June 09, 2007
Libyan Prisoner Exchange
Here's an interesting little conundrum:
Downing Street's claim that a prisoner exchange agreement with Libya did not cover the Lockerbie bomber was dimissed as "ludicrous" yesterday by the Scottish Executive.
As is pointed out, the Scots only actually have one Libyan prisoner in custody so if there is something about prisoner exchanges then it's rather likely that it will cover that prisoner.
Which leaves us all with something of a problem. We know that the administration in London is run by lying bastards. We also know that the Scottish Administration is entirely populated by political pygmies of a particularly virulent strain of incompetence.
So when they contradict each other, who do we believe? The liars or the idiots?
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Libyan Prisoner Exchange:
"We also know that the Scottish Administration is entirely populated by political pygmies of a particularly virulent strain of incompetence."
That was the last mob.
We had...you know...an election?
Chances are they are indeed "political pygmies" infused with "a particularly virulent strain of incompetence"; but at least give the buggers a chance to prove it.
Posted by: Martin | Jun 9, 2007 10:57:24 AM
Default: disbelieve the liars. If Tony Blair said that the sun would rise tomorrow I'd have to check it with an almanac first.
Posted by: Kay Tie | Jun 9, 2007 12:52:42 PM
Alex Salmond may be described as virulent in that he has a reason to pick fights since he wnts independence. On the other hand I don't think he is a pigmy & since he has been in power less than a month certainly hasen't proved it yet.
If the SNP manage to get a higher growth rate than the UK average, as they have promised, they will have proved their competence, at least by comparison.
In any case I don't think Westminster said that the agreement wouldn't cover the only long term Libyan prisoner in Britain but merely that it wasn't aimed specificly at him, it is merely a pure coincidence. Personally I think that requires a very large pinch of salt, but maybe that is just my innate cynicism.
On the other hand since he is clearly innocent, having been fitted up because it was politically necessary to convict some individual to prove it was Libya who dunnit, rather than Syria which was prime suspect right up till they joined us in liberating Kuwait, he should be released.
Posted by: Neil Craig | Jun 9, 2007 2:51:16 PM
I think we must believe the idiots - as the liars always lie and do so knowingly, where the idiots might actually be trying to tell the truth.
You're right though, it's quite the conundrum.
Exit question: Would you rather be led by liars or idiots?
In the United States we presently have both - liars on the left and idiots on the right. You may have noticed their hilarious clown dance over the dastardly immigration bill. Even when they all line up and decide to fuck the electorate, they still fail!
My recent $25 donation/membership dues to the Libertarian Party looks like a wiser investment with every passing day.
Posted by: Martin | Jun 9, 2007 8:10:36 PM
"My recent $25 donation/membership dues to the Libertarian Party looks like a wiser investment with every passing day."
You can't vote for a human because if you do the wrong lizard might get in.
Posted by: Kay Tie | Jun 9, 2007 8:56:48 PM
What Neil says.
Posted by: Mark Wadsworth | Jun 10, 2007 9:10:35 AM