ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi , Ahmed Jibril , Kenny MacAskill , Lockerbie bombing , Marwan Khreesat , Pan Am 103

Reply
Old 26th February 2012, 05:48 PM   #721
Buncrana
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 458
No sooner had I posted...

Originally Posted by Scotsman
Forensic examination of a small fragment of circuit board, cited as critical evidence linking Libya to the atrocity that claimed 270 lives on 21 December, 1988, does not originate from the source identified by prosecutors, it is claimed.

[...] defence experts also claimed it was made of a different combination of materials to the MST-13s, meaning it did not originate with the Mebo device.
http://www.scotsman.com/news/lockerb...uilt_1_2140534


.
Buncrana is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th February 2012, 06:07 PM   #722
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 43,421
Originally Posted by Buncrana View Post
I do wonder what became of Bedford's evidence and statements, alluding to the introduction of an strange Brown Samsonite in the bomb damaged container, when it was announced in Feb/March 1989 by Rarde investigators that the bomb had been contained in a Brown Samsonite. Was it ever passed on to the investigators? Was Henderson, who's testimony at the FAI was critical (perhaps inadvertently) for anyone theorising that a bomb introduced at Heathrow, was now doubly-supported: Bedford's suitcase evidence and no owner whose luggage was now known to be in AVE4041 carried a brown Samsonite. Therefore, Bedford's strange suitcase must've also been unaccompanied. The cardinal sin in the airline industry had occurred with the suitcase in question matching all the descriptions of the bomb suitcase and an unknown provenance.

We don't even need to consider anything about 38mins, and yet that is an absolutely nailer.

This is something I have often wondered. Bedford gave his statement on 3rd January, with the more detailed stuff following on on the 6th I think. Well before the bits of bronze Samsonite had been brought in from the fields, let alone identified as the "primary suitcase". In the earlier stages they thought Patricia's blue case had had the bomb in it, even when the debris analysis was underway.

So when they progressed further, and decided it was the bronze case after all, why did nobody go back to Bedford's statement?

The investigation had already announced, on 30th December, that the bomb had almost certainly not originated at Heathrow. It seems they didn't want to back-track on that. The Met sent a team to Lockerbie in the first week or so, and they rubbed everybody's fur the wrong way, and they were withdrawn and Thatcher decided that the D&G had the job. If Heathrow had been seriously considered as the point of origin, the Met would have had to take the lead. It seems this wasn't desired.

It looks as if early decisions that the explosion had been above the position of the Bedford suitcase were taken as definite proof that it must have been a Frankfurt case. They were adamant that the Bedford case was not moved, and as the explosion was maybe four inches outside its last observed position, that was that. And I think they just stuck to that even when it was discovered that the bomb suitcase matched the description of the Bedford suitcase.

The "experiments" at Indian Head were designed to test (or rather support) the assumption that the bomb suitcase wasn't on the bottom layer. I don't think they did prove this to an acceptable standard - there weren't any repetitions. But again, they satisfied themselves that the exploding case wasn't on the bottom layer, so that was fine. The idea the Bedford suitcase might have been moved a bit when the Frankfurt luggage was being packed in didn't seem to be on the table at all. I really don't know why. But put that together with the concealment of Manly's evidence, and it looks very much like a deliberate attempt to shield Heathrow from blame. Is it relevant that Thatcher had privatised BAA as a plc in 1986?

I note Leppard says of the Indian Head results (speaking about May 1989) that the investigators had "long since" stopped looking at Heathrow. This is quite bizarre. Any normal investigation would have kept an open mind about the Bedford suitcase, and considered that perhaps it had been moved a little while the Frankfurt luggage was being loaded. But it seems they never did. I wonder if this was because the Met had tried to follow that lead up and been completely stymied by the appallingly lax security, so they went into cover-up mode?

When did the main investigation hear about Bedford's suitcase? I have no idea. I'd dearly love to know. Leppard knew all about it though, book came out early 1991. And he got his info from the cops. When did they realise that Henderson's findings meant the Bedford case must be a "rogue bag"? I have no idea. Before Zeist, that's all.

One thing that must be remembered is that the defendants at Dumfries were de facto Pan Am. And from the point of view of Pan Am, there was no point saying, you're wrong, it was Kamboj who let the bomb past, not Maier. Kamboj had exactly the same job as Maier, and if he was the negligent party, then they were equally on the hook. So they had no interest in raising the matter of the "other" brown Samsonite.

Same thing in the US hearings. Pan Am were the actual defendants by that time, but the same thing applied. The case against them was that their x-ray screening had let the bomb past. I don't think anyone led the Heathrow evidence there. It was all about the Frankfurt records showing the bomb had come off KM180. There was nothing in it for Pan Am to introduce the Heathrow evidence and say, you're wrong. They were equally liable for the x-ray screening at Heathrow's failures. Which were considerably worse than any failures at Frankfurt, being as Kamboj couldn't even produce a log of what he had x-rayed, as Maier could.

And the US judges said, well, the FAI in Scotland said the bomb was in an interline case, and two Libyans have been indicted on that basis, who are we to argue?

Is it really possible that the heads of the British inquiry were really more interested in shielding BAA from censure and blame, than in finding out how Pan Am 103 had been sabotaged? It looks that way to me.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th February 2012, 06:09 PM   #723
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 43,421
Originally Posted by Buncrana View Post

Yeah. Rumours, I haz heard them.

That bloody timer chip never really implicated him in the first place. Showing it was a plant certainly hangs the entire inquiry out to dry though.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th February 2012, 07:15 PM   #724
geni
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
geni's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 28,185
Originally Posted by joolz View Post
It just beggar's belief that this hasn't all been brought out in the open. Surely all evidence that supports your claim, either prosecution or defence, should be presented in court?
How? al-Megrahi isn't exactly going to launach an appeal at this point. Which leaves you with the options of some kind of enquiry (and post the bloody sunday marathon I'm not sure how much the legal profession is interested in that kind of thing) or they find some one else to try and prosecute which at this stage is unlikely.
geni is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th February 2012, 10:39 PM   #725
joolz
Medusa
 
joolz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,745
Originally Posted by geni View Post
How? al-Megrahi isn't exactly going to launach an appeal at this point. Which leaves you with the options of some kind of enquiry (and post the bloody sunday marathon I'm not sure how much the legal profession is interested in that kind of thing) or they find some one else to try and prosecute which at this stage is unlikely.

I meant that all the evidence they had should have been presented at the original trial. From Rolfe's post it was clear that there was evidence that was not presented.

There may be a further appeal after Megrahi dies. I didn't know that was possible myself, but see Rolfe's previous posts that explain the options.
__________________
The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge. Stephen Hawking
joolz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th February 2012, 03:21 AM   #726
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 43,421
JfM is pressing for a full independent inquiry. The legal profession can sometimes be compelled to do things it doesn't want to do. It may be that official stonewalling will frustrate this objective, but those involved do not see that as a reason not to try.

It is also possible that a new appeal can be launched, based on the SCCRC findings, after Megrahi's death.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th February 2012, 03:30 AM   #727
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 43,421
OK, the book is apparently now out of embargo, and the Herald has released its material online. Those of us who actually paid for today's dead-tree paper didn't of course get that part.

Megrahi book reveals new Lockerbie evidence

Megrahi: how MacAskill linked my release to dropping my appeal
Megrahi: eight key pieces of evidence
Megrahi: in his own words
Megrahi: Jim Swire's view

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.

Last edited by Rolfe; 27th February 2012 at 03:40 AM.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th February 2012, 03:41 AM   #728
Buncrana
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 458
Oh, this looks much much more interesting than I had expected and covers, in considerable depth, many of the disputed areas: MST, Khreesat, Bedfords suitcase, SCCRC, compassionate release...and so on.

This looks very promising.
Buncrana is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th February 2012, 03:46 AM   #729
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 43,421
I have to wait till 2 o'clock to see if my copy of the book has arrived, because Derek doesn't open his shop till two on winter week-days. If it's in, I'll either go get, or a friend has said she can walk round to the shop and fetch it for me.

I agree, it looks very interesting indeed.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th February 2012, 04:09 AM   #730
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 43,421
Yippe-dee-doo-dah....

Quote:
EXTRACT: "Kelly’s team uncovered evidence that, had it been heard at trial, might have denied the judges these get-outs. If the Bedford bag were not the primary suitcase then, since he [Bedford] saw it before the arrival of PA103A [from Frankfurt], it must have been legitimate. By checking the surviving bags and descriptions provided by the victims’ relatives, [Detective Constable Derek] Henderson established the colour and type of all the legitimate Heathrow interline bags. None were brown, hard-sided suitcases...which meant it was almost certainly the primary case."

That information from DC Henderson was not in the list of productions for the original trial. The book states: "Abdelbaset’s draft grounds of appeal claimed that the absence of the Henderson schedules from the trial constituted a 'material irregularity'...'that material evidence supporting the defence was not properly presented and the appellant was denied a fair trial'."

Is there an "I told you so" smilie?

ETA: Thank God, this seems to indicate that Ashton has given up on the Frankfurt bag-switch conspiracy theory. Hallelujah, amen.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.

Last edited by Rolfe; 27th February 2012 at 04:43 AM.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th February 2012, 04:27 AM   #731
Buncrana
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 458
Yeah, that really is dynamite stuff. And you sniffed out that critical Henderson snippet amid reams of pages of evidence that are there for all to trawl through but no one else had picked up. As far as any assertion made of the Heathrow introduction goes that piece of evidence is the strongest. When added to Bedfords evidence and the 38mins, (and the break-in to a degree) it's becomes almost impossible to discard.

Unless, of course you're the crown prosecution at Zeist, or a defence team asleep at the wheel for over 10 years.

I've already got a good reciprocal back-scratching relationship with my local book shop and have been told I can drop by on my way home tonight at about 9pm and they'll give me my ordered copy of the book. Yay for book shop owners with benefits!

Last edited by Buncrana; 27th February 2012 at 04:28 AM.
Buncrana is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th February 2012, 04:42 AM   #732
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 43,421
I'm also interested in this part.

Quote:
In the book he [Megrahi] writes: "On 10 August (2009), MacAskill and his senior civil servants met a delegation of Libyan officials, including Minister [Abdel Ati] Al-Obeidi. By this time I was desperate.

"After the meeting the Libyan delegation came to the prison to visit me. Obeidi said that, towards the end of the meeting, MacAskill had asked to speak to him in private. Once the others had withdrawn, MacAskill told him it would be easier for him to grant compassionate release if I dropped my appeal. He [MacAskill] said he was not demanding that I do so, but the message seemed to me to be clear. I was legally entitled to continue the appeal, but I could not risk doing so. It meant abandoning my quest for justice." [....]

Mr Ashton told heraldscotland: "The Justice Secretary and his officials should, at all times, have made it clear to Mr Megrahi and his representatives that, if he chose to continue his appeal, it would have had no bearing on the justice secretary’s decision on whether or not to grant compassionate release.

"Furthermore, they should have been aware that, given Mr Megrahi's desperate position, even the slightest pressure that was applied would have caused him to abandon the appeal, even though he was not legally obliged to do so. Of course, by dropping the appeal he spared the Scottish criminal justice system a colossal embarrassment."

Maybe the colossal embarrassment was spared at that time, but it is likely it has only been postponed. In addition, MacAskill should and hopefully will be hung out to dry over this.

The problem is that there is only Megrahi's word against MacAskill's. It's being said this happened in a private, one-to-one conversation. Which will be why it isn't in the minutes that have been published. However I completely believe Megrahi, because it's the only explanation that ever made any sense. As I watched all this unfold live on the TV news at the time, my absolutely certain conviction was that MacAskill had twisted Megrahi's arm to drop the appeal. In spite of Jim Swire and Matt Berkeley and others urging on him the importance of doing everything in his power to ensure that the appeal continued. There was no other reason for things to have unfolded as they did.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th February 2012, 07:12 AM   #733
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 43,421
Why is this thread not red hot?

I phoned Derek, he said he was expecting a parcel by 3pm and it would be in that, then in the next breath he said here's the delivery with the parcel now.... He's just checking that the book is actually in the parcel....

Phone rings.... Yes, he has the book. I think a short skyve is in order. See you later.

ETA again: Gotcha! But shhh, I'm not supposed to say, because it came with an embargo till Wednesday. Which all present agreed was a nonsense, as there was a big flashy book launch in Edinburgh this morning, and the Herald released its excerpts at ten o'clock.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.

Last edited by Rolfe; 27th February 2012 at 08:08 AM.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th February 2012, 07:51 AM   #734
Skwinty
Philosopher
 
Skwinty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 5,593
I have a day off tomorrow so will check my local bookstores.

How much of the book do you think will be treated as his word against theirs, or is it only the issue of Megrahi's release conditions.

Will the state release their version of events or continue the stonewalling?

The million dollar question I suppose.
__________________


What is reality? Nothing but a collective hunch.
--Lily Tomlin
Skwinty is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th February 2012, 08:23 AM   #735
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 43,421
It's a thumping great doorstop. 378 pages the main book, then up to page 425 is appendices dealing with the minutiae of the evidence at various stages, then a ten-page afterward, 34 pages of a reference list, then a glossary, a list of dramatis personae, and a full index.

I imagine the parts dealing with the actual evidence will be entirely factual. With references. The parts relating to Megrahi's own story are going to be his account, obviously. First, what he was really doing on Malta that day. Probably nothing much. Then, his conections with the Libyan security services. That will come down to whether you believe him I suppose. I've got the to the stage where I'm inclined to believe him because so many other people have been lying their backsides off, and no evidence has ever emerged to link him to any other atrocity or terrorist activity. And then the whole compassionate release thing.

To be honest, it's the evidence that interests me. The bits that can be substantiated with reference to verifiable facts and statements. Hopefully there will be a lot of that.

Oh, and as for the last part, I expect the Crown Office to continue stonewalling. I will be delighted to be proved wrong.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.

Last edited by Rolfe; 27th February 2012 at 08:31 AM.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th February 2012, 08:42 AM   #736
Skwinty
Philosopher
 
Skwinty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 5,593
I guess you will not be getting much sleep tonight.
__________________


What is reality? Nothing but a collective hunch.
--Lily Tomlin
Skwinty is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th February 2012, 09:14 AM   #737
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 43,421
From first impressions it's a nice book to read. Well written, professionally edited, on paper that's easy on the eyes and easy to handle, and a legible type face. As I'm already familiar with a lot of the detail I anticipate being able to read it quite quickly. I've got it on my desk here, among the paperwork I'm trying to deal with work-wise, but I can't wait for lousing time.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th February 2012, 09:17 AM   #738
Skwinty
Philosopher
 
Skwinty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 5,593
Enjoy and don't give out too much for a few days.
__________________


What is reality? Nothing but a collective hunch.
--Lily Tomlin
Skwinty is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th February 2012, 12:06 PM   #739
pete2
Scholar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 56
Quote:
A spokesman for Prime Minister David Cameron said of today's book: "This is yet another reminder that Alex Salmond's government's decision to free the UK's greatest mass murderer was wrong. Writing a book three years after he was released is an insult to the families of the 270 people who were murdered."
(From http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/h...eal.2012029725)

The sad thing is that I'm not surprised.
pete2 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th February 2012, 12:10 PM   #740
Antony
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: London, England
Posts: 1,715
Originally Posted by Buncrana View Post
Even the London free newspaper "Metro" is getting in on the story:

'New Lockerbie bomber evidence' may clear Abdelbaset al Megrahi | Metro.co.uk
Antony is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th February 2012, 12:21 PM   #741
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 43,421
I'm still on Megrahi's early life and career before 1988. Nothing to report there.

From the reports, the tin on the timer fragment seems to be the biggie. This seems to show it was not made by Thuring, the manufacturer who made the MST-13s for MEBO to Lumpert's design. It doesn't prove it was planted of course, but it's consistent with that theory.

I note Jim Swire has got it right in his commentary that the fragment appeared in late summer 1989, just in time to provide a plausible mechanism whereby a device could have been flown in from Malta as opposed to a barometric device having to be loaded at Heathrow. I think that's right. I don't think there was a concerted plan to blame even Libya at that time, let alone Megrahi. I think it was still all about not blaming Heathrow. I'm just slightly intrigued by why the Americans went along with this.

I think, though, that when a countdown timer became necessary to divert suspicion away from Heathrow, it was natural for the CIA to choose a Libyan-related device for this purpose. There have always been suspicions they had one made up to order.

Damn, C4 showing an item about Schmallenberg virus, which I need to watch for work, and BBC1 will be starting the Lockerbie item soon. Ten minutes is probably enough though.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th February 2012, 01:13 PM   #742
SpitfireIX
Illuminator
 
SpitfireIX's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana, USA
Posts: 4,715
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
I'm just slightly intrigued by why the Americans went along with this.

Not in any way trying to absolve the US government, but are you reasonably certain that "they" knew what was going on? Or at least that "they" should have known?

ETA: On rereading your post I see I missed the part about the CIA initially. Did they supply the timer?
__________________
Handy responses to conspiracy theorists' claims:
1) "I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." --Charles Babbage
2) "This isn't right. This isn't even wrong." --Wolfgang Pauli
3) "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." --Inigo Montoya

Last edited by SpitfireIX; 27th February 2012 at 01:15 PM.
SpitfireIX is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th February 2012, 01:30 PM   #743
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 43,421
Probably. The sequence of events suggests that Thurman and/or Orkin were behind the production of the fake fragment. It could be worth going back over that assumption though.

It's a commercial break in the al-Jazeera programme now. It's the same programme as the BBC Scotland one, the latter has just been cut down to fit a 30-minute slot, re-voiced, and some inaccuracies introduced in the process. I'll give a quick summary when it's over.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th February 2012, 02:15 PM   #744
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 43,421
Well, that was very very interesting. No need to watch the BBC Scotland version, because as I said it was just the al-Jazeera film edited down to a shorter slot. Al-Jazeera repeat things a lot, and the last time they just threw the lot on YouTube a few days after the initial broadcast. I was able to watch it live online, even though I can't get it broadcast because our village relay transmitter doesn't carry the full range of Freeview programmes. No problem.

It was mainly about the identification evidence. A lot about the rain - Thomson actually interviewed Joseph Mifsud, who repeated his evidence from Zeist that he was 90% sure there was no rain in Sliema on 7th December. The film didn't mention that the Zeist judges simply took that and said, OK, that means a 10% chance of rain, that means it could have rained, that means it did rain. (Mignini would be proud of these guys.)

Then they got the Minister of Tourism who showed his diary and said he switched the Christmas lights on on 6th December. Gauci was originally adamant that the lights were not yet lit when the clothes were purchased. And all the discrepancies of height and build and age were pointed out. I saw the original version of the photospread picture for the first time and I can (just) see Megrahi's features in it in the better resolution. It's the poor photocopy used in the photospread that destroys the likeness.

We also got sight of a statement where Gauci says he thinks the date of purchase was 29th November because that was the day he had a row with his girlfriend. That statement was never disclosed to the defence or the court. That definitely stinks.

They then went on to the clothes, and all the uncertainties about the identification of the grey Slalom shirt, which I can never get all that excited about. The man didn't buy a shirt. Then he definitely didn't buy a shirt. Then he did, but it was a beige one. Then the Scottish cops left the word "beige" out of the typewritten transcript. George kept going on about this breaking the chain of evidence, but I don't quite follow why it's so important. Unless it points to fabrication, but it's hard to tease that part out.

And finally, they got on to the timer fragment, and Ashton actually went to Blinkbonny to where it was found - I recognised the wooden barn at the corner of the field from my own trip there last August. Funnily enough they didn't bother showing the actual field, after all that trouble.



The main point was about the coating on the fragment being 100% tin, while the Mebo devices had a tin/lead alloy. Feraday knew this, but got someone to speculate that the lead had been vaporised off by the explosion. A boffin actually did the experiment, and that didn't happen. Feraday just assumed it had, and glossed over it in court saying the analysis was "similar in every particular".

You really need to put this in context, as I think someone said in the BBC film. Probably someone has, or will. Probably Ashton, and I will get back to his book now.

Oh, and the BBC version also got some reaction from MacAskill and the Crown Office. MacAskill says he has not read the SCCRC report by the way. He and the Crown Office continue to stonewall, so no change there.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.

Last edited by Rolfe; 27th February 2012 at 02:16 PM.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th February 2012, 02:27 PM   #745
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 43,421
I just logged in to NNS, thinking I'd lambast the inevitable defence of MacAskill that was sure to be launched. But there, they made a good point, so I held my fire. It's worth looking at the NNS take on it. I'm not sure what to think.
http://www.newsnetscotland.com/index...says-macaskill

Megrahi does not say MacAskill told him his release would be easier if he withdrew the appeal. He says MacAskill had a private one-to-one meeting with the Libyan official, who then told Megrahi that's what MacAskill had said.

Hmmmm.

I speculated earlier that a whole lot of the circumstances surrounding the PTA suggested that the Libyan government (Gaddafi) was keen to persuade Megrahi to drop the appeal. The terms of the PTA could have been written with that as the main objective. If that's true - is it possible both Megrahi and MacAskill are telling the truth?



Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.

Last edited by Rolfe; 27th February 2012 at 03:10 PM.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th February 2012, 05:15 PM   #746
Buncrana
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 458
It's definitely possible of course that Libyan representative al-Obedi, with instruction from Tripoli, led Megrahi to believe this was what he had been told by MacAskill, when in reality no such comment was really made. I accept there may have been a preference for the case to simply disappear from the Libyan side, although my own feeling is that, had that been an sought or imperative, would they have not advised this course of decision sooner? That would have at least allowed the possibility of the PTA being considered - at least within the 90-day time frame allowed. Perhaps they did and Megrahi had previously refuted them, but on his deterioration became more susceptible?

He was, or at least very much seemed, determined and adamant he would see this appeal through and ultimately prove his innocence. Today, he's still trying.

However, in considering this allegation by Megrahi that MacAskill had intimated to Mr al-Obedi that dropping the appeal would improve his chances of being afforded compassionate release, it is important to think about the context in which this occurred and how it might be framed around what had proceeded, and indeed, in light of subsequent efforts. And why, whether the Libyan had a wish to see the end of the appeal or not, I think Mr MacAskill did express the possibility that the dropping of the appeal would be in the interests for a favourable decision on compassionate release.

So, what had proceeded Megrahi's release?

The SCCRC recommended that Megrahi's case be sent to the Appeal Court in 2007 and suffered from endless delays and protracted legal arguments. Even after being diagnosed with cancer, the court then endured a hiatus of 7months when one of the judges in the appeal was unwell. We even, despite being the funding taxpayer but still lesser mortals, were not entitled to examine the full statement of reasons determined by the SCCRC and instead had to suffice with 14 of over 800 pages. Now this cannot all be simply laid at the door of the Scottish govt., but at no stage throughout have we witnessed any sort of desire or urgency in any of these matters. This was coming from the same party who had in previous parliaments voiced several concerns over the original conviction! Now they were apparently struck dumb when these matters came calling.

And what has been the attitude of Mr MacAskill and the hierarchy of the Scottish govt., since Megrahi's release?

Nothing short of airbrushing the second appeal from history, determinedly refusing any public enquiry into Zeist and doing its upmost to stymie any possibility that the SCCRC report will be published - in full - anytime soon. They have rigidly stuck, no matter how compelling or embarrassing new disclosures might be, to the line that they 'do not doubt the conviction', ignoring how absurd it might look that they are contradicting the SCCRC opinion itself and actually is nothing more than sticking fingers in your ears shouting lalalala.

I thought Kenny MacAskill's 'response' tonight was also very telling - and very very disappointing.

Instead of addressing the issue and offering some form of professional explanation or counter reasoning, he chose to try to discredit the author, the book and its contents, claiming this was all nothing more than lies and propaganda to sell a book. His comment was insulting, to the wider public and more importantly to the victims relatives, to be quite honest. Does he honestly believe that by simply being rude will either assure those who question the conviction of Megrahi or that these matters will simply disappear?

.
Buncrana is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th February 2012, 05:40 PM   #747
joolz
Medusa
 
joolz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,745
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
You're kidding, right? The LA is in charge of getting a conviction and upholding convictions. The prosecution aren't interested in the truth, only in getting a conviction.
No, not kidding. As a human being he should be interested in the truth. I know that 'should be' doesn't mean he is, but with that amount of evidence surely he couldn't be stupid enough to think the truth would just conveniently go away? He must have known his reputation will be wrecked if he's found to be complicit in a cover up?


Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
The entire forum knows I'm a veterinary pathologist, I think.

Ah! Now I understand a comment that puzzled me some time ago! Someone made a comment about sheep and you said something along the lines of 'you wouldn't want to meet the ones I do'. I wondered if you lived near a particularly vicious breed of them, but felt it would be rude to ask


Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
A bit more of the scientific method wouldn't go amiss here. A bit more seeking the truth, regardless of what it might turn out to be. It seems a lot of lawyers don't do that any more.
Yes. And more's the pity

Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
Yippe-dee-doo-dah....

Is there an "I told you so" smilie?
You deserve a dozen of them !!! It's a terrible situation to be cheerful about but thank heaven things seem to be moving in the right direction.

My book should be arriving at my mum's tomorrow or Wed I think, so I'll have to drive out to the sticks and get it.
__________________
The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge. Stephen Hawking
joolz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th February 2012, 05:51 PM   #748
joolz
Medusa
 
joolz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,745
Originally Posted by Antony View Post
Even the London free newspaper "Metro" is getting in on the story:

'New Lockerbie bomber evidence' may clear Abdelbaset al Megrahi | Metro.co.uk

Thanks for the link.

NB In case anyone hasn't noticed, this link contains a reference to the new documentary we were discussing recently. Part 2 of the one I've linked to below.

Quote:
The programme will be shown at 8pm on Al Jazeera English. It includes an interview with Megrahi filmed in December. John Ashton, who was part of Megrahi’s defence team, said: ‘The wrong man was convicted.’
Hopefully the new one will be on you tube soon.

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE
__________________
The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge. Stephen Hawking
joolz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th February 2012, 07:08 PM   #749
Matthew Best
Philosopher
 
Matthew Best's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Leicester Square, London
Posts: 6,805
Originally Posted by joolz View Post

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE
Thanks very much for that link (and apologies if it was linked earlier by someone else). It really made the whole thing seem much easier to follow.
Matthew Best is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th February 2012, 08:26 PM   #750
joolz
Medusa
 
joolz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,745
Originally Posted by Matthew Best View Post
Thanks very much for that link (and apologies if it was linked earlier by someone else). It really made the whole thing seem much easier to follow.
Someone else in JREF shared it with me, but the truth can't be told too often.

If anyone sees part 2 on you tube after it is broadcast then I hope a link will be posted here.
__________________
The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge. Stephen Hawking
joolz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th February 2012, 02:47 AM   #751
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 43,421
I'm still on the run-up to the atrocity part. Ashton feels he has to go over all the PFLP-GC, Autumn Leaves, Dalkamoni/Khreesat/Talb/Elias stuff, and the Helsinki warning (and the other more credible one), and I was just glazing over. Of course he has to include it and it's highly relevant, but I've just read it so often and I still can't keep it completely straight.

Megrahi's own story is quite boring and mundane. He's terribly conscious of things that might look suspicious, and of course we've only got his word for it, but nobody has ever proved that anything he said was false (apart from the Salinger interview, which he discusses). It has to be looked at in the context of Libya at the time. His job didn't pay well, but was essentially part-time, and he was trying to built up business ventures by way of moonlighting. The sanctions-busting stuff wasn't "working for Gaddafi" at all, it was pure private enterprise, although the government tacitly encouraged such activities.

The story about the Abdusamad passport is interesting. He applied for and was given it to facilitate a particular deal (which in the end didn't come off) because his own passport made it clear he was a LAA employee and that would have caused the other party to back off. Once he had it, he found it useful for that purpose in other deals. Then, because his wife was getting upset over him travelling abroad so often, he sometimes used the Abdusamad passport so that he could leave his own passport at home, and tell his wife he was merely in some other part of Libya.

This was discussed on Radio Scotland yesterday, and the presenter said it was a weird story, I mean, if he'd said he was having an affair, it would be more credible. Well, was he? It's been suggested before, I know. And if he was, I don't find it incredible that he should still be trying to conceal it. Bunntamas mentioned a female LAA employee in Malta who was carrying on about him on Facebook or something. The only thing about that is, I'm surprised the investigators didn't uncover links to a woman when they were investigating him, if that's what was really going on.

Megrahi himself is adamant that he is not trying to accuse anyone else of the atrocity (the PFLP-GC, basically). He says he knows there is a lot of evidence pointing to a particular group of people, but that hasn't been tested in court, and it could turn out to be as spurious a pile of rubbish as the so-called evidence against him. So he won't point the finger at anyone, he only wants to make it clear it wasn't him.

I snuck a look at the appendix on the Frankfurt baggage transfers, and I think it's time to bump that thread.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th February 2012, 02:55 AM   #752
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 43,421
Originally Posted by Buncrana View Post
And what has been the attitude of Mr MacAskill and the hierarchy of the Scottish govt., since Megrahi's release?

Nothing short of airbrushing the second appeal from history, determinedly refusing any public enquiry into Zeist and doing its upmost to stymie any possibility that the SCCRC report will be published - in full - anytime soon. They have rigidly stuck, no matter how compelling or embarrassing new disclosures might be, to the line that they 'do not doubt the conviction', ignoring how absurd it might look that they are contradicting the SCCRC opinion itself and actually is nothing more than sticking fingers in your ears shouting lalalala.

I thought Kenny MacAskill's 'response' tonight was also very telling - and very very disappointing.

Instead of addressing the issue and offering some form of professional explanation or counter reasoning, he chose to try to discredit the author, the book and its contents, claiming this was all nothing more than lies and propaganda to sell a book. His comment was insulting, to the wider public and more importantly to the victims relatives, to be quite honest. Does he honestly believe that by simply being rude will either assure those who question the conviction of Megrahi or that these matters will simply disappear?

You're quite right. I just keep trying to understand why people are behaving the way they are, and I can't make this rational any way I slice it. The closest I can come is genuine belief that Megrahi is guilty in some way, and consequent horror that a terrorist might have to be exonerated because of dodgy police work carried out by the Scottish investigation.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th February 2012, 03:52 AM   #753
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 43,421
Following Megrahi's account of his trips to Malta in December 1988, it's all the more striking how little he was trying to hide. This isn't just his word for it, because all this was presented in court, it's just that the judges didn't think it was important.

On the trip involving 7th December, he was using his own passport in his own name, and went around carrying out normal business in his own name. (There's a part of the day where he says he doesn't remember what he was doing, and I still wonder about that woman on Facebook, but whatever.) He stayed at the Holiday Inn in Sliema where he was known to staff. He flew out on Swissair, on a flight to Zurich. The manifest shows he didn't check any luggage. So where were all the clothes he's supposed to have bought from Tony Gauci? Hidden somewhere in Malta?

This makes absolutely no sense at all. Clothes bought very conspicuously only three miles from the airport, when he was travelling quite openly with no attempt to conceal his identity, actually leaving a trail a mile wide, and then hidden somewhere in Malta while he flew on to a huge anonymous European capital city where he could have bought anything he liked without anyone recognising him or even remembering the transaction?

Then the trip on 20th-21st December. It all sounds so normal, and it's the same story he's been telling all along. Why did he use the coded passport? He says he can't really remember the reason, because it didn't seem important at the time. It's possible his own passport was with his bank, because of some rules about currency restrictions. It's possible he used the Abdusamad one because it had a stamp entitling him to an additional currency allowance. And then, yes, "the most likely one is that I didn't want my wife to know I was in Malta. Although it was only an overnight trip, I knew she woudln't be happy, as I'd just been away for ten days and, more importantly, Malta had a bad reputation among Libyan women as a place of low moral standards where men were easily led astray. I may therefore have told her that I was visiting a friend on the other side of Tripoli and intended to spend the night there. If so, then to prevent her suspecting my true destination, I would have left my regular passport at home. She had no idea about the coded passport, which I always kept at my office. I was supposed to use it only for business purposes, but I had occasionally taken it on my personal travels, for example when I went to Mecca for the Umrah pilgrimage, for no other reason than it was the closest to hand." (Aisha found the passport in his pocket the following year and threw an almighty strop, which is when he scored across the important pages and promised her he would never use it again.) There's actually a slight subtext of "henpecked" and even "harridan" running through this, though that may be completely unfair.

Apart from the Abdusamad passport, which he didn't think was a big deal at all, the trip was normal. He filled in his disembarkation card as Abdusamad, because of course it had to match the passport. The main purpose of the visit was to meet Fhimah in relation to Fhimah's new business, and with regard to getting Fhimah to help with the motor rally organisation that Megrahi was involved in. Megrahi also wanted to buy some things for the new house he was building, particularly carpets.

He flew with Fhimah, who was travelling on his own passport, seeing as he didn't have another one. A bit careless, that! Fhimah took him to Vincent Vassallo's house for a meeting - the men had never met. Megrahi was using his own name, and Vassallo's diary records being introduced to him as "Abdelbaset". Megrahi admired the wooden staircase in Vassallo's house, and Vassallo offered to introduce him to a workshop which could supply something similar. However they didn't go there that afternoon because they ran out of time looking at the Medtours office and buying the carpets, and Megrahi and Fhimah went to the Holiday Inn (again!).

The receptionist was a former LAA stewardess whom Fhimah knew, and Fhimah promptly asked her to give Megrahi the LAA staff discount he was entitiled to. It was only then Fhimah realised Megrahi was using the Abdusamad passport, which didn't reveal that he was an LAA employee (that was of course the whole point of the thing). Fhimah asked to speak to the duty manager, whom he also knew, and vouched for Megrahi as being entitled to the discount, which he was given. This was of course all presented at the trial, with documentary evidence.

The next morning Fhimah overslept (he was staying in his own flat, not the hotel), and apparently this was so common Megrahi had been anticipating it. That's why he called early in the morning, because Fhimah was supposed to be giving him a lift to the airport. But he didn't get hold of Fhimah, and got a taxi, mising out the carpenter visit. At the airport he visited the LAA station manager for a chat, and while he was there, Fhimah phoned to apologise, saying he would contact the carpentry firm himself. He did that, and the carpenters visited Megrahi's new house in Tripoli, but their estimate was too high.

I don't actually know what Megrahi did with the two $100 carpets he had with him at the Holiday Inn. He doesn't say. Maybe he stashed them where he stashed the clothes! Megrahi thinks the station manager checked him in for the Tripoli flight without him actually going to the desk, because that's what usually happened. He stayed in the office till it was time to board. He didn't have any luggage to be checked in. He boarded the flight, got to Tripoli, and went to his office to get on with the car rally preparations.

That's his story, and obviously he has had 20 years to brood about it. However, the prosecution has not been able to disprove a word of it, nor prove that he did anything different. If nothing else, the documented proof of his movements is good evidence that he was not trying to conceal his presence on the island at all.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.

Last edited by Rolfe; 29th February 2012 at 04:23 AM.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th February 2012, 04:11 AM   #754
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 43,421
Now for the bit I found especially interesting. There is a statement from Sidhu!

His name is Amarjit Sidhu, and both he and a loader I have not encountered before called Tarlochan Sahota confirmed Bedford's description of exactly how the suitcases were arranged in the container before it was taken out on to the tarmac. They all said this was the usual way they loaded the things. They all confirmed that the entire floor area of the container was covered, by the row of upright cases at the back, and the two flat cases at the front.

This seems to confirm how unlikely it would be that Sidhu would have lifted out one of the flat cases to put another in its place. All Crabtree testified to was that loaders might rearrange the cases within the floor of the container - a bit of re-jigging. But for Patricia's case to have replaced the left-hand Bedford case, Sidhu would have had to lift the latter right out of the container. For God's sake, he was in a big rush. The Bedford case was a hardshell. Why the hell would he lift it out to put a soft-sided case on the bottom?

I don't know what else is in that statement, presumably if it's important, Ashton will tell us. Of course the whole theory up to 1991 at least rested on the assumption that Sidhu absolutely didn't do that. Then some time between 1991 and 2000, it was decided that he did. I don't suppose anyone asked him....

I did notice, flicking through the illustrations, that there is one of a mock-up of the container with the left-hand case shoved to the left into the overhang section, and slightly tilted up. Uh-huh....

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th February 2012, 04:02 PM   #755
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 43,421
Newsnicht banging on and on about the compassionate release and the dropping of the appeal, and not a word about the shocking revelations about evidence withheld and police misconduct.



OK, I'll be fair, Jim Swire now on talking about the main issue.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.

Last edited by Rolfe; 29th February 2012 at 04:06 PM.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st March 2012, 03:13 AM   #756
Buncrana
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 458
Well, this is a fair chunk of dead tree! Well written and nicely laid out it look as though it will live up to expectations, and perhaps beyond. I've been jumping back and forward through the chapters picking out areas of particular interest and tonight is marked for the Frankfurt records. However, I will make an effort to read it as the author intended this weekend, and then go back through points noted.

It's interesting that in some of the specific points we had previously noted here, the book goes on to provide further evidence lending greater weight to our speculations; the debates over the height from the base and precise location of the explosion, Bedford's suitcase and its possible eventual location in 4041 and the innumerable anomalies surrounding the MST fragment (although I've not seen any reference as yet about the photographs taken).

I'm at the stage where Gauci's statements are simply wholly discounted because the man quite clearly contradicts himself at each turn although if anything can be gleaned from his involvement is that he may have sold clothes, but it certainly wasn't to Megrahi, and his cooperation (and his brothers) was so motivated by 'other inducements', consequently becomes almost worthless.

I also note he goes into Abu Talb, Abu Elias and the German PFLP cell in some depth, in which he also, interestingly and unexpectedly for me, provide much more information on the very shady Khalid Jafaar.

However, what is immediately striking and astounding is the sheer volume of evidence relating to various aspects of the investigation that was never disclosed. For the obvious reason that it severely undermined the investigations focus. This is nothing less that the perversion of justice and in itself should be investigated and people put in jail. Inquiry and transparency are worthless without accountability.

Last edited by Buncrana; 1st March 2012 at 03:17 AM.
Buncrana is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st March 2012, 04:10 AM   #757
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 43,421
Loads of fascinating stuff. One thing I didn't realise is that in addition to the photo of Megrahi (one of the February 1992 set) identifying him as the bomber, the Focus article also included a helpful list of all the discrepancies between Gauci's original evidence and the Crown case. Not just the description of the purchaser, but the rain and the Christmas lights. Ashton has the magazine, and it's pretty much a crib sheet for Gauci to tell him how he should change his evidence to fall in line with the prosecution case. And then Tony did pretty much exactly that - fudged one point after another to become more favourable to the prosecution. That's deadly, especially in the light of the reward money.

It also appears there has been a lot of tidying up of the rags of garments found, to match up with what Tony said he sold or might have sold. An interesting point Ashton makes is to recall Claiden's point about the circuit board lodged in the data plate. Stuff flies around very randomly in an explosion, and Claiden said he had long given up trying to predict where anything in particular would end up. But that's exactly what Hayes and Feraday were doing with this classification of items as being group 1 or 2 depending on whether they had bits of suitcase in them. And even then, Hayes ignored his own rules on several of the items.

At the moment I think the check trousers, the Anglia jacket, the Babygro and the unbrella are probably kosher. But even there, it looks as if the bits of the trousers may have been manipulated to make the identification less questionable. I still think a pair of trousers made by Yorkie and sold by Tony Gauci were pretty near the explosion, probably with at least a couple of other things he sold to the same customer. Were they actually in the bomb suitcase? I still think probably, but to be honest I'm not sure it has been definitely proved.

Ashton has been a devotee of the Frankfurt bag-switch theory for decades. He worked on The Maltese Double Cross with Francovich, for God's sake. That was the main thrust of Cover-up of Convenience too. It must be quite a wrench for him to look at the Heathrow evidence and realise the bomb probably wasn't in Jaafar's luggage. Even now, I don't think he's going to plump for one theory, I think he's going to show how much other smoke is flying around that's far more likely to be connected to fire than Megrahi's acquaintance with Edwin Bollier.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.

Last edited by Rolfe; 1st March 2012 at 04:30 AM.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2012, 08:14 PM   #758
Bunntamas
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 310
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
Bunntamas mentioned a female LAA employee in Malta who was carrying on about him on Facebook or something. The only thing about that is, I'm surprised the investigators didn't uncover links to a woman when they were investigating him, if that's what was really going on.
Yes, Bunntamas noted per above, which Rolfe handwaved as follows:

Originally Posted by Bunntamas
...Megrahi was well known and liked by Luqa employees (have you seen the pinings for him on Facebook by some woman - who is not his wife, who was/is a LAA employee expressing her undying love for him?), and able to move freely about Luqa, often bypassing security / customs via the "VIP" access (or whatever it was called).

Quote:
Rolfe: Honestly, I never look at Facebook.
Quote:
What do the ravings of some demented woman have to do with evidence anyway?
Apperenty now, a great deal

Quote:
Rolfe: I know about the "VIP access" thing from the trial. As I understand it, this was shown only to be a means of expediting the processing of VIP luggage, which was still subject to all the normal security checks. The prosecution accepted this.


It is now noted in records, and as you point out in your comments above, that there is a period of time, that is unaccountable, as regards Megrahi's whereabouts, between when Megrahi arrived at LAA and when he boarded the flight.
It is also acknowledged that Megrahi did not check in at the Malta airpoort, according to "normal proceure", but rather was given the "VIP" treatment, and was not checked in, according to normal "security procedure" (so much for all those astringent security measures at Malta), but rather, he and his "alleged" non baggage, and other records, due to said "VIP" staus may not have been recorded.

So, during that time that Megrahi is unaccounted for, which Rolfe notes in prior post above, and now acknowledges said possibility of Megrahi affair w/ said LAA employee, (I'm too tired to link to it)....was he shagging the LAA employee in the bathroom? (heaven forbid LAA video surveilence should be recovered) or was he handing off an unrecorded bomb loaded bag to be transferred onto PA103? Me thinks the latter.

Thanks Rolfe for bringing up my prior comments on the LAA employee's Facebook "love comments". And (sorta) acknowledging said comments as now not being as trivial as you had previously noted. Hand wave away on that one as well if you so desire....
Bottom line is, Megrahi had no business traveling on a false passport. His wife knew it, and there was a row about it . AND he was an agent of the former Libyan regime, and had ties to MEBO (e.g rental space for alleged "travel agency" business w/ Fimah). Need I say more? Or would you like to go on about stair cases, carpets and sanctions bustng - the latter of which would have clearly required deep, and high ranking (former) Libyan official government ties?

~B.

Last edited by Bunntamas; 4th March 2012 at 08:40 PM.
Bunntamas is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2012, 01:29 PM   #759
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 43,421
Oh for goodness sake. The radio announced this morning that Megrahi was having an affair and went to see the woman on both 7th and 20th December 1988. Colour me seriously unsurprised. They didn't happen to mention if the woman is your Facebook friend. The judges said....

Quote:
It is possible to infer that this visit under a false name the night before the explosive device was planted at Luqa, followed by his departure for Tripoli the following morning at or about the time the device must have been planted, was a visit connected with the planting of the device. Had there been any innocent explanation for this visit, obviously this inference could not be drawn.

Well, there's your "innocent" explanation, which the police apparently missed. Would the judges have said, "OK then you're innocent", if he had admitted to cheating on his wife? Not likely, and I imagine he knew it. But actually, this revelation in fact thoroughly undermines the judgement as written.

So, he shouldn't have been using his coded passport for private travel, but he did. He shouldn't have been cheating on his wife, but it seems he did.

How does that make him a terrorist, again? You know, that pesky evidence that any bomb was ever on Malta in the first place, let alone travelled on KM180. Still can't find any?

Bunntamas, your hatred of Megrahi is understandable, but it does you no credit. You seem to be at the stage where evidence that Megrahi was spending his time on Malta secretly working as a volunteer in a hostel for homeless orphans would be twisted by you to imply that he's a murderer.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2012, 03:43 PM   #760
joolz
Medusa
 
joolz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,745
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
I don't actually know what Megrahi did with the two $100 carpets he had with him at the Holiday Inn. He doesn't say. Maybe he stashed them where he stashed the clothes!
<snip>
He didn't have any luggage to be checked in.
My friend carried two 'carpets' costing more than this as hand luggage when we returned from Istanbul, so Megrahi's 'carpets' wouldn't need to be stashed anywhere. I've been in the Libyan Desert, but not in Libya itself yet, so I'm no expert, but flats I've rented and homes I've been in in various places in Egypt have (so far) all had rugs on the floor. I've never seen a carpet there in the way we think of them, ie wall-to-wall, but when I stayed with a Middle Eastern friend in Montreal he referred to his rugs as 'carpets'.

If Libyans use the same terminology then there may be nothing sinister at all about Megrahi not saying what he did with them, from his POV, he'd assume that everyone would just know it was the natural thing to take them as hand luggage.

The more info that comes out, the more horrified I am at his conviction. I don't know anyone who thinks he was guilty, that's why I can't understand why Salmond thinks differently - presumably he reads and watches the news?

ETA: ... and what upsets me the most is that nobody is even out there looking for the real murders.
__________________
The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge. Stephen Hawking

Last edited by joolz; 5th March 2012 at 03:46 PM.
joolz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:24 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.