalitarian regime that has ever existed, but it would also seem that you are a moral relativist. Either you do not believe there is such a thing as objective truth, or you do believe in truth, but care about it only when it is convenient for you.
Nevertheless facts are stubborn things they will continue to be the facts without your support.
But I am going to give you the benefit of the doubt. Maybe your argument is that the American media has misrepresented the facts of the Magrahi case and that he was NOT released under false pretenses.
But the proof is in the pudding. This guy is still alive. So either the status of his health was grossly misrepresented, the Libyan medical system is miraculously advanced or your health system is as incompetent as we have been led to believe.
All of this is serves only to obfuscate the nasty fact that Scotland rewarded a mass murdering terrorist with a trip home to a hero's welcome and used the guise of "mercy" to do it.
At best, it requires utter intellectual dishonesty or complete idiocy to pretend that this abomination serves justice.
At worst one must question the motivation to defend it – politics? Nationalism? Whatever it is – it doesn't defend what a 3 year would see as obscenely un-just, un-merciful and detrimental to the victims, their families, friends and TO THE ENTIRE CONCEPT OF JUSTICE.
Last: I don't care if his victory lap is in his own living room – or if it consists of rolling his wheelchair in and out of the bathroom. It is a victory lap nonetheless.
Utterly disgusting.
August 9, 2010 at 8:02 pm
Oh yes, and I should add: I finally understand what the term "Scott Free" really means.
August 9, 2010 at 8:48 pm
I'm not sure how it's possible to meet the challenge for an "intelligent" discussion with someone who's demonstrably only interested in spewing venom. But nevertheless I shall try to answer your points.
1. "First, thanks for not disagreeing with the vast bulk of what I wrote. I'd hate to have to respond to that, too, and it is edifying to have you at least tacitly agree with it."
I do disagree with the vast bulk of what you wrote. For you to claim that by not referring to other points you made I was by default agreeing with them is utterly (and probably willfully) obtuse.
2. "but if you think that a good end can justify an evil means"
I can't answer that because I literally have no idea what it means. I appreciate you believe Megrahi's release was "evil", so in that case what was the "good end"?
3. "Either you do not believe there is such a thing as objective truth, or you do believe in truth, but care about it only when it is convenient for you."
There is such a thing as objective truth as far as matters of fact are concerned – ie. did something happen or didn't it. But much of what you presented as fact were, as I stated, subjective opinions.
4. "Maybe your argument is that the American media has misrepresented the facts of the Magrahi case and that he was NOT released under false pretenses."
Of course it is – the American media have grossly and demonstrably misrepresented the facts. In any case, it would be rather curious for me to argue "he was released under false pretences, but it was still the right decision".
5. "But the proof is in the pudding. This guy is still alive. So either the status of his health was grossly misrepresented, the Libyan medical system is miraculously advanced or your health system is as incompetent as we have been led to believe."
Incorrect. It was made abundantly clear at the time that Megrahi might live longer than three months – that prognosis was merely a reasonable estimate. (Incidentally – "led to believe" by whom? Fox News? No wonder you're so ill-informed on this case.)
6. "All of this is serves only to obfuscate the nasty fact that Scotland rewarded a mass murdering terrorist with a trip home to a hero's welcome and used the guise of "mercy" to do it."
I can only wearily point out that this is yet another misuse of the word "fact".
7. "At worst one must question the motivation to defend it – politics? Nationalism?"
Neither. A belief in due process and the integrity of the Scottish legal system, not to mention the values it is founded on.
8. "I finally understand what the term "Scott Free" really means."
Hmmm. Don't give up the day job.
August 9, 2010 at 9:02 pm
Jimbo – You can't seem to argue a point without making ad hominem attacks against people. You might want to rethink how you interact with others on the internet, because you really do come off as obnoxious.
James – I agree with you that the victims' wishes should absolutely be taken into account whenever sentencing or clemency is involved. While I have a hard time believing there would ever be a consensus for clemency among ALL the relatives of the victims, it does sound like that was a definitel factor in this case.
I would also like to add that as someone who has lived in the UK and the US, BOTH societies are very big on vengeance and retribution on the popular level. Anytime someone is accused of a high-profile crime in the UK, you will see mobs of purple-faced, screaming rabble-rousers who when questioned are simply there to "support the victims" by shouting obscenities and pelting the passing police escorts with rocks and vegetables. I will say that at the governing level, the system is definitely much more geared towards rehabilitation than in the US. And I think it has to do with capacity more than compassion.
August 10, 2010 at 5:08 am
What about the mercy for the families of the 270 dead?
Which is exactly why al-Megrahi deserves to die.
Justice before mercy, please. If he were dead, he wouldn't be taking "victory laps" now.
August 10, 2010 at 5:09 pm
This isn't about revenge or even compassion. It is about justice. The Lybian agent who was jailed at least has locked up for life. Socttland showed more mercy to him than he showed to the victims. Whether he was ill or not isn't the point. Al Mergahi's wasn't locked up in Auschwitz. Most prisoners who are terminally ill remain locked up.
This entire legal fiasco has money written all over it. There are several reports that al Mergahi's release was followed by a long term deal between BP and Libyia. The British government told the world that al Mergahi was in the last stages of a terminal illness. Yet, he walked off the plane that deposited him in Lybia.
When attempting to get to the truth to stories like this money is usually a better motive than ideology.
August 10, 2010 at 5:53 pm
"Most prisoners who are terminally ill remain locked up."
In Scotland, if they meet the criteria laid down for compassionate release? You're imposing a US perspective and US values on a decision that was taken outside US jurisdiction. Because the decision "does not compute" according to that world view, you're then jumping to wild conclusions about economic motivations, based on not even the slightest scrap of evidence.
"The British government told the world that al Mergahi was in the last stages of a terminal illness."
If they did it was only second-hand information. Apart from the fact that the UK government could in theory have blocked Megrahi's fight to Libya, this was entirely a matter for the Scottish government.
August 10, 2010 at 7:01 pm
Jerome – I agree with you that the money trail usually leads to the correct answers. Lybia throws around a LOT of money, and essentially bought themselves off the "axis of evil" list by paying off the victims. So, you're probably not too far off there.