Giving evidence before Congress ...

Whatever the US sensibilities may be, the manner in which Congress conducts its 'enquiries' is completely alien to any sense of justice - one only has to consider the examination of Mr Toyoda or Mr Heywood to see that the questions are dominated by the needs of the mid term elections in the US and the political posturing of US senators and congressmen and women.  Very few of the questions are directed at enquiring into the events that are being examined and most are closed questions that suggest that the aims are political rather than inquisitorial ...

Further, the decision to release a certain convict on compassionate grounds is entirely a decision for the UK - and in this case for the Scottish Minister of Justice.  I have little doubt in my mind that the decision was taken on dubious evidence and the longer that the Al-Megrahi lives, the worse the evidence appears. 

But we should not forget that the decision is accountable here and not in the US ... the representatives are accountable here and not in the US ... the conviction was by a peculiar Scottish Court and not an American court.  The US could have sought to try Al-Megrahi ... the UK extradited him and he was tried pursuant to a special agreement between the UK and Libya.  Whilst I understand and sympathise with the families of the deceased victims of this particular atrocity, their remedies are here, not in the US.  We should not forget that some of families even doubt the conviction's basis in any event ...

And before the US starts to cry about US sensibilities and sentiments, one only has to consider for a moment the manner in which the US has behaved and continues to behave in its own interests to understand that the US is being somewhat hypocritical at best ...