tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1638916042737526171.post5329701494765016039..comments2024-03-28T07:16:39.621+00:00Comments on Lallands Peat Worrier: Labour set to make Megrahi a campaign issue?Lallands Peat Worrierhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18276270498204697708noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1638916042737526171.post-35942086737463117502010-07-10T20:30:14.305+01:002010-07-10T20:30:14.305+01:00Thanks for the comments, Andrew, Anonymous.
Just ...Thanks for the comments, Andrew, Anonymous.<br /><br />Just to enlarge a bit on your respective allusions to the risk that Labour <i>(and other opposition parties for that matter)</i> could be "hoist by their own petard", if they misjudge or overemphasise one or two of the gamut of issues potentially implied in the whole late Lockerbie business. <br /><br />On Anonymous' point, there is clearly a macabre calculation going on about the implications of Megrahi's continuing survival and what wider, critical point elements of the opposition might use it to imply. Although prima facie, Megrahi living beyond his three months always appeared problematic for MacAskill, equally it isn't terrifically easy to work out how couch any allegation against him. <br /><br />What argument can they make? Medical misjudgements? Insufficient caution by the Cabinet Secretary? - He should have hesitated and didn't?<br /><br />Again, this seems to me a pretty weak argument. Folk will be concerned with the substance, yea or nay. Those who were always against may feel vindicated. The calculation, it seems to me, is whether the relatively sympathetic public opinion at the time has been - or can be - chipped away at by Megrahi's sickly vitality. <br /><br />Most importantly, such speculation is patently ugly, the use of a sickly man's existence for sly political advancement highly unattractive. Reasons, therefore, for Labour to be uneasy and handle the whole issue on this front decidedly gingerly. Or as in the case of Gray's speech - obscurely, rhetorically, dishonestly, irrelevantly. In Andrew BOD's very apt characterisation and phrase, "low-level repetition", letting the audience take what they will from it, without Labour having to take too firm a stand themselves. <br /><br />As you say, one imagines they wouldn't care to revisit the apparent dubiety of the ex-PM or the grimy geo-political detail of the "deal in the desert"Lallands Peat Worrierhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07238432265194046726noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1638916042737526171.post-19584383858862266402010-07-10T16:25:57.300+01:002010-07-10T16:25:57.300+01:00I'm not sure how sensible a pursuit of this ma...I'm not sure how sensible a pursuit of this matter is for the greeting Opposition. You will recall that, at the height of the teeth-gnashing last year, polls suggested that a significant percentage of the Scottish public supported the release of Mr Al-Megrahi. A considerably higher percentage, interestingly, than vote SNP.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1638916042737526171.post-44048129434002007822010-07-09T20:25:47.177+01:002010-07-09T20:25:47.177+01:00Lallands
On QT Wendy's Bro had a threesome of...Lallands<br /><br />On QT Wendy's Bro had a threesome of rehearsed spinnings on Megrahi and very clever they were too. However, he answered the inquiry question with a resolute "no". I suspect Labour have more to lose than the SNP if the prisoner transfer shenanigans come to the fore. Remember that the sitting government is a bit different now , and they may have less reservations about regurgitating this matter.<br /><br />If they make too big a thing of Megrahi, it may blow up in their face, so I suspect, like you, a low-level repetition of these points, to grind away at the SNP leadership.Andrew BODhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11760729285415432266noreply@blogger.com