Revere has the latest on the scientific evidence that proves their innocence.
Janet Stemwedel has addresses where you can send letters.
More like this
Revere reports that there is a new article in Nature (pdf) demonstrating even stronger scientific support for the innocence of the Tripoli 6, the one doctor and five nurses facing a possible death penalty in Libya. The final verdict will be read on December 19th. The international pressure from…
I don't write about politics very often nor do I intend to do so in the future. But, time is running out for the Tripoli Six. Imprisoned in 1999, five nurses and one doctor were tortured until they confessed to a horrific crime; infecting over 400 children with the virus that causes AIDS. They…
You may remember the plight of the Tripoli Six (also known as the Benghazi Six), the physician and five nurses on trial in Libya for infecting 400 children in the hospital where they were working with HIV even though there is overwhelming evidence that the most likely route of infection was poor…
Yesterday, Revere (Effect Measure) threw down the gauntlet challenging those critical of alternative medicine to examine work done at the University of Nebraska Medical Center in 2000 on the medicinal properties of chicken soup.
The news release cites work that a chicken/vegetable soup, but not…
Why is it exactly that the "science community" expects Libya to behave rationally on this issue in any way?
I hope the stern letters and support from over a hundred Nobel laureates and the "science community" work, but if they don't is anyone prepared to defend these innocent people with bullets? Or do we just let them swing in the wind since they took the risk of doing charity work in a backwards country? I suppose the thoughtful eulogies to follow will make everything all right.
That's Weiss! Er, I mean Janet. (Obscure joke, sorry, but it really is Janet.)
Oops. Fixed. At least I spelt her last name correctly.
"is anyone prepared to defend these innocent people with bullets? Or do we just let them swing in the wind since they took the risk of doing charity work in a backwards country?"
So Ben how many Libyans are you willing to see dead over this?
I mean most of them are innocent too but they live in a "backwards country" so their live are obviously less valuable.
I mean the Libyans never even advanced technologically to the point of building concentration camps or atomic bombs.
I mean the Libyans never even advanced technologically to the point of building concentration camps or atomic bombs.
I bet a campaign of stern letter writing might help.
In all seriousness, this is one of those situations where doing anything is probably better than doing nothing. But remember that Qudafi (however you spell it) is a coward, and it wouldn't take much to convince him to force the issue. He is still in charge over there, isn't he?
"Qudafi (however you spell it) is a coward, and it wouldn't take much to convince him to force the issue."
Right,this is the same Gaddafi who repeatedly told the US to go fuck themselves over about a thirty year period?
Gaddafi has many many vices and precious few redeeming characteristics but I haven't see anything to suggest he's a coward.
Besides haven't you heard? since he abandoned his (probably futile) quest for nuclear weapons and started handing the US information of Libyan dissidents (sorry "Islamist terrorists") he's become one of Britain and America's favorite middle east dictators.
THAT'S probably why he feels he can get away with treating Bulgarian citizens like this.
Right,this is the same Gaddafi who repeatedly told the US to go fuck themselves over about a thirty year period?
Right, until Reagan sent a few bombs his way.
Besides haven't you heard? since he abandoned his (probably futile) quest for nuclear weapons
Yeah, right after we kicked the crap out of Saddam.
"Right, until Reagan sent a few bombs his way."
Except that as I've already pointed out on this blog, less than a year later Gaddafi sponsored the Lockerbie bombing.
And since Gaddafi probably knew he had buggar-all chance of building an a-bomb anyay he was giving up almost exactly nothing.
alrighty then, stern letters it is.
Ah, the joys of binary thinking.
The US air raids on Libya patently failed to stop Gaddafi sponsoring terrorist acts.
The sanctions impsoed after Lockerbie did achieve that - preobably backed by the discreet threat of force if he didn;t change tack.
Gaddafi has finally managed to get those sanctions lifted in the last year - and to do so he was willing ot admit his regime's culpability in the Lockerbie bombing, hand over the perpetrators for trial and compensate the families of the victims.
What do you think he'll do to prevent their reimposition?
You have a choice here Ben been a policy that's proven to have failed in the past and a policy tha thas had at least some limited success.
Why choose the failed policy? Because it'll let TV stations roll out stock footage of F-16s and distract Americans momentarily from the Iraqi clusterfuck?
Actually it almost certainly wasn't Libya who sponsored Lockerbie, not that it matters particularly in this case. Libya was framed. Oddly, the British families mostly refused to believe the official case, whereas the American families mostly believed it.
Quadaffi wants to be internationally respectable, so its possible that sufficient pressure may have an effect. I suppose bombing might have an effect - though I'm not quite sure why deLibyans is better than falsely imprisoned Bulgarians.