Sssshhh… you’re not supposed to mention that. Talk about BP instead.
The extent of which would be 0.
That’s rather bold, coming from the international libel kangaroo court of the world, which has no problems with dragging in people from all over the world to face trumped up charges at British courts of law. (U.S. Senate passes ‘libel tourism’ bill) Britain can discuss jurisdiction after it has amended its absurd libel laws. Until such a time, you can shut your trap. It also doesn’t appear that the senators “demand” that the persons come and testify, but that they are outraged that they don’t go there freely.
In any case, the US has every right to be very upset and demand some answers, when a large number of victims were Americans and the releasing of the terrorist more and more seem to be a farce. Britain has not fulfilled its obligations to America and the families of the killed Americans to ensure that justice has been fulfilled. Your actions have been despicable, short sighted and self-serving, and putting financial interests over that of justice. You are not to be trusted in the future.
At least I’ll be sure to get a good lay. I’d considering taking up your PM offer to fuck you, but while you may be a pussy alright, I think you are probably overestimating the attractiveness of your man titties.
Are you just gonna bark all day, little doggy?
Summoning him to appear before the U.S. Congress is, I agree, a silly request. However, if the Scottish Justice Minister ever sets foot in America voluntarily, he should be arrested immediately.
Yes, because they really want to get this in a media-accessed courtroom.
If they don’t behave, we’ll just send George Galloway over there to make a mockery of them again.
Ignoring your attempt at insult, you’re one of those freaky single-issue dopers like Valteron. Going on past form, I’m sure you are not in the least bit worried about the UK’s libel laws. But OMG there’s a MUSLIM involved in this story. The adrenaline of fear grips you, your knee jerks your fingers to the keyboard, and you post in the usual, predictable manner.
You need a bit more “oomph” in your vitriol and a lot more wit in your quips then, unless you want your invite revoked.
No, there isn’t. The verdict was correct and sustainable as a matter of law. The allegations that Al Megrahi was framed or otherwise railroaded are simply unsupportable speculation.
Didn’t we win Scotland in the Revolutionary War? They have to do what we tell them.
Also, Scotland is welcome to any and all of our lawmakers whenever they wish. We’ll even gift-wrap.
Fuck me, you really are a bit thick. To recap then, because Britain’s libel laws favour the plaintiff, you feel it’s ok for American senators to demand explanation for the release of a prisoner in Scotland, by the Scottish Justice Minister?
No. Sorry, we’ve just had a small discussion here in Scotland* regarding this idea, and we’ve decided that you can ram that as well. In this case though, we must ask that you ram it up your arse, feeling that you’ve demonstrated insufficient judgement to be allowed to choose an orifice for yourself.
You are fully entitled to like/dislike/not give a rat’s arse over whatever fucking piece of UK statute you like, and it will be given all due consideration **. I am equally entitled to like/dislike/not even give a second’s consideration to issues of US jurisdiction too. You dislike UK libel laws, I’m not keen on Texas’ allowance of covert recordings as testimony in civil suits. Why, we could bounce silly laws back and forth all day, so we could.
But quite how you feel that it entitles you to then question the jurisdiction of British ministers/judiciary in matters of british law…well, that’s just a non sequitur you see. I might as well argue that I dislike the collegiate system, so you should let Britain pick your presidents. It’s non-sensical. Then again, I rather suspect you are too, judging by this little tantrum here:
Oh dear lord, I’ve been away for quite a while so can I just ask if this sort of wibbling tantrum is par for your course, or have you recently changed meds or something. The actions involved have been releasing a person with terminal cancer from jail. The obligations we had to you in this case was to carry out justice as Scottish law views it for a mass murder. Well, what do you know, we did that. The people involved have already stated their reasoning, so quite what you feel entitled to demand is pretty fucking interesting? Come on, just how do you feel the ministers involved have somehow not met their obligations? In your own time, and please be careful to avoid the mental equivalent of heavy lifting as I am absolutely convinced you’re not in good shape for such activity.
- in the same way that everyone in England has met the queen, everyone in Scotland knows each other, and we meet in the pub pretty much every day at around this time. Handy, eh?
** not one fucking jot or tittle, in your case.
Not a chance - you send 'em over with the return postage already paid.
I think you’ll find that William Wallace won the Revolutionary War for America, and as payment for this we get to tell you what to do.
What. The. Fuck. For?
Being Scottish, I think.
Violation of international law.
Fuck you, you really are stupid as a stupid Paris Hilton imitation. You get to shut your trap and your whining about jurisdiction, because your own libel court thinks it has universal jurisdiction on matters of libel law. So shut your fucking trap.
You post in the pit, and then whine about four lettered words. Are all Brits as pathetic as you, or are you an exceptional pathetic specimen?
And by “a person with terminal cancer”, I take it you mean "a terrorist mass murder, with cancer which was not so terminal after all, but we shopped around a good bit and found some guy who’d be willing to write that he was dying provided we send him a nice bonus”. The obligation you had for the 270 killed persons and their families was to ensure justice had been served. In this you have failed miserable.
You honestly had me going for a minute there. Good whoosh.