Re "Gravely ill Lockerbie bomber wins early release," Aug 21, and "An ugly act of 'mercy,' " Editorial, Aug. 21

I agree that the release of the Lockerbie bomber was disgusting. Even more disgusting was the hero's welcome given to this criminal in Libya, as you reported. That country, where they care so little for innocent human life, should be the target of boycotts. Where are the church leaders and academic groups?

Marshall Giller

Winnetka, Calif.


Today, for the first time, I am ashamed to be Scottish. To allow a man duly convicted of the brutal mass murder of 270 innocent men and women to ever see the light of day, much less be allowed to board an airplane and go home a free man, is an extreme miscarriage of justice. If this monster had served a hundred lifetimes in prison, the punishment would still not be sufficient.

Arnold Edwards

Toluca Lake


Come again? The Scottish government released the only man convicted of the Lockerbie plane bombing as part of its compassionate release program? Because it seemed unkind to let him die of cancer in prison?

Excuse me, folks, a life sentence necessarily includes death in prison.

If there is one person undeserving of compassion -- and, in fact, there are many -- it is this guy.

Bill Bedsworth

Laguna Beach


How great the harm when the motive is getting even.

The U.S. branded Libya a terrorist nation after a series of confrontations in the 1980s, and it accused Libyan agents of placing a bomb in a Berlin disco that killed three people, including two American soldiers. In retaliation, the Reagan administration ordered American planes to bomb targets in Libya, killing dozens of civilians.

It can be surmised that in retaliation, a bomb was placed on Pan Am Flight 103.

So where does the blame for the Lockerbie tragedy lie? In my opinion, there's enough to go around to all parties.

Wm. McCall


Copyright © 2019, Los Angeles Times
EDITION: California | U.S. & World