The Ministry of Justice of Scotland decided to release a fatally ill with cancer of the Libyan terrorist Abdelbaset Ali Mokhmed al-Migraha, who was serving a life imprisonment for an explosion of a passenger aircraft over Lokerbi in 1988.
The campaign against this decision immediately began. US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (and mainly the American military flew on an exploded plane) personally called the Minister of Justice of Scotland Kenny Makaskill and insisted that the terrorist could not be released. President Obama called the decision of the Scottish authorities a mistake.
Let us leave aside the behavior of the Libyan side (which sent the presidential plane for the liberated terrorist and arranged for him a pomp). Still, a country, at the state level, organizing terrorist attacks on passenger aircraft, can hardly be evaluated according to some familiar criteria. And al-Migrahi is also generally not a terrorist. He is an employee of the special services of his country, who simply complied with the order. In this case, Gaddafi is the terrorist, however, not only is free, and also has the opportunity to move freely around the world. It is understandable - there is a lot of oil in Libya.
We will also not discuss the economic background of the act of humanity. Yes, everyone understands that Scotland is interested in the supply of Libyan oil at affordable prices.
The most interesting thing in this whole story is not at all in Libya and not in oil. The most interesting here is once again the difference in American and European mentality. Europe has long abandoned the death penalty. The United States, who call themselves the most progressive country on Earth, continue to kill their own citizens on behalf of the state.
And even when Europe takes the following logical step from the primitive society to the Homo sapiens society - he will refuse a lifelong imprisonment, the United States will probably continue to hang, poison and kill their own citizens with the current. And to invite a different audience to this sophisticated murder, which will watch how a person dies with great interest.
Defenders of national revenge usually lead to justify their bloodthirstiness the biblical thesis "Eye for the Eye". And besides, they argue that fear of death can stop potential criminals in their criminal intentions.
But after all, all the arguments in favor of the death penalty and life imprisonment are not worth one response counterargument: killing or depriving of freedom without hope for pardon, society behaves in relation to the criminal in the same way as the offender behaved in relation to society. That is, the society (every citizen of the country that kills its name) becomes exactly the same killer as the executed.
And no excuses of this simple fact cannot be canceled.
And here is the most progressive society on Earth, teaching everyone and everything, as they need to live, without trial and the investigation, killing civilians of other countries, hiding behind certain "ideals of democracy", once again shows its, excuse, "Murlo". "I have to sit!" - insists the democratic Hillary
Clinton. "He will sit!" - He echoes her liberal Barack Obama, on whom the world community entrusted such hopes. The same Barack Obama, who promised to close the illegal prison in Guantanamo, where, for years, some kind of innocent people have been sitting for years without a prosecution. He promised, but did not close.
But if they let them out, they will say a different disagreement, then they will continue to kill! Society in this way protects itself.
A weak argument to justify the murder. After all, Gaddafi ordered Almigrahi to blow up the passenger plane, guided by this argument: if not to kill the US military, they will continue to bomb our cities (and they really bombed the Libyan cities). And then it turns out that there are correct killings, but there are incorrect ones.
But we know for sure that whatever the murder it remains, it remains a murder.
And that any other country practicing the death penalty is a country of killers. [M. TO.]