Megrahi moves

Alex Salmond might yet consider going to America to answer questions on the release of Mr Megrahi (your report, 26 July). This would not be a knee-jerk response or an act of craven acquiescence.

He could take a presentation or a diagram illustrating the differences between the UK and the Scottish Government's responsibilities and he could explain that the two hostile political parties, Labour and the SNP, did not communicate amicably and were unlikely to agree on anything underhand. This would be an act of statesmanship and he could use the occasion to speak about globally applicable values.

Mr Salmond could ask difficult questions in return and he could suggest ways in which America could more usefully relate to the rest of the world in the 21st century. Mr Salmond could speak pastorally to Americans who lost loved ones in the Lockerbie bombing.

He would be well received for having the courage to appear, for showing understanding of American grief and for offering a vision of a better world.

(REV DR) ROBERT ANDERSON

Blackburn and Seafield Church

MacDonald Gardens

Blackburn, West Lothian

I FIND it extremely distasteful that Messrs MacAskill and Salmond keep referring to the Lockerbie bomber as "Mr Megrahi". The use of "Mr" is classed as a title of respect. Until proven otherwise Megrahi deserves no respect.

TIM McCORMACK

Foyers

Inverness-shire

US SENATE hearings are rarely edifying. Usually, we are treated to self-indulgent monologues by senators attempting to demonstrate their erudition, but instead exposing their already well-formed views. In short, they are grandstanding for their constituents.

Those who are invited to give evidence before them are treated with disdain at best, and often with discourtesy.

The appearance of George Galloway before such a hearing was hugely (albeit inadvertently) entertaining, leaving his usually loquacious inquisitors speechless. It is telling that, following Mr Galloway's evidence, the relevant part of the committee hearing was removed from the internet after a few hours, suggesting that proceedings which do not reflect well on members are unwelcome.

Scottish ministers are right to resist the demands/invitations/pleas to subject themselves to ritual humiliation before a US committee, and not only on the grounds that they are not answerable to such a body.

In regard to Mr Megrahi's release, the answers which senators allegedly seek have already been given, at length and on many occasions.

ALAN R IRONS

Woodrow Road Glasgow

Your report that some American citizen wants the United States to embark upon military action against Scotland over the Megrahi episode (26 July) prompts an interesting reflection.

Would Scots accept the regime change or would some of us form a resistance movement and attack the occupying forces? Some people never learn.

JOHN KELLY

Park Avenue

Edinburgh