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 9th March 2011, 07:42 AM   #321
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,977
PFLP-GC and Libya. They had quite a strong Libyan connection of course. Might have bought a radio there to use in a bomb, why not? Except I don't believe Toshiba make their cheap radio manuals out of asbestos.

Might have got hold of an MST-13 timer, why not? Except, I don't believe anyone with an MST-13 timer would have set it to blow up PA103 at 19.03 GMT. Not Megrahi, not Jibril, not Elias.

I think Bunntamas is still clinging to that dodgy cable where the informant makes up the story about Megrahi travelling to Heathrow from Malta, with the bomb, in order to intercept his luggage, set the timer, and disappear while the unacompanied luggage continues. Which is total fantasy. It's obviously the work of someone who knows that if he can make something up to implicate Megrahi and Fhimah, he has a shot at the $4 million reward money.

For someone so keen on the findings of the Zeist court, she's awfully keen on "evidence" that was either rejected by the court, or not of sufficient quality to present to the court on the first place.

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 9th March 2011, 08:33 PM   #322
Bunntamas
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 310
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
Actually I just noticed an error Bunntamas made, too late to edit my post. Megrahi isn't Gadaffi's close clansman. There was a BBC article last week saying the Gadaffi and Megrahi tribes (with different spellings) are now in conflict. The Megrahi tribe is a large and powerful one, but it's not Gadaffi's.

Bunntamas insists on scrupulous accuracy from us, so this needs to be pointed out.

Rolfe.
I never said they were the same clan. I said the clans were close. Twisting words and accuracy are quite far apart.
You're good at the former, particularly when it comes to "dodgy" and trying to turn CTs into evidence.

Last edited by Bunntamas; 9th March 2011 at 08:35 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 9th March 2011, 08:39 PM   #323
Bunntamas
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 310
deleted.

Last edited by Bunntamas; 9th March 2011 at 09:07 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 9th March 2011, 09:00 PM   #324
Bunntamas
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 310
But this is. http://www.arabist.net/storage/uploa...ialnetwork.pdf
Note: "Abdullah Sanussi al Megrahi".

Last edited by Bunntamas; 9th March 2011 at 09:03 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 9th March 2011, 09:51 PM   #325
Ambrosia
Good of the Fods
 
Ambrosia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,331
Originally Posted by Bunntamas View Post
Suggest you do some homework. Crawl out from under the JREF rock, Rolfe's walls of text and the FEW others who defend Megrahi, and look up – Sennusi – Gaddaffi’s brother-in-law and Megrahi’s former boss, Gaddaffi himself (Megrahi's close clansman),
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
Actually I just noticed an error Bunntamas made, too late to edit my post. Megrahi isn't Gadaffi's close clansman. There was a BBC article last week saying the Gadaffi and Megrahi tribes (with different spellings) are now in conflict. The Megrahi tribe is a large and powerful one, but it's not Gadaffi's.
Originally Posted by Bunntamas View Post
I never said they were the same clan. I said the clans were close.
I've multi quoted this exchange here in this post - you can click the little arrow link icon next to each [quote] box to go directly back to the posts in question to make sure I haven't changed anything (apart from adding yellow highlights)

You claim that Megrahi and Ghadaffi are "close clansman"

Rolfe points out that they are not close clansmen and the clans in question are now in fact fighting each other.

Then you state that you said they were close and not the same clan.

No word twisting required, you claimed they were close and then made out that Rolfe had misquoted you.

Quote:
trying to turn CTs into evidence.
We are not trying to turn CTs into evidence. We have spent a long time trying to find evidence to support or disprove the official line as regards Lockerbie.

There is a huge difference here.

None of us know who did Lockerbie, why or how, there isn't enough evidence to prove anything.

This is a sceptics forum, we don't believe in anything until it is proved by evidence, this is the defintion of sceptic.

Have a look here for a page outlining the tribes in Libya.

Ghadaffi belongs to one tribe Qadhafa, Megrahi to the Magariha tribe.

Ghadaffi is a conniving and politically very clever dictator. The Magariha tribe is one of the largest and most powerful of other tribes, and the link you post states that Abdullah Sanussi is "married to the sister of Ghadaffis wife"

This is not exactly unusual, a dictator sets up a marriage to ally himself with the largest and most powerful tribe in the country, it does not at all follow that Megrahi, and Ghadaffi are best buddies, the press is awash with statements that Megrahi blackmailed Ghadaffi from Scottish jail.

None of the clan stuff is relevant in the slightest to Lockerbie.
Ambrosia 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 10th March 2011, 02:33 AM   #326
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,977
Here's another one.

Originally Posted by Bunntamas View Post
this man, Megrahi, and his ruler, fellow tribesman for whom Megrahi kept silent....

I feel slightly uncomfortable about the use of the word "clan" in this context. "Clan" is a Gaelic word meaning "children". It's pretty specific to the social system that was in operation in Scotland up to about the 18th century.

The system in Arab society is tribal. These are tribes we're talking about. Indeed, there are similarities, but "tribe" is a perfectly normal, common, everyday word in English. Why can't we use it?

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; 10th March 2011 at 02:45 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 10th March 2011, 03:59 AM   #327
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,977
But as Ambrosia says, it's all pretty academic. Megrahi is related to some pretty unpleasant people. Megrahi is acquainted with some pretty unpleasant people. Indeed, there are a lot of unpleasant people in Libya. Is Megrahi himself one of them? Who knows. I wouldn't die of shock, but we simply have no evidence. He is not one of those who ever appeared on the radar in connection with any of the other atrocities we know were committed by the Libyan regime.

As an aside, I wonder how Bunntamas herself would react to the accusation that she must have carried out some atrocity, personally, solely on the grounds that some of her extended family, or some people she worked with, were implicated in crime?

I get tired saying it, but no matter how many evil deeds were done by Megrahi's relations, or Libyans in general, we can only accuse Megrahi of being "the Lockerbie bomber" if we have some DIRECT EVIDENCE LINKING HIM TO THE ACTUAL CRIME.

There is none. Absolutely zero. Nothing at all. Zilch. Nada.

The only, single, sole piece of evidence linking Megrahi to the Lockerbie bombing was the assertion that he was the man who bought the clothes from Tony Gauci. We've presented a positive gallery of pictures showing how the word "uncertain" doesn't even begin to describe the confusion surrounding this identification. Just about any middle-aged clean-shaven man with dark curly or frizzy hair was liable to be fingered as "resembling" the purchaser.

For comparison, look at these two pictures.

http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/200...10_468x353.jpg

In Tony Gauci's world, might these have been picked out as the same person from a photo-line-up, especially if the pictures were less well-defined than shown, and in black and white? (Hint: left is Hussain Osman and right is Jean Charles de Menezes.) Dammit, if either of these had rather longer hair, they'd do quite well as the mystery shopper as well!

However, the primary, crucial decision from which everything else flows in the Zeist case is that the clothes were purchased on 7th December. Unless that was the day of purchase, Megrahi could not have been the purchaser, because he wasn't there.

The court's decision to choose 7th December was made independently, apparently without considering Megrahi's lack of an alibi for that day and that day only. It completely flew in the face of the evidence regarding the football match, the weather, and the absence of Christmas lights. It would be a stretch even to say there was an outside chance it might have been 7th December.

There was of course a day that fitted the evidence much better, 23rd November. However, the court ignored that, latched on to the almost outside chance of 7th December, and declared they were quite satisfied that the purchase had in fact occurred on that day. Beyond any reasonable doubt. Absolutely. We're quite sure about this.

What?????

Originally Posted by SCCRC
the Commission formed the view that there is no reasonable basis in the trial court’s judgment for its conclusion that the purchase of the items from Mary’s House, took place on 7 December 1988.

In the Commission’s view, [....] the purchase took place at a time when there was no evidence at trial that the applicant was in Malta.

Whatever else the SCCRC dismissed or ignored, its crucial finding was right on the money. Because the assumed date of the purchase from Mary's House is the single key finding from which everything else in the Zeist judgement flowed. And it was perverse to the point of irrationality.

It was only after making this perverse finding, that the court proceeded to note that Megrahi had been around on that day. Fancy that! So even though the identification was as shaky as hell, and in fact added up to a non-identification ("Not the man I saw in my shop...."), the judges concluded that because Megrahi had been physically in the vicinity on the (already-decided) day of purchase, he bought the clothes. Beyond any reasonable doubt. Absolutely. We're quite sure about this.

Then what? Megrahi was at the airport in Malta on the morning of the Lockerbie disaster, catching a plane for Tripoli. At the same time, a plane was leaving for Frankfurt, where it was possible to connect (by way of a four-hour stopover) with another plane that then connected with PA103. The police had become convinced the bomb had travelled on this plane, but despite intensive and prolonged investigation they were never able to find any evidence to support this conviction. (On the contrary, the lack of any evidence from an investigation that determined begins to look like pretty good evidence of absence.)

The judges concluded that the bomb suitcase was smuggled on board the Frankfurt flight, despite the complete and utter absence of any evidence for that, and indeed "considerable and quite convincing evidence that that could not have happened".

Why?

Because the man they had already decided bought the clothes was at the airport at the time. [I'm not making this up, you know.]

No, he didn't have any suitcase with him. He didn't check in any luggage. He didn't go airside. He didn't have any accomplice. All he did was get on a plane for Tripoli. But he was the man who bought the clothes, we already determined that, so somehow, we know not how, the bomb must have been smuggled on to that plane. And Megrahi must have had something to do with it, even though we can't in any way say how he managed that.

That's that, beyond any reasonable doubt. Absolutely. We've quite sure about this. Guilty, life imprisonment.



But if the purchase didn't take place on 7th December, as the SCCRC investigation concluded, then Megrahi didn't buy the clothes.

And if Megrahi wasn't the man who bought the clothes, there is NO reason at all to conclude that the bomb travelled from Malta that morning.

Which makes Megrahi someone who was getting on a plane a thousand miles and more from where a completely different plane blew up, eleven hours later.

This is what has to be confronted by anyone trying to make a case for Megrahi's guilt. Not a lot of irrelevancies about who his brother-in-law happens to be.

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 LashL; 12th March 2011 at 08:31 AM. Reason: Restored text upon appeal.
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 10th March 2011, 04:09 AM   #328
MarkCorrigan
Winter is Coming
 
MarkCorrigan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 8,440
I'm pretty sure Megrahi is a nasty piece of work.

Just because he's a nasty piece of work, doesn't mean he bombed Pan-Am 103.

Has he ever responded to the issues with the Megrahi evidence? I came to this topic recently having had no real interest in the matter, and it's pretty damn obvious that unless Rolfe is lying her ass off about pretty much everything, he didn't do it.

Edited by kmortis:  Removed personal attack
__________________
Naturalism adjusts it's principles to fit with the observed data.
It's a god of the facts world view. -joobz

Now I lay me down to sleep, a bag of peanuts at my feet.
If I die before I wake, give them to my brother Jake.

Last edited by kmortis; 10th March 2011 at 08:16 AM. Reason: Removed to comply with Rule 12
MarkCorrigan 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 10th March 2011, 04:51 AM   #329
Chaos
Penultimate Amazing
 
Chaos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 10,519
Originally Posted by MarkCorrigan View Post
I came to this topic recently having had no real interest in the matter, and it's pretty damn obvious that unless Rolfe is lying her ass off about pretty much everything, he didn't do it.
And that´s what makes things very simple for some people: obviously, Rolfe MUST be lying her ass off about pretty much everything, or otherwise their cherished pet theories might be wrong and the Lybia-bashers have acted as a bunch of useful idiots preventing the identification and punishment of the real culprits.
Chaos 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 10th March 2011, 05:33 AM   #330
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,977
Originally Posted by MarkCorrigan View Post
I'm pretty sure Megrahi is a nasty piece of work.

I'm not going to argue with you on that, because I have more than a moderate suspicion you're right. However, I then have to concede I have nothing more than a gut feeling to support that suspicion. No credible evidence at all has been produced to show that Megrahi himself (as opposed to friends and relations) was ever connected to anything "nasty".

I say "credible", because there are a number of discredited statements floating around, all seeming to stem from one circumstance. In about 1994, three years after the indictments against Megrahi and Fhimah were issued, the US DoJ circulated huge "wanted" posters offering a reward of up to $4 million to anyone who could provide evidence against them. A number of lowlifes came forward after that with various nonsensical statements about having seen both men doing this or that. None of these statements were presented in court.

On the other side of the coin, we have Megrahi's own story about what he was doing on Malta that day.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/20...8057-21049478/

It's perfectly possible he may be lying, but I can't prove it. I just hope he is, because even though it doesn't make things any better for our justice system, I'd far rather the man we wrongly jailed for ten years was actually a bad guy, than someone who was just in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Originally Posted by MarkCorrigan View Post
Just because he's a nasty piece of work, doesn't mean he bombed Pan-Am 103.

That's what we're finding so difficult to get Bunntamas to understand. There are many bad guys in the world. They didn't all bomb PA103. Call me naive, but I want the person who actually carried out the crime in jail, not just some random villain the police decided to fit up for the crime.

Originally Posted by MarkCorrigan View Post
Has he ever responded to the issues with the Megrahi evidence?
Edited by kmortis:  Removed personal attack

You mean Bunntamas? She's a she.

Here's what I said about her recently. http://www.internationalskeptics.com...postid=6435709

And here's what she said about herself. http://www.internationalskeptics.com...postid=6915502

Originally Posted by MarkCorrigan View Post
I came to this topic recently having had no real interest in the matter, and it's pretty damn obvious that unless Rolfe is lying her ass off about pretty much everything, he didn't do it.

Originally Posted by Chaos View Post
And that´s what makes things very simple for some people: obviously, Rolfe MUST be lying her ass off about pretty much everything, or otherwise their cherished pet theories might be wrong and the Lybia-bashers have acted as a bunch of useful idiots preventing the identification and punishment of the real culprits.

Nobody needs to make a subjective judgement about whether or not I'm lying my ass off. Just read the relevant documents.

Opinion of the Court
Opinion of the Court (first appeal)
UN Observer's report of the trial
UN observer's report of the (first) appeal
SCCRC press release re. the second appeal

Other very useful documents linked from the UN observer's own web site.
http://www.i-p-o.org/lockerbie_observer_mission.htm

Journalist David Morrison's articles on these issues
The original judgement
The first appeal
The second appeal

I choose Morrison, although his articles are little-known and seldom cited in this context, because he confines himself to showing that the judgement was perverse on its own terms, without getting involved in the (admittedly highly plausible) allegations of evidence being fabricated.

These allegations can be counterproductive, because it's impossible to prove anything was fabricated, beyond any doubt - we lack sufficient information. Thus the door may be opened for the assertion that look, you haven't proved these items were fabricated, therefore you haven't proved the case against Megrahi was flawed.

This last is a non-sequitur. Even if the disputed items of evidence (the radio manual, the timer fragment, the Erac printout and so on) are entirely kosher, there is still no evidence to link Megrahi to the bombing.

The trouble is, very few people on this forum are prepared to read these documents. Certain individuals would rather snipe and jeer about "conspiracy theories" than find out what the evidence is that this "conspiracy theory" is based on.

It's based on the actual Opinion of the Court demonstrating that he didn't do it, and then just deciding to convict him anyway.

Rolfe.

ETA: If you only want to read one document, read this one. Lockerbie, a perverse verdict
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.

Last edited by kmortis; 10th March 2011 at 08:17 AM. Reason: Removed previously moderated content in quote
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 10th March 2011, 07:06 AM   #331
Chaos
Penultimate Amazing
 
Chaos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 10,519
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
Nobody needs to make a subjective judgement about whether or not I'm lying my ass off. Just read the relevant documents.
Relax... I don´t say you´re lying. I say that certain parties will conclude you are lying simply from the fact that your statements here and the evidence you present to support them are inconsistent with what they want to be true.
Chaos 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 10th March 2011, 07:21 AM   #332
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,977
Oh, it's fine. I understood perfectly that that was what you were saying.

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 10th March 2011, 07:25 AM   #333
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,977
Talking of Libyan tribes, this is the BBC article about tribalism in relation to the present conflict.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12528996

It's dated 21st February I think.

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 10th March 2011, 10:03 AM   #334
Skwinty
Philosopher
 
Skwinty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 5,593
A question for Rolfe.
Is the information below correct?

At the end of the Pan Am Flight 103 bombing trial an international observer appointed by the United Nations, Hans Köchler, called the verdict a "spectacular miscarriage of justice".

Even though Libya never formally admitted responsibility for Pan Am Flight 103 or UTA Flight 772, Libya "accepted responsibility for the actions of its officials" and agreed to pay compensation to the relatives of the victims.

In October 2008 Libya paid $1.5 billion into a fund which will be used to compensate:

relatives of the Lockerbie bombing victims with the remaining 20% of the sum agreed in 2003 ($2.7 billion);
American victims of the 1986 Berlin discotheque bombing;
American victims of the 1989 UTA Flight 772 bombing; and,
Libyan victims of the 1986 US bombing of Tripoli and Benghazi.
__________________


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 10th March 2011, 10:09 AM   #335
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,977
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pan_Am_...iracy_theories


Quote:
At the end of the Pan Am Flight 103 bombing trial an international observer appointed by the United Nations, Hans Köchler, called the verdict a "spectacular miscarriage of justice".[32] Even though Libya never formally admitted responsibility for Pan Am Flight 103 or UTA Flight 772, Libya "accepted responsibility for the actions of its officials" and agreed to pay compensation to the relatives of the victims.[33] In October 2008 Libya paid $1.5 billion into a fund which will be used to compensate relatives of the
  1. Lockerbie bombing victims with the remaining 20% of the sum agreed in 2003 ($2.7 billion);
  2. American victims of the 1986 Berlin discotheque bombing;
  3. American victims of the 1989 UTA Flight 772 bombing; and,
  4. Libyan victims of the 1986 US bombing of Tripoli and Benghazi.[34]

I'm not aware that any of it is wrong, shall we say. I haven't made a detailed study of that aspect.

The letter Gadaffi wrote was one of the things the SCCRC considered, and they agreed that it did not amount to an admission of responsibility. In the letter, Libya "accepted responsibility for the actions of its agents" but never at any time even acknowledged that Megrahi was a Libyan agent, never mind that any Libyan agent had had anything to do with Pan Am 103.

The money was paid in effect to bring the UN sanctions to an end, facilitate the normalisation of Libya's relations with the international community, and facilitate oil exploration by foreign companies.

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; 10th March 2011 at 10:14 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 10th March 2011, 10:17 AM   #336
Skwinty
Philosopher
 
Skwinty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 5,593
It seems to me a bit odd for Libya to issue that letter and pay compensation of that amount if they (the Libyan government) had no knowledge of, or were not implicated in some manner.

What would they stand to gain from such concessions? ETA: Were they successful in convincing the world to normalise relations?

I was also shocked to read that South Africa was considered to be involved, even if only from a conspiracy theory aspect.
__________________


What is reality? Nothing but a collective hunch.
--Lily Tomlin

Last edited by Skwinty; 10th March 2011 at 10:19 AM.
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 10th March 2011, 10:28 AM   #337
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,977
Libya was over a barrel at the time. Ship Megrahi and Fhimah to Holland, write a letter accepting responsibility, and pay out a lot of money, or else these crippling sanctions will continue.

There are others more expert than myself on these matters though.

I view the South Africa theory as conspiracy theorising, personally. It appears to be the idee fixe of one person only, a certain Patrick Haseldine. He likes to write emails to assorted people claiming that I'm an MI5 or CIA agent, for some reason.

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; 10th March 2011 at 10:29 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 10th March 2011, 10:57 AM   #338
Skwinty
Philosopher
 
Skwinty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 5,593
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
Libya was over a barrel at the time. Ship Megrahi and Fhimah to Holland, write a letter accepting responsibility, and pay out a lot of money, or else these crippling sanctions will continue..
I am not really familiar with all the twists and turns of Libyan politics, but hasn't Libya always been over a barrel?

If the West bought this Libyan story of contrition then it makes a mockery of the West not negotiating with terrorists.

Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
He likes to write emails to assorted people claiming that I'm an MI5 or CIA agent, for some reason.

Rolfe.
If you are an MI5 or CIA agent, you not doing a good job of maintaining your cover.
__________________


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 10th March 2011, 03:01 PM   #339
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,977
Originally Posted by Skwinty View Post
I am not really familiar with all the twists and turns of Libyan politics, but hasn't Libya always been over a barrel?

If you want the real deal on this aspect, you need to talk to a guy who posts on Robert Black's blog as "Fullinquiry". He seems to have been an expat working in Libya during this period.

There were certainly sanctions in place against Libya even before Lockerbie, because Megrahi's globetrottings were related to procuring aircraft parts and so on and getting them to Libya despite the sanctions. However, after the indictments were issued against Megrahi and Fhimah, and Libya refused to extradite them without seeing the evidence, the US and the UK applied to the UN to impose punitive sanctions. This seems to have caused a lot of hardship in the country, allegedly including "thousands" of deaths due to lack of medical supplies (stories of people with heart attacks dying in ambulances on the way to Tunisia).

This went on for eight years, with various attempts to find a solution. Eventually a suggestion of holding a trial with no jury under Scots law in a neutral country was accepted, brokered by Nelson Mandela. Fullinquiry has said that what really swung it was an undertaking just to go after the two accused and not to try to charge Gadaffi himself, but I can't vouch for the truth of that.

The deal was that if anyone was found guilty at Zeist, Libya would pay out an eyewatering amount of money, and write a letter accepting responsibility. Even at that stage the threadbare nature of the case was fairly clear, and advice was being given to the Libyans that it simply wouldn't stand up in court. So it's quite possible Gadaffi didn't originally believe it would ever come to paying out.

Then the main plank of the prosecution case collapsed in a heap during the hearings. There was widespread speculation that the case would be abandoned, because there was so little left. However, the prosecution pressed on with a case I wouldn't give anyone a parking ticket on. The judges issued an opinion which pretty much laid out that Megrahi didn't do it (or at least, that there was no evidence at all that he had), and then said they saw a "real and convincing pattern", guilty, life imprisonment.

There was an appeal of course, but Megrahi's advocate brought it on the wrong grounds, and all that achieved was a litany of "it is not for us to substitute our opinion for that of the trial court on these matters." This left Gadaffi without much in the way of options. If he'd continued to protest Libya's non-involvement in Lockerbie, the sanctions would not have been lifted, and worse might have happened.

So he paid up (I believe the final installment didn't show up until 2008), and wrote that letter with the weasel words that don't actually admit to anything, and the sanctions were lifted and life in Libya got a fair bit better. Which is pretty much why Megrahi was being cheered at the airport when he got home - the Libyans saw him as the man who had surrendered himself to a show trial and spent ten years in jail for something he didn't do, in order to get those sanctions lifted.

Even if Gadaffi had done it, he would never have paid out that money or written that letter without being pretty much over a barrel. The only thing the letter and the money bear witness to is how hard his arm was being twisted at the time.

Originally Posted by Skwinty View Post
If the West bought this Libyan story of contrition then it makes a mockery of the West not negotiating with terrorists.

Oh, wake up and smell the coffee. The "West" negotiates with anybody it thinks it can gain advantage from.

Originally Posted by Skwinty View Post
If you are an MI5 or CIA agent, you not doing a good job of maintaining your cover.

I'm not responsible for Patrick Haseldine's delusions, fortunately.

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; 10th March 2011 at 03:04 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 10th March 2011, 03:20 PM   #340
Chaos
Penultimate Amazing
 
Chaos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 10,519
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
There were certainly sanctions in place against Libya even before Lockerbie, because Megrahi's globetrottings were related to procuring aircraft parts and so on and getting them to Libya despite the sanctions.
Not sure if this has been covered before, but wouldn´t the bolded part be a reason to frame Megrahi, from the US point of view - after all, with him out of circulation, that whole operation would be dealt at least a serious setback, if it isn´t stopped outright.
Chaos 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 10th March 2011, 03:59 PM   #341
little grey rabbit
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 3,164
Originally Posted by Skwinty View Post
I am not really familiar with all the twists and turns of Libyan politics, but hasn't Libya always been over a barrel?

If the West bought this Libyan story of contrition then it makes a mockery of the West not negotiating with terrorists.



If you are an MI5 or CIA agent, you not doing a good job of maintaining your cover.
Its pretty obvious.

Rolfe's job is to try and steer people away from the high probability that the MST-13 timer was planted by the police. This means he has to construct a persona of a "truth-seeker" but whenever discussions turns to areas that implicate corruption in British police and push discussion in fantasy speculations regarding Palestinians or Iranian groups. He and his colleague Caustic Logic spend a lot of the time of the internet cyber stalking people who given testimony that they actually made the timer at the request of the CIA

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mebo_Telecommunications

Quote:
Criminal complaint

During week 11 of the trial, Mebo lawyer Dieter Neupert filed an official criminal complaint against the Crown over what he alleged was a 'forged fragment of MST-13 timer'.[6]
[edit] False testimony

Former Mebo employee, Ulrich Lumpert, told the Scottish Court in the Netherlands that as an electronics engineer he had produced all of the firm's MST-13 timers. Lumpert agreed that the fragments shown to him in court "could be" from that timer and was asked to confirm his signature on a letter concerning a technical fault with the prototype MST-13 timer.

Seven years later, on 18 July 2007, Lumpert claimed he had lied at the trial.[7] In a sworn affidavit before a Zurich notary, Lumpert stated that he had stolen a prototype MST-13 timer PC-board from Mebo and that he had given it on 22 June 1989, to "an official person investigating the Lockerbie case".[8] Dr Hans Köchler, UN observer at the Lockerbie trial, was sent a copy of Lumpert's affidavit and issued a report on the matter.[9] Dr Köchler told the Glasgow Herald:

"The Scottish authorities are now obliged to investigate this situation. Not only has Mr Lumpert admitted to stealing a sample of the timer, but to the fact he gave it to an official and then lied in court".
So while it is true that Rolfe isn't very good at maintaining his cover, he has been given a very difficult assignment.
little grey rabbit 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 10th March 2011, 04:14 PM   #342
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,977
Originally Posted by Chaos View Post
Not sure if this has been covered before, but wouldn´t the bolded part be a reason to frame Megrahi, from the US point of view - after all, with him out of circulation, that whole operation would be dealt at least a serious setback, if it isn´t stopped outright.

Nah. Doesn't fit the way the case progressed.

Anyway, Megrahi had changed jobs by the time Lockerbie happened, and he wasn't even indicted until nearly three years later.

He was just in the wrong place at the wrong time, and by that I mean he happened to be the frameable person who was catching flight LM147 from Malta to Tripoli on the morning of the disaster. Given the volume of traffic between Libya and Malta, with Malta being practically the only doorway to the wider world for Libya at the time, it must have been pretty short odds that some Libyan with a possibly dodgy background would have caught that plane that morning.

Caveat: Caustic Logic thinks they went after Megrahi in person from an early stage. My personal reading of it is that they didn't catch on to the potential for pinning it on a real live Libyan until nearly two years after the crash.

Due to the position of the bomb in the aircraft hold, the two possible airports of origin were Heathrow and Frankfurt. The UK authorities announced on day 9 that it wasn't Heathrow (even though the plane was loaded from empty there), and it had come from Frankfurt (the Frankfurt luggage wasn't security-screened at Heathrow). However, all the Frankfurt baggage records disappeared (or were disappeared) within a few days of the crash, from under the noses of the German cops. The German cops insisted that the bomb had gone on at Heathrow. Stalemate.

This went on for eight months. The atmosphere between the two police forces was poisonous bordering on outright warfare. The stalemate was resolved when the Frankfurt police suddenly produced a small extract from the missing baggage records which had miraculously turned up. This was ambiguous and open to interpretation, but it seemed (possibly) to show two unaccompanied bags heading through Frankfurt towards the feeder flight for Heathrow. One of these was from Warsaw and the other from Malta. Possibly. Or possibly one or both entries were merely coding anomalies.

The clothes packed around the bomb had by then been traced as being of Maltese manufacture, so they ignored the Warsaw lead, and everybody converged on Malta, leaving Heathrow and Frankfurt behind with a collective sigh of relief.

They spent the next year trying to show the obvious suspects (a Palestinian gang) had smuggled the bomb on board at Malta. All they achieved was to show there was pretty much no chance anything untoward had travelled on that particular flight, or could have done. Didn't stop them (Chicago cop syndrome).

Then in the autumn of 1990 it was decided that Libya was the preferred suspect, not the Palestinian gang at all. It was then realised that someone believed to be a Libyan security officer (Megrahi) had been at the airport when the Frankfurt flight left, and that he was travelling on a diplomatic passport in a false name. Hey, paydirt.

Further investigation showed that he had no suitcase with him, checked in no luggage for his half-hour flight, never went airside, and basically behaved like any other airline passenger. And there was still no evidence that any unaccompanied luggage had travelled on the Frankfurt flight, and a lot of evidence that no such thing had happened.

The investigators had been trying to get the man who sold the clothes in the bomb suitcase to identify one of the Palestinian gang as the purchaser, and had partially succeeded - his identification of Abu Talb was at least as confident as his identification of Megrahi, if not more so.

[Oh good grief, once again as I'm typing this, the TV current affairs programme I'm watching is banging on about Megrahi again. This is situation normal of course.]

They then turned their attention to persuading the shopkeeper that it was in fact Megrahi who had bought the clothes. This has been covered ad nauseam elsewhere, and the hints and the bribery and the "well it's not the man but he looks a bit like him" and so on. It's been suggested that if they'd gone on showing him pictures of clean-shaven men with dark curly hair he'd have gone on picking out people who "resembled" the customer. It was never the sort of identification a case should have stood up on though.

So the CIA simply picked up a low-level Libyan informant and by a combination of threats and bribes managed to get statements out of him describing Megrahi having a suitcase matching the description of the bomb suitcase at the airport in Malta the day before the bombing, and about conversations allegedly implicating Megrahi in a plot to bomb an aircraft.

So I don't think Megrahi was targeted for himself. The investigation was mad keen on Malta because it wasn't Heathrow or Frankfurt. When it was decided to blame Libya, he just happened to be the Libyan who was at the airport at the relevant time, and it all snowballed from there.

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 10th March 2011, 04:39 PM   #343
Ambrosia
Good of the Fods
 
Ambrosia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,331
Originally Posted by little grey rabbit View Post
high probability that the MST-13 timer was planted by the police.
Some background reading for you

To summarise:

The provenance of this fragment is more than a little "dodgy" it was THE piece of physical evidence used in the trial to connect Libya to the bombing. However there is not enough evidence one way or another to say for sure where it actually came from.

If you want to get into details then the thread I link above is the place to do it.

We've done the timer fragment to death already, which is a very far cry from "steering people away from talking about it"
Ambrosia 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 10th March 2011, 06:09 PM   #344
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,977
Originally Posted by little grey rabbit View Post
Its pretty obvious.

Rolfe's job is to try and steer people away from the high probability that the MST-13 timer was planted by the police. This means he has to construct a persona of a "truth-seeker" but whenever discussions turns to areas that implicate corruption in British police and push discussion in fantasy speculations regarding Palestinians or Iranian groups. He and his colleague Caustic Logic spend a lot of the time of the internet cyber stalking people who given testimony that they actually made the timer at the request of the CIA

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mebo_Telecommunications

So while it is true that Rolfe isn't very good at maintaining his cover, he has been given a very difficult assignment.



That's freaking hilarious.

Hysterical, even.

No, LGR, you're right. I don't believe the timer fragment was planted by the police.

I believe it was manufactured by Tom Thurman of the FBI and "John Orkin" of the CIA, some time in the summer of 1989, probably at the instigation of Vincent Cannistraro. I believe it was planted into the Lockerbie chain of evidence in September that year by Thomas Hayes and Allan Feraday of RARDE, and Hayes also created backdated forensics notes to make it appear as if it had been examined in May. I believe the whole boiling of them cooked up the idea in April 1989 in Maryland, while they were carrying out the famous let's-blow-up-an-airliner-in-a-way-as-unlike-Lockerbie-as-we-can-manage tests. Just before Feraday went to Japan to acquire the materials he needed to fake up the radio manual page that was also planted in the evidence.

Someone in the police persuaded Thomas Gilchrist and Thomas McColm to sign the altered evidence label that was put on the finished item, but it's not necessarily the case this person knew the evidence was fabricated - I think there was quite a lot of tidying-up of the provenance of important finds, even the ones that were on the level.

That's what I believe. And it's not as if I haven't said so often enough. But it's also impossible to prove, at least not without access to the RARDE photographic records, assuming they haven't been destroyed or tampered with by now. And I think it's important to keep stressing that proving the timer fragment to be a fake is not necessary to show that the case against Megrahi was smoke and mirrors. The case remains smoke and mirrors even if the Archangel Gabriel descends from heaven and shows conclusive proof the IED really was detonated by an MST-13 timer.

What about Bollier? I think he's disinfo. He was a Stasi agent, and he really has been fingered as a suspected CIA asset, by Francovich no less. He was the person who set the investigation after Libya in the first place, and later, Megrahi. Everything he does seems to be geared to reward money, first the DoJ's $4 million, and then some ridiculous sum Gadaffi is supposed to have promised him if he can get Megrahi's conviction overturned and his $2.7 billion back. Like that's ever going to happen.

He makes statements about the timer fragment which can be easily seen to be false by looking at the pictures of the thing he hosts on his own web site for goodness sake. He has all the credibility of Giaka and half the personality.

But the date Lumpert says he handed that other timer over to "a person associated with the Lockerbie inquiry" fits in very nicely with the timetable above, so I don't discount it. It's just a shame it's all barnacled over with nonsense about an M being scratched on the board, and different bits being different colours at different times. You'd almost think someone wanted investigators to look into the allegation, see these fallacies and nonsense-claims, and dismiss it as fantasy.

But that would be a conspiracy theory, I suppose.

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; 10th March 2011 at 06:12 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 11th March 2011, 04:35 AM   #345
Caustic Logic
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,494
Originally Posted by Skwinty View Post
It seems to me a bit odd for Libya to issue that letter and pay compensation of that amount if they (the Libyan government) had no knowledge of, or were not implicated in some manner.

What would they stand to gain from such concessions? ETA: Were they successful in convincing the world to normalise relations?

I was also shocked to read that South Africa was considered to be involved, even if only from a conspiracy theory aspect.
Would a detained suspect confess to a crime he knows nothing of? Not usually. Following torture, by jailers who know the true perps cannot be caught and the prisoner is the best alternative? It's been known to happen.

That was an illustration, not meant to read right over to this case, but the concept is similar. The world told Libya it was guilty, and punished them as if they were. Only that evasive letter of "responsibility," the massive lawyer-fattening settlement, and so on was able to change it. So they did these things, to stop the punishment.

And as you wondered, yes, it worked. At least, so far. Gaddafi has worked hard to recover from the sanctions and other pariah stuff while maintaining his own grip. It seems the hope now is to hand the fruits of that to his replacements. But that's just me musing.

Skwinty, thank you for taking a moment, as so few do, to even engage this issue. You're a bit of what I was hoping to see more of around here.

Ditto Rolfe on the South Africans theory - PH is big on making sure his voice gets through on wikipedia. He's got some kind of logic, a couple actual oddities tha could mean something, but ... No, that's not a good theory. I ditto Rolfe a lot, and vice-versa, which some take as a sign of some partner conspiracy or somethin. But really what it is is well-honed research and reasoning and logic applied to the same huge set of evidence, allegations, etc. Shady things often do look shady, certain possibilities are plausible and others aren't. Functioning minds on the right track will often wind up agreeing, as the community here generally agrees on the rational side (with side quibbles often) of a CT debate.

The fact that the rational side and the official one are NOT the same side in this particular case makes it unusual. I think the forum's having a hard time dealing with that, in a way, and doing very well in others.

Let's keep at it, pursuing rationalism even when it gets tricky and takes us into really considering this theory about a conspiracy. Or actually, Rolfe, what is the purpose of this exact thread? Let's keep doing that.
Caustic Logic 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 11th March 2011, 04:46 AM   #346
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,977
The thread? I started it for McHrozni, who was arguing stuff in the "Mystery Shopper" thread that wasn't relevant to the thread. In effect, he was saying he believed Megrahi was guilty but not confining his discussion to the clothes purchase. I started it to try to stop the derailing of the clothes purchase thread. McHrozni argued for a while but didn't seem to know anything about the actual evidence and kept changing his stance, and in the end he sort of went away.

The thread was dormant for a while until I bumped it when Bunntanas jointed, as a venue to allow her to present whatever case she liked to support Megrahi's guilt. You know what happened on that front.

It was dormant again until October, when Bunntamas herself bumped it a few days ago to accuse us of having gone all quiet - well, this thread was quiet because we were discussing stuff in other threads.

So I guess the thread is for anyone to present whatever case they like to support the view that Megrahi (note, I specified Megrahi, not Libya in general) carried out the Lockerbie bombing.

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; 11th March 2011 at 04:47 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 11th March 2011, 04:52 AM   #347
Caustic Logic
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,494
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post


That's freaking hilarious.

Hysterical, even.

No, LGR, you're right. I don't believe the timer fragment was planted by the police.

I believe it was manufactured ...
Yeah, but you don't accept Lumpert's version, which was in a fancy affidavit, and has been re-posted a zillion times.

Bollier is the ultimate expert for the CT side now, and once for the prosecution (one of only three important witnesses AGAINST Megrahi at trial) As I said and offered a link where it's explained, he was the first person on earth to offer to help the CIA frame Libya. I think the idea stuck and became what we've seen. Bollier stayed very helpful throughout the indictment assembly into late 1991, and only in the mid-1990s started telling (slightly) weird stories that during and after the trial got stranger and stranger. But as the maker of the timer, he's accepted by many as gate-keeper of the MST-13 evidence, supplier of the leads to "prove" its fabrication (he's used several, some mutually exclusive). Rolfe mentioned some of the extremes, actually quoted and illustrated here.

Hints to LGR:
1) Don't say that something is pretty obvious if you haven't done your homework.
2) On second thought, never mind. You are a funny little rabbit when you accuse Rolfe of being an "obvious" agent and a chuckle is nice.
3) Go re-read what Lumpert said about the color of the board he handed over, then try and find a photo of the evidence used against Libya (fake as hell but hard to prove) and check its color. See any problems yet?
4) Keep digging, it gets interesting. If you'd rather not question Bollier and Mebo, I recommend ignoring them and focusing on another of the many amazing aspects of this case. Like either of the other two shady witnesses brought in to prove the fictituous case written by the CIA sometime in 1989. (hint- both last names are 5-letters long and start with G)

Last edited by Caustic Logic; 11th March 2011 at 04:55 AM.
Caustic Logic 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 11th March 2011, 05:22 AM   #348
Caustic Logic
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,494
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
The thread? I started it for McHrozni, who was arguing stuff in the "Mystery Shopper" thread that wasn't relevant to the thread. In effect, he was saying he believed Megrahi was guilty but not confining his discussion to the clothes purchase. I started it to try to stop the derailing of the clothes purchase thread. McHrozni argued for a while but didn't seem to know anything about the actual evidence and kept changing his stance, and in the end he sort of went away.

The thread was dormant for a while until I bumped it when Bunntanas jointed, as a venue to allow her to present whatever case she liked to support Megrahi's guilt. You know what happened on that front.

It was dormant again until October, when Bunntamas herself bumped it a few days ago to accuse us of having gone all quiet - well, this thread was quiet because we were discussing stuff in other threads.

So I guess the thread is for anyone to present whatever case they like to support the view that Megrahi (note, I specified Megrahi, not Libya in general) carried out the Lockerbie bombing.

Rolfe.
Ah, we've gone badly off-track then. Bunntamas is arguably the closest to on topic, in addressing Megrahi's clan/tribe affiliation. It's evidence against Megrahi himself, just not very good evidence. The network she's looking at is probably several thousand people wide, and something or other sets Megrahi apart from the rest.

Hint: it has to do with Malta, clothing, luggage tags, etc.

Perhaps Skwinty, or a lurker, could bring a question - a pretty solid sounding charge among those listed on the Wiki page, or something, to see how on earth we could address THAT.
Caustic Logic 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 11th March 2011, 05:30 AM   #349
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,977
Lumpert's basic story is seductive, because of the timing. Thurman and Orkin must have got a sample circuit board from somewhere, after all. There were one or two floating around unaccounted-for though, and then there was a story of a company in Florida making counterfeit models for the CIA. And then there's Lumpert.

Wherever they got it from though, they got it in the summer of 1989. Lumpert claims to have handed over his example in late June 1989, which fits in that respect. However, didn't he say it was a brown board? The colour of the thing is tantalising, as the photographs don't show the colour clearly at all. I don't understand that, because the colour of the pics of the brown circuit board from the radio is perfectly faithful. However, the timer fragment doesn't change colour throughout the investigation, and Hayes's original notes specifically describe it as green, so why would he call it green if it was brown?

The later tales about part of the exhibit being substituted and it being half green and half brown at one point are just silly. The photographs show nothing of the sort. The photographs are of the same item all the way through, with modifications consistent with the recorded manilulations performed by the investigation.

The "I scratched an M on it" is silly as well. The scratch isn't a clear M, it's a squiggle. So Lumpert knew he should identify the timer he handed over, and exactly the right bit of the right circuit board was what the conspirators fortuitously chose to make into their "evidence", without realising it had been marked. I don't think so.

I'm not sure what the M is, but it seems to be part of a pattern of scratching that's more intense lower down, between the printed circuit lines. I don't think it's fluff. It seems to have been scratched superficially before it was photographed as if to remove a surface sooty deposit. Later more efficient cleaning has then removed all trace of these scratches.

This is the thing that was never tested for explosives residue, of course. Though why that's such a big deal I don't know, I'm sure it could have been arranged for it to test positive if that was what was wanted.

Was it a bit of a board from a timer Lumpert handed over? I don't know. I do know that the rest of the Lumpert/Bollier story is horse-feathers and demonstrably so. Which makes me wonder, why publish such evident rubbish?

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; 11th March 2011 at 05:34 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 11th March 2011, 10:42 AM   #350
Ambrosia
Good of the Fods
 
Ambrosia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,331
Originally Posted by Caustic Logic View Post
Yeah, but you don't accept Lumpert's version, which was in a fancy affidavit, and has been re-posted a zillion times.
There's a problem with Lumpert. Namely he's a liar.

Either he lied to the Zeist court when giving evidence. Or his affidavit is lies. Which do you believe?

Quote:
Bollier is the ultimate expert for the CT side now, [...] Bollier stayed very helpful throughout the indictment assembly into late 1991, and only in the mid-1990s started telling (slightly) weird stories that during and after the trial got stranger and stranger.
Bollier is a snake. I think the Conspiracy files BBC program interview of Bollier pretty much nails him. He's a seller of anything to anyone for the right price. Arms, bombs, bomb timers, and who knows what else to anyone who has the money and he doesn't care in the slightest who those people are. He's well aware of the substantial rewards offered and is motivated by money and little else.

The investigators don't need Bollier at all or his company to make up the MST-13 fragment and add it into the evidence chain.

e.g. They have the timers they seized from Senegal or whereever it was in a vault somewhere, know they can tie them back to Libya and only Libya (via someone known to the investigation already, who shares an office building with Megrahi) they chop one up appropriately, give it to the Scots police and let them stumble around with it for a while, before someone through much "painstaking work" finally matches it up with the MEBO timer.
Ambrosia 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 11th March 2011, 05:24 PM   #351
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,977
Originally Posted by Caustic Logic View Post
2) On second thought, never mind. You are a funny little rabbit when you accuse Rolfe of being an "obvious" agent and a chuckle is nice.

You know, I love it when twoofers start engaging with Lockerbie. The results are always completely off-the-wall.

I'd have thought that twoofers might have had Lockerbie sussed already. Or I thought that about three years ago, until I tried to find out. I mean, they're such tenacious researchers, and so alert to all the possibilities of official malfeasance, surely they'd have found the right end of the stick?

No, not on a bet.

Most of them ignore it completely, which is probably a blessing, but odd. The largest school of thought, led by David Shayler, has decided Megrahi actually did it. Shayler says, basically, the cops framed the right guy, trust me on this. (Maybe I'd trust him a smidgin more if he didn't also think he was Jesus or something.)

And then we have the ones who think it's got to be a more complex CT than it really is.

LGR believes Edwin and Lumpert, bless his furry little heart. I love him to bits.

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 11th March 2011, 05:44 PM   #352
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,977
Originally Posted by Ambrosia View Post
There's a problem with Lumpert. Namely he's a liar.

Either he lied to the Zeist court when giving evidence. Or his affidavit is lies. Which do you believe?

Neither, if that's a valid answer.

Originally Posted by Ambrosia View Post
Bollier is a snake. I think the Conspiracy files BBC program interview of Bollier pretty much nails him. He's a seller of anything to anyone for the right price. Arms, bombs, bomb timers, and who knows what else to anyone who has the money and he doesn't care in the slightest who those people are. He's well aware of the substantial rewards offered and is motivated by money and little else.

Yes, but why is he making those thousands of spam posts that everybody ignores, alleging stuff that seems to be about 30% reasonable and 70% complete batsqueak crazy?

Why does he have that bizarre web site which nevertheless has some really useful images of primary evidence on it? If it wasn't for him, we wouldn't have the images of much of the important production material from Zeist.

And why has he induced Lumpert to tell quite such a transparent fairystory about a brown circuit board? (Unless that bit's true, but then they realised all the boards sold to Libya were green so they simply couldn't use Lumpert's board - does that fly?)

But even if that's the explanation (and I'm rather warming to it), why the nonsense about the two-tone exhibit, and the M?

But on the other side of that coin, why can't we tell the colour of this "green" board in the photographs? If I look inside the mouse I have in my hand, it has a green circuit board, and the colour is unmistakeable. It should show in a photo no trouble at all.

I've always regarded this "disinfo!" accusation as being a bit silly. But I do wonder about Edwin. Definitely Stasi, probably CIA at least until the wall fell, and managing to get a complete pile of horse-feathers accepted as the likely solution to the conundrum of the MST-13 fragment. A pile of horse-feathers that will obviously blow away if anyone tries to look at it critically.

I don't know on what grounds the SCCRC said it could find no evidence to substantiate the allegation that the timer fragment was fabricated. I won't believe it until I see the evidence, and it better include the original negative of the red-circle photo, traceable to 12th May 1989. But could it be that they investigated Lumpert's allegations, and found them to be baseless?


Originally Posted by Ambrosia View Post
The investigators don't need Bollier at all or his company to make up the MST-13 fragment and add it into the evidence chain.

e.g. They have the timers they seized from Senegal or whereever it was in a vault somewhere, know they can tie them back to Libya and only Libya (via someone known to the investigation already, who shares an office building with Megrahi) they chop one up appropriately, give it to the Scots police and let them stumble around with it for a while, before someone through much "painstaking work" finally matches it up with the MEBO timer.

That's entirely true. That's what we were working on as a hypothesis before Lumpert's story was in the equation. At best, as I said, it maybe that they originally tried to obtain a usable sample item from MEBO, were given a brown one, and only realised later when they compared it with the file copy that it was the wrong colour to implicate Libya.

And of course they had to retain one example to serve as the comparison. So it might not have been as straightforward as all that to get hold of a suitable item. This could explain why the plan started moving in April, but PI995 wasn't ready to be fed into the chain of evidence in September and had to have its provenance backdated to 12th May.
__________________
"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 11th March 2011, 08:10 PM   #353
Bunntamas
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 310
Originally Posted by little grey rabbit View Post
Its pretty obvious.

Rolfe's job is to try and steer people away from the high probability that the MST-13 timer was planted by the police. This means he has to construct a persona of a "truth-seeker" but whenever discussions turns to areas that implicate corruption in British police and push discussion in fantasy speculations regarding Palestinians or Iranian groups. He and his colleague Caustic Logic spend a lot of the time of the internet cyber stalking people
And bullying....

Thank you, LGR!

~ B
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 11th March 2011, 08:16 PM   #354
Bunntamas
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 310
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post

As an aside, I wonder how Bunntamas herself would react to the accusation that she must have carried out some atrocity, personally, solely on the grounds that some of her extended family, or some people she worked with, were implicated in crime?
Here's how Bunntamas reacts: WOW. Comparing me to a convicted terrorist, with a seemingly veiled threat. You are WAY out of line with that one. Consider yourself reported. And then some.

Last edited by LashL; 12th March 2011 at 08:32 AM.
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 11th March 2011, 08:43 PM   #355
little grey rabbit
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 3,164
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post

I believe it was manufactured by Tom Thurman of the FBI and "John Orkin" of the CIA, some time in the summer of 1989, probably at the instigation of Vincent Cannistraro. I believe it was planted into the Lockerbie chain of evidence in September that year by Thomas Hayes and Allan Feraday of RARDE, and Hayes also created backdated forensics notes to make it appear as if it had been examined in May.

Great, Rolfe. But seriously who cares what you believe if you have no evidence for it? Mebo saying the circuit board in evidence was not provided by them to Libya and appears like a fake is evidence. It is a statement from people in a position to know. An affidavit from a Mebo employee sworn before a Swiss judge that he stole parts and provided them to a British or American official is evidence - he is in a position to know. Your views on "John Orkin" are not evidence.

Quote:
Just before Feraday went to Japan to acquire the materials he needed to fake up the radio manual page that was also planted in the evidence.
Except we have some very respectable Scottish citizens who quite clearly remember finding it and finding it in almost completely undamaged state. And have been interviewed on TV swearing blind that it must have been damaged during police custody prior to being presented to the court. Or are they disinfo agents too?

Why would Ferady have to go to Japan to acquire materials to fake up a radio manual page? You have taken a very simple story, with lots of evidence and replaced it with wild unsubstantiated rubbish.

It is because you constantly spew out such demonstrable nonsense when the true facts are so strong is the reason you are very easy to spot.

Quote:
He was a Stasi agent, and he really has been fingered as a suspected CIA asset, by Francovich no less.
He was an engineering company that sold components across the Iron curtain, as was quite legitimate. I do not know the specific details of his commercial dealings but it was normal practice for STASI to create front companies not just for dealing with Western companies and individuals - but also for dealing with their own citizens. Alternatively, they might use a genuine firm or state owned enterprise as a front when they wanted to source something. None of this rules out that Bollier was a Stasi agent, but it is not a necessary explanation.

But gee, it so much easier to breathlessly say "Stasi agent" wink wink nudge nudge, "GLPC" wink wink nudge nudge, "Oil contracts" wink wink, nudge nudge and pretend your wild rantings actually have some substance behind them.

Of course he if did sell components to the East Germans - quite possibly they ended up in the West Berlin disco bombing and that was how he came into the orbit of the CIA in the first place.....wink wink, nudge nudge
little grey rabbit 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 11th March 2011, 08:47 PM   #356
Bunntamas
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 310
Originally Posted by little grey rabbit View Post
Great, Rolfe. But seriously who cares what you believe if you have no evidence for it?
Originally Posted by little grey rabbit View Post
But gee, it so much easier to breathlessly say "Stasi agent" wink wink nudge nudge, "GLPC" wink wink nudge nudge, "Oil contracts" wink wink, nudge nudge and pretend your wild rantings actually have some substance behind them.

Bavo, LGR!
I'm quite Certain that "Walls of (repeated for years on end, "but it's there was no clothing purchase by Megrahi! The bomb did not originate in Malta!" non-evidence CTs again) of text, by Rolfe, and "yeah, that's right!" CT cheerleading by CL will follow. Ooooohhh, I can hear the clicking and clacking of the keyboard now, as they compile the ever so strategic argument, which ultimately is nothing but repetitive nonsense, which, in 22+ years of opposition to Megrhai's guilt, has gone NOWHERE (sans release of him by Scottish and UK oil whoreing politicians, bowing to Megrahi's CLAN affiliations) - Hmmmm wonder why? wink wink, nudge nudge.
I also anticipate Yawwwwwning (not unlike skimming Bollier's blather) at predictable, transparent CTs, who get SO bummed out when their alleged facts, which they deem "evidence" get relegated to the CT forums - sub forums, whatever you want to call them (Ambrosia), they're still CTs, NOT evidence.

~B.

Last edited by Bunntamas; 11th March 2011 at 09:47 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 11th March 2011, 09:31 PM   #357
Ambrosia
Good of the Fods
 
Ambrosia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,331
Originally Posted by little grey rabbit View Post
Great, Rolfe. But seriously who cares what you believe if you have no evidence for it?
Perhaps you missed some of the earlier posts I made about the nature of the webforum you are posting on. As the answer to the above statement is "pretty much noone cares what Rolfe believes on Lockerbie, we do care about what can be backed up with evidence"

You appear to not understand so one can only apologise if this comes across as patronising.

I shall spell this out for you LGR a little more simply.

James Randi is a world wide famous sceptic. He founded the JREF which is an organisation to promote scientific and critical thinking and has a long standing Million Dollar Challenge, still unclaimed, to anyone who can prove any paranormal event ever.

As a spinoff from the JREF these forums were established to provide a place where people can discuss "skepticism, critical thinking, science and the paranormal, in a friendly and lively way."

Now well established, these web forums attract very many intelligent and educated people, many of whom hold the scientific method in very high regard and are dyed in the wool sceptics.

Sceptics by definition won't believe ANYTHING without evidence that proves that it is true.

You are arguing on the internet with a bunch of sceptics LGR, and we don't give a stuff as to what someone believes, only what can be proven with evidence.

Quote:
Mebo saying the circuit board in evidence was not provided by them to Libya and appears like a fake is evidence.

You are conflating the legal definition of evidence with the scientific definition. However if you want to go down that road there is also the evidence to consider where Lumpert stood up in court and testified pretty much the exact opposite. Which evidence do you choose to give most weight to? What other evidence might there be that is consistant with either of the above pieces of evidence so as to corroborate one or the other?

Quote:
(manual page discovered by Mrs Horton)Except we have some very respectable Scottish citizens who quite clearly remember finding it and finding it in almost completely undamaged state. And have been interviewed on TV swearing blind that it must have been damaged during police custody prior to being presented to the court.
[sarcasm]What it was on TV?!! - well it must be true! [/sarcasm]

Eyewitness testimony is not good evidence, according to the scientific definition. (this is a scientific/sceptical forum remember)

LGR a plane was blown apart in midair at about cruising altitude. Tore itself to pieces and fell to earth along with it's contents. There is nothing unusual about finding scattered pieces of manuals of electronic radios amongst the wreckage some time later.

(What is unusual is how the prosecution can so definitively tie this particular page of manual exactly to the bomb case, and how damaged the scrap shown in trial evidence is compared to the Horton testimony, both captured in interviews near the time and much later, we've already discussed this in older threads. There is nothing to prove one way or another whether or not the fragmented page of manual is the same as that recovered by Mrs Horton at all. Furthermore even if it IS the same page there is not very convincing evidence that can place it within the bomb case, and there is evidence that suggests any manual packed close to a high explosive of the type and size that was required to blow PA-103 from the sky would have even survived such a blast at all.)

Quote:
It is because you constantly spew out such demonstrable nonsense
I can honestly say that I don't know of anyone who is better researched and knows more about the evidence of Lockerbie as a whole, and who I think is more credible than Rolfe. Thats just my personal opinion though take it however you want.

If you want to discuss the MST-13 fragment in some detail then post some thoughts to the MST-13 thread I linked earlier and we can go through all that there, though if you bring up the same stuff as is already talked through in the thread I'll just link back to it and post laughing dogs.
Ambrosia 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 11th March 2011, 09:47 PM   #358
Ambrosia
Good of the Fods
 
Ambrosia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,331
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
Neither, if that's a valid answer.
Well of course he can also be lying twice over.

Quote:
Yes, but why is he making those thousands of spam posts that everybody ignores, alleging stuff that seems to be about 30% reasonable and 70% complete batsqueak crazy?
Why do people believe assorted claptrap about the 9/11, moon landings, JFK, Reptillians, intelligent design, homeopathy, religion etc etc and continually makes posts to web forums the world over with a little truth and mostly rubbish?

I think Bollier is simply motivated by money and thinks he can get paid off BIGtime by Ghadaffi if he can convince people that the offical story is wrong. I'd wager that he knows a good deal more than he's letting on about what actually happened, and as well as posting a bunch of what he knows on his website is also spinning stories and exaggerating this and that to make himself seem more important to anyone that cares and to try to make what he says seem more believable.

Which sadly tends to devalue his evidence some.
Ambrosia 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 11th March 2011, 10:00 PM   #359
Ambrosia
Good of the Fods
 
Ambrosia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,331
Originally Posted by Bunntamas View Post
whatever you want to call them (Ambrosia), they're still CTs, NOT evidence.

~B.
You know you are free to make more than one post. There's also a nifty "preview" feature where you can re-edit posts as much as you like before comitting them to the forum.

Handwave away whatever you like and dismiss anything but the official version as a silly CT with no evidence if it suits you.

Thing is we are not pushing any alternate theories really. We are holding up the offical version to scrutiny and asking what evidence is there to support it. That's the vast bulk of the collected posts on this topic here by myself, Rolfe, CL, and others.

Time and again there is no evidence to support the offical story. There's also a bunch of conflicting evidence that could support an alternative version or versions.

All we can say for sure is that we don't know who blew up PA-103, and there sure as hell isn't enough evidence to convict Megrahi.
Ambrosia 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 12th March 2011, 05:06 AM   #360
Caustic Logic
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,494
It occurs to me to note
that there is a lack of agreement
on the meaning of the word "evidence"
evident in this thread.

On the one hand, the best definition to me, is a measurable trace, effect, imprint, etc. of a certain real-world action or event. Ex. - a broken window that was taken as evidence of a break-in to a house where the occupant was shot and robbed.

But since no one can know for sure what happened in most cases, we can't wait to be sure it's a sign of the one, factual reality. So in a second-best meaning of "evidence", the window becomes a possible reflection of any number of possible events theorized, by investigators, prosecutors, judges, or conversants in a forum, as the case may be.

One person might suggest the broken window, rather than showing a break-in (nothing was stolen, no sign of entry) might still be related to the bullet that killed the house's occupant, suggesting a shot fired through the window. Ideally, as the Occam's razor thing says, the simplest explanation that accounts for all known facts (the second half is often under-appreciated by people who excel at lacking facts) is the best.

So anyway, it would be helpful to the discussion if we could all agree on the varying definitions of evidence, proof, theories, etc. to avoid talking past each other, which seems the order of the day as usual anyways, so never mind. Who's got the time for that cat-herding job? We're just speaking different languages here, and going by vastly different worldviews / philosophies.

Last edited by Caustic Logic; 12th March 2011 at 05:12 AM.
Caustic Logic 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 07:49 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
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.