SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Pastimes : Kosovo -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: D. Long who wrote (4959)4/26/1999 7:01:00 AM
From: robnhood  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 17770
 
I read that Ghadafi barely changed his offer from his original offer...They just spin it differently now....
<<<<

<<<<Contrary to what American officials and the media have stated on numerous occasions, the 1992 U.N. resolutions do not demand that Libya turn the two men over to the
United States or Scotland. No specific venue is mentioned.41

In 1992, Qaddafi declared that if the U.S. could demand that al-Megrahi and Fhimah be turned over for trial, he could ask for the surrender of the American airmen who
bombed two Libyan cities, killing 37 people, including his daughter.

The United States refuses to accede to the request of Costa Rica for the extradition of John Hull, an American who was a major player in Iran-Contra, and who is wanted in
Costa Rica for drug trafficking and other crimes. Similar requests from Cuba over the years for the terrorists harbored by the U.S. in Washington and Miami have also been
ignored.

It is surprising that Qaddafi has agreed to subject the two Libyans to a Scottish judge and Scottish law, without a jury. Even though it would take place in the
Netherlands, there is no reason to assume that the Scottish judges would be any less biased than in Scotland. To return home after acquitting the men could not be a
pleasant thing to face.

At the same time, it is unlikely that any U.S. or British official really believes that Libya played a significant role, if any. And for that reason, they probably do not
actually want to see the trial of the two men take place.42 Not only would the paucity of their evidence be exposed for all the world to see, but they might be obliged to
reveal information they'd rather not see the light of day, perhaps touching upon the role played by one or more U.S. intelligence agencies. >>>>>>>>

From William Blum
caq.com