"A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear"
Cicero Marcus Tullius
I haven't seen anything that would say they weren't. They did deny and their lawyers argued at court that the bombing may have been carried out by Palestinians on behalf of Iran - however by my recollection such splinter groups are usually only too keen to claim to be the instigators of any attack - and so far no claim by anyone else stands up.
Those two men are not required to prove they were not responsible, the CPS is required to prove that they are responsible beyond reasonable doubt. If anyone can show me evidence that they are guilty beyond reasonable doubt, please do.
Both men were members of Libyan intelligence and so were likely involved in questionable activities at some point in their lives, that does not mean they killed 270 innocent people.
If a Libyan court were to convict a British secret service agent of a horrific crime based on scant evidence would you be saying the same thing? Or would you be lambasting it as a politically motivated show trial?The answer is obvious but reality shows that what any country has at best is a mixture to some degree of the two opposites you put up.
We all live under the same sky, but we don't all have the same horizon