Stardate 091021.6

The Lockerbie Deal

There has been some confusion today over whether or not the Lockerbie bomber (terrorist) has died.  The news pundits, namely Sky News and Reuters, have published reports of his death; however, the terrorist’s Scottish lawyer, Tony Kelly, denies the report stating, “He is alive and breathing”.  Regardless of how this plays out today, whether the terrorist actually dies or not, it is of little consequence when one considers that this killer should never have been released from prison in the first place.  In fact, if more countries had the fortitude that even our country is slowly losing, this fiend would have been put to death when he was convicted of killing 270 people.  The fact that he was allowed to live was a poor decision to begin with for the country of Scotland, but to release him on grounds of compassion is just shameful. 

 

Yes, he has prostate cancer and would experience more discomfort dying in prison than in his home in Libya.  The question that should be posed to the Scottish government is, “So?”  The man killed 270 people when he hijacked a plane back in 1988; 189 of which were Americans. 

 

Reports are surfacing, and investigations are being launched to determine whether or not this decision was made in an effort to sweeten an oil deal between the UK and Libya.  If that is true, and the UK government released this terrorist in the interest of business, there should be serious repercussions. 

 

This terrorist, and others like him, have no regard for human life outside their own Islamic faith.  For too long, the agencies and covert organizations that are designed to protect the American people from the damage and death these terrorists can inflict have been hampered and harnessed by rules of fair play established by global decisions, like those arrived at by the Geneva conventions.  The terrorists and Islamic extremists do not play by the rules.  They feel no remorse for the killing of innocents, because their religious leaders have indoctrinated them with hate for America and its allies.    A contracted, trained strike force not attached to the US government would be a handy tool when a terrorist needs to be dealt with. 

 

The third Geneva Convention, which deals with prisoners of war, is all well and good when an issue arises in a country that has actually signed the treaty and abides by it, but for those terrorist-run organizations that don’t care about this treaty or the one about harming civilians, special treatment should not be afforded.  If a terrorist has information that will lead to the prevention of an attack on US soil and/or its citizens, then we should be able to employ the means necessary to gain that information.  Even if those “means” entails some extreme methods that, regardless of how some may feel about them, produce results. 

 

With the current direction of our country and its government, the possibility of these methods actually being employed seems highly unlikely.

 

Unfortunately, we are more concerned with peace talks than national security.