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 3rd October 2011, 03:35 PM   #481
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,971
The BBC is back at it, on the broadcast news. In spite of showing the Arabic interview in clear, with a voice-over translation that now says "the West exaggerated my name."

That the word "exaggerated" is still being used suggests to me that the theory that this particular word was mistranslated was wrong, which suggests it may well have come from Edwin. That would be par from the course.

It's clearer from the whole interview what Megrahi actually meant. He's saying he was a very ordinary person who was never involved in any of the atrocities that were going on in Gaddafi's Libya. Of course, a large part of the case against him was that he was a "security officer", a spy, an undercover agent for Gaddafi and so on. But as I said earlier, there's no evidence of this. The idea that he was a "bad guy", so he must have been guilty of the bombing, was blown up out of almost nothing.

"The West exaggerated my name."

They exaggerated what sort of person he was, in their attempt to smear him as being capable of such an act. It's still being reported as his "role in the bombing" being exaggerated.



Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is online now   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 October 2011, 03:59 PM   #482
CTB
Thinker
 
CTB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 203
Reuters seemingly stand by their translation. Dumfries & Galloway plod are seeking a transcript.

I think this is a non-story purely on the fact that to find it on the BBC website ( from the Channel Islands ) I have to click on 'news' then 'uk' then 'Scotland' [nb I'm one of those weird folk that does not watch tv. Haven't done for 4 years. Kinda makes streaming rugby games and Dr Who pricey on the ol' mobile broadband, though. ]

It's my reading that Mr Megrahi has not admitted to having any role in Lockerbie, never mind an exaggerated one.

Mind you, as western economies disintegrate further all the Tories manage is an argument over a cat. All the bad stuff was Gadaffi. ( Oh yeh, n those Scotch chappies, Blair n Brown. ) Trust me, Rolfe n others, the view, from so South it's really France, is one of not news. The only thing that will make news here is an unequivocal admission from Mr Megrahi that it was 'im all along or acceptance by 'agencies' involved that he was stitched-up by a Tory govt. I reckon party loyalties will not allow that.

I've said it before. Big-up the JFM. I've noted even Big Tel Waite has come onboard. There's a man with an insight to the times if ever there was.



CTB
CTB 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 October 2011, 11:18 PM   #483
SnidelyW
Critical Thinker
 
SnidelyW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 486
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
Snip...

Although the timer fragment which ostensibly shifted the focus of the investigation to Libya wasn't identified until June 1990, arguably just late enough to be connected to the upcoming Gulf War (though Saddam didn't invade Kuwait until August), the actual item was definitely present in the chain of evidence from September 1989.

Snip...

Rolfe.
I just want to be certain about several things- perhaps you could clear up some confusion. I apologize to all if these details have been covered in previous threads, but IMO, they go to the crux of the case against Megrahi.

I have three different dates when the timer fragment was supposedly found- May 1989, (the Scottish detective who signed the evidence tag) January, 1990 (the Americans), and late January, 1990 (the Germans).
With three different dates in play, when exactly was the shirt (embedded with the timer fragment), found and logged? Was the fragment of timer found in the shirt ever tested for explosive residue? Has anyone seen a document detailing a residue test done on the timer fragment?

Since Tony Gauci was so detailed and certain about the exact items of clothing purchased, the quantity of each, and the method of payment, down to the exact denomination of banknotes used, why was his memory ostensibly foggy in then later recalling he had sold a 'beige' shirt, which later turned out to be grey? Oh, and according to the shirt manufacturer, they told police the shirt was a boys size shirt!

Sooooooooo... could anyone assist in the clarification of these points?

As always, thanks in advance.
__________________
"A foolish faith in authority is the worst enemy of truth"
(Albert Einstein, 1901)
SnidelyW 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 October 2011, 03:21 AM   #484
CTB
Thinker
 
CTB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 203
Originally Posted by SnidelyW View Post
I just want to be certain about several things- perhaps you could clear up some confusion. I apologize to all if these details have been covered in previous threads, but IMO, they go to the crux of the case against Megrahi.

I have three different dates when the timer fragment was supposedly found- May 1989, (the Scottish detective who signed the evidence tag) January, 1990 (the Americans), and late January, 1990 (the Germans).
With three different dates in play, when exactly was the shirt (embedded with the timer fragment), found and logged?

As I understand it, the shirt fragment was found in January, 1989. It is labelled PI995 and described as Debris ( charred ), but used to say Cloth ( charred ) The change was not made by the officer signing the evidence label. The date of 13 Jan 1989 was also not written by the officer.

It is in May of 1989 that the shirt fragment is examined closely, and from there the timer fragment - amongst other bits - was removed.


Originally Posted by SnidelyW View Post
Was the fragment of timer found in the shirt ever tested for explosive residue? Has anyone seen a document detailing a residue test done on the timer fragment?
The court was told that no explosives residue testing was conducted on the timer fragment. Apparently it was too small, or the procedure was too expensive.

Any documents regards actual testing are not in the public domain. It is rumoured, however, that Mr Megrahi's defence team have uncovered such evidence.

http://lockerbiecase.blogspot.com/20...as-framed.html

Originally Posted by SnidelyW View Post
Since Tony Gauci was so detailed and certain about the exact items of clothing purchased, the quantity of each, and the method of payment, down to the exact denomination of banknotes used, why was his memory ostensibly foggy in then later recalling he had sold a 'beige' shirt, which later turned out to be grey? Oh, and according to the shirt manufacturer, they told police the shirt was a boys size shirt!
Mr Gauci's recall is very questionable. He is interviewed many times, perhaps 15 or so. Each time something is different, or new, or forgotten.

Al-Jazeera cover some of this in their documentary: http://youtu.be/0oVVmt1W-6U

Originally Posted by SnidelyW View Post
Sooooooooo... could anyone assist in the clarification of these points?

As always, thanks in advance.

I hope that's some help.
__________________
- CTB


" ...in the land of the blind the one-eyed man is not king, for he can never get folks to see things his way."
CTB 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 October 2011, 10:16 PM   #485
SnidelyW
Critical Thinker
 
SnidelyW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 486
Thanks, CTB, for the assistance. Very much appreciated.

I've watched the Al-Jazeera documentary and if former Detective Thomson is correct, wouldn't his assertion that the evidence chain is severely damaged call into question all the evidence used against Megrahi?
One would think that the police service would have to meet a standard for collection and preservation of evidence. For the Crown to then say "well, we have evidence which has been properly collected, documented, and handled, so we can proceed to trial", one would think they have to be satisfied those standards were met.

It appears those standards were not met, looking back now.

There seem to be two more key questions to be answered here- Why were so many procedural 'errors' seemingly made by the Scottish police - whom I am certain are proud, conscientious professionals, and why didn't the Crown ensure the evidence was unassailable before proceeding to trial? After all, Lord Fraser stated that all knew "the eyes of the world" would be on the case.

What happened?
__________________
"A foolish faith in authority is the worst enemy of truth"
(Albert Einstein, 1901)

Last edited by SnidelyW; 11th October 2011 at 10:20 PM. Reason: spelling
SnidelyW 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 October 2011, 05:35 PM   #486
CTB
Thinker
 
CTB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 203
Originally Posted by SnidelyW View Post

What happened?

"Camp Zeist Court is the smallest place on earth that contains the largest number of liars. " - Megrahi

http://news.stv.tv/scotland/273142-i...reaks-silence/
__________________
- CTB


" ...in the land of the blind the one-eyed man is not king, for he can never get folks to see things his way."
CTB 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 24th October 2011, 08:11 PM   #487
Bunntamas
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 310
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...56#post7638956

Rather says it all.

~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 24th October 2011, 08:18 PM   #488
Bunntamas
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 310
Wonder who is driving Megrahi's Ferrari and Range Rover now. Hmmmmm.....Maybe Tony Blair??? or Megrahi's Doctors??? or Gadhaffi's daughter who was killed in the Regan bombing, but graduated medical school. Maybe her father's ghost....
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 25th October 2011, 07:43 AM   #489
Bobby
Scholar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 73
Originally Posted by Bunntamas View Post
Wonder who is driving Megrahi's Ferrari and Range Rover now. Hmmmmm.....Maybe Tony Blair??? or Megrahi's Doctors??? or Gadhaffi's daughter who was killed in the Regan bombing, but graduated medical school. Maybe her father's ghost....
If the recently discovered Hanna/Hana Gaddafi is the same adopted daughter that was claimed to be killed during the 1986 bomb strike, wouldn't it remove one of the motives conjectured for Libyan support of the Lockerbie bombing (Gaddafi did it to avenge the death of his daughter)?

IIRC back in 1986 wasn't there suspicion in the West regarding the existence of an adopted daughter? Seems to me the story has gone from "Hanna does not exist, so the bomb strike did not kill her" to "Hanna does exist and she's still alive today, so the bomb strike did not kill her".
__________________
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true!
Bobby 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 25th October 2011, 04:06 PM   #490
CTB
Thinker
 
CTB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 203
Originally Posted by Bunntamas View Post
Wonder who is driving Megrahi's Ferrari and Range Rover now. Hmmmmm.....Maybe Tony Blair??? or Megrahi's Doctors??? or Gadhaffi's daughter who was killed in the Regan bombing, but graduated medical school. Maybe her father's ghost....

I think you've mistaken some of those that criticise Mr Megrahi's conviction with being Fanboys of Ghaddafi. The Bash the Dead Dictator Thread is somewhere else.

I'm still waiting for you to convince me that you can prove Mr Megrahi had anything to do with the murder of those 270 people.

Perhaps when Mr Megrahi shuffles off this mortal coil, and after you've stopped dancing around, crowing and doing cartwheels of jubilation you could inform me, via this thread, what has convinced you that he's The Man.

Just remember to include the bit where the court judges said, along the lines of, " We know it was you. Here's how you accomplished it."

It's not even a close call. I reckon you've got nothing, just like the judges.

Mr Megrahi's a hate figure for you, but I think it inappropriate to try and derail this thread because a hateful dictator got snuffed by his opposition.
__________________
- CTB


" ...in the land of the blind the one-eyed man is not king, for he can never get folks to see things his way."

Last edited by CTB; 25th October 2011 at 04:08 PM.
CTB 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 October 2011, 07:53 PM   #491
Bunntamas
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 310
Originally Posted by CTB View Post
Mr Megrahi's a hate figure for you, but I think it inappropriate to try and derail this thread because a hateful dictator got snuffed by his opposition.
I've done nothing to derail this thread. I'm quite sure the moderators will let me know if I've made such an offence, and hopefully will do the same with others (though that's doubtful) who choose to make unwarranted and baseless personal attacks.

In the mean time, yes, I will be taking great satisfaction, along with the Libyan people that the murdering dictator is finally gone, and hope that the other muderers of his now fallen regime, including Megrahi, will soon follow in his recent footsteps in death and hell, where they belong.

~B.

Last edited by Bunntamas; 27th October 2011 at 08:01 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 27th October 2011, 08:22 PM   #492
Bobby
Scholar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 73
Originally Posted by Bunntamas View Post
I've done nothing to derail this thread. I'm quite sure the moderators will let me know if I've made such an offence, and hopefully will do the same with others (though that's doubtful) who choose to make unwarranted and baseless personal attacks.

In the mean time, yes, I will be taking great satisfaction, along with the Libyan people that the murdering dictator is finally gone, and hope that the other muderers of his now fallen regime, including Megrahi, will soon follow in his recent footsteps in death and hell, where they belong.

~B.
You've read this thread and still believe Megrahi is a murderer? What piece (or pieces) of evidence lead you to such a conclusion?
__________________
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true!
Bobby 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 October 2011, 06:46 PM   #493
Bunntamas
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 310
Originally Posted by Bobby View Post
You've read this thread and still believe Megrahi is a murderer?
I used to read this thread. I skim it now for giggles, or when I'm bored. For me, it's like going to the zoo and watching monkeys throw feces at each other. I watch until one or two ineveitibly eats it. I stop laughing, my gag reflex kicks in, and I head for the exit.

As for Megrahi being a murderer, yes. I do belive he is. Suggest you read up on his affiliations with the former Libyan regime and the maker of the bomb that blew up PA103.

Originally Posted by Bobby View Post
What piece (or pieces) of evidence lead you to such a conclusion?
LOL. Once again, Googleing / media and forum blather do not define EVIDENCE, such as that which was presented in court and resulted in a guilty verdict. And spare me the Gauci bribe crap. You all know there was much more EVIDENCE against Megrahi, upon which the judges based their GUILTY verdict. And no, I'm not going to engage in further feces hurling here. I've barfed enough after observing the JREF Megrahi forum primates.

~B.

Last edited by Bunntamas; 28th October 2011 at 06:55 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 28th October 2011, 08:15 PM   #494
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 16,329
Wow. Rolfe, I assumed that you were overstating the claim that certain posters in this thread were behaving identically to those in the AK ones. After reading this page I see you weren't. The arguments made are almost identical, you could cut and paste them into the AK threads and no one would even notice.

Guilty because the courts declared it so
Only evidence given by the prosecution in court is acceptable
There is lots of evidence that proves you wrong, but I don'ty have to provide it
Anything else is "Googled" and therefore not worthy of consideration or debate
If you claim otherwise then you are lambasting and attacking me.
__________________

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah
I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)
My Apollo Page.
PhantomWolf 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 October 2011, 01:47 AM   #495
CTB
Thinker
 
CTB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 203
Originally Posted by Bunntamas View Post

As for Megrahi being a murderer, yes. I do belive he is. Suggest you read up on his affiliations with the former Libyan regime and the maker of the bomb that blew up PA103.


~B.

Well, there's something you could help me with. Who made the bomb?
__________________
- CTB


" ...in the land of the blind the one-eyed man is not king, for he can never get folks to see things his way."
CTB 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 October 2011, 05:05 AM   #496
Bobby
Scholar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 73
Originally Posted by CTB View Post
Well, there's something you could help me with. Who made the bomb?
It's a guess though I suspect Bunntamas means the alleged timing device.
__________________
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true!
Bobby 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 October 2011, 05:13 AM   #497
Bobby
Scholar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 73
Originally Posted by Bunntamas View Post
I used to read this thread. I skim it now for giggles, or when I'm bored. For me, it's like going to the zoo and watching monkeys throw feces at each other. I watch until one or two ineveitibly eats it. I stop laughing, my gag reflex kicks in, and I head for the exit.

As for Megrahi being a murderer, yes. I do belive he is. Suggest you read up on his affiliations with the former Libyan regime and the maker of the bomb that blew up PA103.
Perhaps you're not aware of this fallacy.

Originally Posted by Bunntamas View Post
LOL. Once again, Googleing / media and forum blather do not define EVIDENCE, such as that which was presented in court and resulted in a guilty verdict. And spare me the Gauci bribe crap. You all know there was much more EVIDENCE against Megrahi, upon which the judges based their GUILTY verdict. And no, I'm not going to engage in further feces hurling here. I've barfed enough after observing the JREF Megrahi forum primates.

~B.
Does this mean that the only valid opinions are from those that were present during the court case, and, though some may have presented these opinions in media / on the internet, such opinions are to be dismissed? Would your opinion be different if Megrahi's legal team had succeeded in having the judgment overturned on appeal?
__________________
Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true!
Bobby 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 October 2011, 10:23 AM   #498
CTB
Thinker
 
CTB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 203
Originally Posted by Bobby View Post
It's a guess though I suspect Bunntamas means the alleged timing device.

Ah, the ol' MST-13. A fragment of which ended up in shirt that was Made In Malta. Mr Guaci testified to selling a couple of mens shirts to a man resembling Mr Megrahi.

The shirt's manufacturer, in Malta, is on record as saying the shirt was a boys size.

I was kind of hoping that Bunntamas can share some info that we don't know. The actual person who pieced together the alleged device would be a great start.

Monkeys eat their own poo? Well, there you go. I have learned something new.
__________________
- CTB


" ...in the land of the blind the one-eyed man is not king, for he can never get folks to see things his way."
CTB 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 30th October 2011, 12:19 PM   #499
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,971
Originally Posted by Bobby View Post
It's a guess though I suspect Bunntamas means the alleged timing device.

Oh yes. Edwin didn't make the bomb, even if he seems to have produced an inaccurate Arabic translation at the beginning of this month. Some of this stuff is surreal, and Edwin (starting with the "Spanish typewriter" letter of January 1989) is one of the most surreal elements.

Megrahi was acquainted with Edwin. I'm sure lots of people were, and are, for their sins. Megrahi was never known to have had one of the timers in his possession, and was not connected with the sale of the timers to Libya. Indeed, his acquaintance with Bollier post-dates the sale of the timers.

Even if the timer was really part of the bomb, that would hardly implicate Megrahi in the bombing. However, there is a great deal of evidence to suggest the timer in question, the MST-13, was never part of the bomb in 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 online now   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 30th October 2011, 12:34 PM   #500
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,971
Who did make the actual bomb? Is it just coincidence that the device that brought the plane down bore an absolutely uncanny resemblance to the devices seized in Germany that had been made by Marwan Khreesat, Jordanian agent and possibly CIA asset? Who was supposed to be making dud bombs to infiltrate the PFLP-GC, except his bombs turned out to be lethally live?

Cannistraro said in the 1990s that the CIA had all the evidence of how the indicted Libyans had made the bomb - how the parts had been transported from Libya to Malta, and how it had been put together in LAA offices in Malta. None of that was true. They had absolutely no evidence of where the bomb came from or who made it. Megrahi had no expertise in bomb-making. (Security officers who know about these things say that making these devices is an individual thing, and any bomb will betray its maker by how it is made. But everything about the Lockerbie bomb merely resembles Khreesat's modus operandi.)

There was not and is not the slightest shred of evidence that that bomb was ever within a thousand miles of the island of Malta. There was not and is not any evidence that Megrahi did anything at all on the morning of 21st December 1988 other than catch a plane for Tripoli, without going airside, and without even checking in any luggage.

There was not and is not any evidence that Megrahi was anything more than a wheeler-dealer for the Gaddafi regime, arranging for various goods and supplies to come into Libya against the sanctions imposed after the death of Yvonne Fletcher, including aircraft parts to keep the LAA fleet in the air. There was not and is not any evidence that he went to Malta on 20th December 1988 for any other reason than private business, or that he used his coded passport (in a false name) for any sinister reason.

It's easy enough to sneer sceptically at all that, and disbelieve Megrahi's own story on a knee-jerk reflex. But there is absolutely no evidence at all that Megrahi is telling anything other than the simple truth. Everyone seems to assume that he has to have been more than he seemed to be, but that's nothing but an assumption. In 20 years, there has been no actual evidence even of Megrahi having kicked a cat when he was a boy.

"The West exaggerated my name."

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is online now   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 30th October 2011, 12:54 PM   #501
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,971
Originally Posted by Bunntamas View Post
I used to read this thread. I skim it now for giggles, or when I'm bored. For me, it's like going to the zoo and watching monkeys throw feces at each other. I watch until one or two ineveitibly eats it. I stop laughing, my gag reflex kicks in, and I head for the exit.

Sometimes, Bunntamas, you seem to have a very strange sense of humour.

Originally Posted by Bunntamas View Post
As for Megrahi being a murderer, yes. I do belive he is. Suggest you read up on his affiliations with the former Libyan regime and the maker of the bomb that blew up PA103.

Uh, he's Libyan, and not a dissident. Quite what that has to do with anything is a big question. Even if he was more than the evidence indicated he was, just being associated with the Libyan regime doesn't mean he bombed that plane, if there is no evidence connecting him to the bombing. Which there isn't.

The matter of the timer is discussed above. As regards the maker of the actual bomb, there is no evidence he had any connection with Marwan Khreesat.

The really sad thing about all this is that somebody murdered these 270 innocent people. Somebody who has got away with it for nearly 23 years, and who is certainly laughing himself sick every time Megrahi is referred to as "the Lockerbie bomber". And the more people like Bunntamas set their faces against acknowledging this, the harder it becomes to pursue real justice against the real terrorists.

Originally Posted by Bunntamas View Post
LOL. Once again, Googleing / media and forum blather do not define EVIDENCE, such as that which was presented in court and resulted in a guilty verdict. And spare me the Gauci bribe crap. You all know there was much more EVIDENCE against Megrahi, upon which the judges based their GUILTY verdict. And no, I'm not going to engage in further feces hurling here. I've barfed enough after observing the JREF Megrahi forum primates.

The evidence presented in court was nothing but wild speculation.

Yes, Tony Gauci was bribed with $2 million to identify Megrahi as the man who bought these clothes. That is a fact. His brother Paul got 1 million even though he didn't go into the witness box, just for "maintaining the resolve of his brother" - you couldn't make this up. Paul was the one who was really pressurising Tony not to admit he couldn't possibly identify the clothes purchaser after more than ten years. And besides, it was better that Paul should have money of his own, to preserve the dynamics and balance within the family. Nice that the US DoJ is so generous.

Just to recap, Tony originally said the man who bought the clothes was about 50 years old, over 6 feet tall, heavily built/burly, and dark-skinned. Megrahi was 36 at that time, 5 feet 8 inches tall, of average build, and pale-skinned. How on earth did that identification get made? The photographic evidence seems to show conclusively that it was anything but a reliable identification.

This is why I don't think discussing the bribery of the witness is especially constructive. It invites the conclusion that the identification was credible, and only undermined by the unfortunate little wrinkle that the US DoJ was careless enough to pay the guy eye-watering quantities of cash. Nothing could be further from the truth. The identification is a crock of ridiculous nonsense, even if the Gauci brothers had never been given so much as a damp sandwich and their bus fare (which is about what the Scottish court usually stretches to for witnesses).

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is online now   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 30th October 2011, 01:29 PM   #502
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,971
Originally Posted by SnidelyW View Post
I just want to be certain about several things- perhaps you could clear up some confusion. I apologize to all if these details have been covered in previous threads, but IMO, they go to the crux of the case against Megrahi.

I have three different dates when the timer fragment was supposedly found- May 1989, (the Scottish detective who signed the evidence tag) January, 1990 (the Americans), and late January, 1990 (the Germans).
With three different dates in play, when exactly was the shirt (embedded with the timer fragment), found and logged? Was the fragment of timer found in the shirt ever tested for explosive residue? Has anyone seen a document detailing a residue test done on the timer fragment?

The scrap of shirt collar was found right here, on 13th January 1989, by Thomas Gilchrist. The note of the finding was countersigned by Thomas McColm. (Isn't it odd how many of the dodgy investigators in this case are named Thomas or Tom?)



(Yes, I am a sad person, I hiked across country to the grid reference to take that photo. The trees in the background are the extreme western edge of Newcastleton Forest, but the collar was found in the open, not among the trees.)

OK, that's where and when it's said to have been found. In court, Gilchrist behaved as if he'd never seen the production or its label in his life before, and Crawford's book helpfully includes a character assassination of McColm detailing how he hardly ever left his cushy warm desk job to go out in the field, but was extraordinarily cavalier about the chain of custody of the evidence.

The scrap of cloth was examined in Kent by Thomas Hayes, on 12th May 1989, who found all sorts of goodies inside it, including the infamous timer fragment, miraculously the only piece found, surviving from right beside a brisant explosion, and miraculously the one corner fragment with a circuit pattern distinctive enough to be identified.

Except, the documentation of all this strongly suggests it was all added retrospectively to Hayes's notes. Loose leaf notes, contrary to all good laboratory practice. Of course, Hayes used to use a hard-bound lab book, until that helped get him rumbled for having fabricated the evidence that convicted the Maguire Seven in the 1970s. Then he switched to loose-leaf notes. Before he "left" rather suddenly to become a chiropodist, at the time the official report into the miscarriages of justice in the IRA bombing trials was being published.

The fragment was also mentioned on 15th September 1989 by Allen Feraday, the only one of this mob not called Tom. In my opinion this reference is the first one which actually places the timer fragment within the chain of evidence. Unless Williamson (to whom he mentioned it) was also bent, which I think is improbable, because his name was William.

The Germans were told about the existence of the item in January 1990. So according to their records that's when it appeared. That's irrelevant though, other than supporting the assumption that the thing did indeed exist by that time.

Tom Thurman (his first name was James, but he went by Tom which was his middle name) identified the mystery piece of evidence as being part of an MST-13 timer manufactured by MEBO, in June 1990. This is also a fascinating little episode, with circumstances suggesting Thurman already knew what it was before he got his hands on a photo of it, and was able to go straight to the right file.

Hope that helps.

Originally Posted by SnidelyW View Post
Since Tony Gauci was so detailed and certain about the exact items of clothing purchased, the quantity of each, and the method of payment, down to the exact denomination of banknotes used, why was his memory ostensibly foggy in then later recalling he had sold a 'beige' shirt, which later turned out to be grey? Oh, and according to the shirt manufacturer, they told police the shirt was a boys size shirt!

It's very hard to make a lot of sense of Tony's evidence. He was adamant at first that he had not sold any shirts at all to the mystery customer. But the detectives were awfully interested in shirts, and after a while he managed to "remember" he did after all sell the man two. The descriptions don't really match the exact fragments found though, as you note.

It's hard to see how relevant this is. There's no rule that says the bomber had to have bought all the clothes in the suitcase in the same shop. It's possible the cops were just over-enthusiastic in their zeal to tie up all the loose ends in their evidence. It shows how suggestible Tony was though.

Originally Posted by SnidelyW View Post
Sooooooooo... could anyone assist in the clarification of these points?

As always, thanks in advance.

Hope that helps!

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; 30th October 2011 at 01:32 PM.
Rolfe is online now   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 30th October 2011, 04:16 PM   #503
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,971
Originally Posted by PhantomWolf View Post
Wow. Rolfe, I assumed that you were overstating the claim that certain posters in this thread were behaving identically to those in the AK ones. After reading this page I see you weren't. The arguments made are almost identical, you could cut and paste them into the AK threads and no one would even notice.

Guilty because the courts declared it so
Only evidence given by the prosecution in court is acceptable
There is lots of evidence that proves you wrong, but I don'ty have to provide it
Anything else is "Googled" and therefore not worthy of consideration or debate
If you claim otherwise then you are lambasting and attacking me.

This case is even more clear-cut than the Kercher murder fiasco. It's a different set-up - instead of the cops leaping to the wrong conclusion prematurely, they settled on the wrong conclusion quite late after failing to find anything substantial in their earlier inquiries, much like the Barry George case.

It's stunningly simple. The bomb was smuggled into Heathrow airport. The Brit authorities were -scared of the damage such a revelation would do to the British aviation industry, and absolutely refused to face up to the fact that that was what had happened. They announced it hadn't been Heathrow on day 9, well before most of the evidence had come in, and stuck to that in the face of mounting evidence with the tenacity of Nelson seeing no ships.

They tried to blame Frankfurt airport, but the cops there had had the foresight to lose all the relevant records in double-quick time, and just denied it could possibly have happened on their patch. They pointed out that Heathrow was the logical point of ingestion. Stalemate, until a part of the missing records showed up, kept as a souvenir. The partial records that were recovered were difficult to interpret, and neither the Germans nor subsequent analysts managed to make coherent sense of them. However, one of several entries which couldn't be matched to legitimate passengers looked as if it might have come from Malta.

Eureka! The clothes in the bomb suitcase had been found to be manufactured in Malta, so that means the bomb was smuggled on board at Luqa airport, Malta! It was a decent theory, but the problem was they found nothing at all to substantiate it. They investigated Malta till its pips squeaked, and found absolutely no evidence at all of any unaccompanied luggage on the flight in question. In fact, the records were good enough and the inquiry detailed enough that any sane person would have realised there had been no such thing and the entire Malta theory was a red herring.

Any sane investigation would have taken stock, accepted the unpalatable fact that Malta was coming up completely clean, realised that the plot they were hypothesising was actually batsqueak insane anyway, and re-evaluated the remarkably compelling pile of evidence that had accumulated pointing to Heathrow. But this investigation didn't do that. They never even considered that the reason they could find no sign of the bomb on Malta was that it had never been there in the first place.

They wasted a year trailing round after various dodgy Palestinians on Malta, and found nothing. This led them not to consider that maybe these were not the Palestinians they were looking for, and maybe they should look a bit closer to home, but to conclude that the Palestinians who had been making bombs uncannily similar to the Lockerbie device and had apparently been paid to down Pan Am 103 by Iran (see IR655 and the USS Vincennes) weren't responsible for Lockerbie at all.

Reagan had wanted Pan Am 103 blamed on Gaddafi right from the get-go. He went off on one against Libya on day five. The entire investigation has a thread of "sure would be good if we could pin it on that bastard Gaddafi" running through it, with Edwin's surreal Spanish-typewriter letter just one part of it. They only turned away from that when highly suggestive evidence emerged pointing to the Frankfurt cell of the PFLP-GC - suggestive enough that imminent arrests were announced more than once. When eventually they failed to pin it on the Palestinians, possibly because they were by then looking at the wrong Palestinians in the wrong country, they decided to try Libya again.

And they discovered that a guy who worked for the Libyan government (Megrahi) had been catching a different flight at the time the Air Malta flight left for Frankfurt. And he was using a coded passport in a false name. So they decided it must have been him.

That's about it. They never found anything else against Megrahi at all. All he did was catch that plane at just the wrong moment. He didn't have any luggage and he didn't go airside, and no accomplice was ever identified. If he did have anything to do with it, he must have rendered the bomb suitcase invisible, and levitated it on board by the power of his mind.

But the rest of the investigation just turned into an exercise in pinning the crime on this handy scapegoat, including persuading Tony Gauci that the terrorist he really did see was Megrahi, despite no correspondence at all in the description, and threatening/bribing another informer into providing perjured evidence that was later thrown out by the judges but was instrumental in getting the indictments in the first place.

There are conspiracy elements. The timer fragment was in all probability fabricated, not so much to throw suspicion on Libya, but to provide a plausible explanation to support the idea the bomb could have been interlined from Malta - a Khreesat device would have had to have been loaded at Heathrow. Politically, it was a lot more convenient to blame Libya than Syria and Iran, compare and contrast current events on that one. And there's the whole undercurrent of suspicion that the CIA had infiltrated the PFLP-GC and might have been discovered to have been unpardonably or even criminally negligent in allowing a Khreesat/PFLP-GC device to get on a plane. Plus monumental quantities of backside-covering by both Heathrow and Frankfurt airports and their domestic police authorities.

But basically it's a story of good evidence being ignored because it led in an unpalatable direction, and a convenient red herring being pursued instead, and finally one hapless guy who was in the wrong place at the end of that blind alley being fitted up.

And nobody seems to want to talk about it 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; 30th October 2011 at 05:41 PM.
Rolfe is online now   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 30th October 2011, 06:03 PM   #504
CTB
Thinker
 
CTB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 203
For me, the bottom-line of this case is that it is not proved.

I've spent months trying find a way that might remotely connect him. As it turns out, the only 'chat' I've heard believing in the conviction are folks calling Mr Megrahi " A worm " ( copyright Frank Duggan ) and referring to me as " A ****-eating primate " ( Copyright Bunntamas.) This is the best the believers in Mr Megrahi's guilt have got.



There is no connection between Mr Megrahi to any explosive device. ( PM me for a court transcript. I'll send you a pdf of 13Mb)

There is no connection between him, even unknowingly, placing said device on a plane in Malta.

All there is belongs in the imagination of the judges. ( PM me, I'll send you a copy of their judgement. It's worthy of a Lifetime Stundie award of unthink )

IMO, no-one actually knows who blew up 103. Could that be proved otherwise then there is nobody in government, from the last 30 years, that would commit career suicide by saying, " Actually, we do know, but we don't really care."

In popular opinion, the Lockerbie Bomber is Libyan. It doesn't matter if it's Mr Megrahi or not.
The Scottish and British politicians really want to draw a veil over 270 murders. I've got my own opinion about that, but it's for a different thread.


On another note: nice photo of the terrain Rolfe. You're not telling me you hiked out there in January? Looks a bit too green
__________________
- CTB


" ...in the land of the blind the one-eyed man is not king, for he can never get folks to see things his way."

Last edited by CTB; 30th October 2011 at 06:05 PM.
CTB 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 31st October 2011, 02:07 AM   #505
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,971
Not January, no. It's not far from a road though, and there's a farm track most of the way, so it could be done on a nice day in January I imagine. I don't believe there were many nice days in January 1989 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 online now   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 31st October 2011, 02:56 AM   #506
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,971
Originally Posted by CTB View Post
For me, the bottom-line of this case is that it is not proved.

Not proved as in "we don't know who did it", agreed. I've heard a lot of statements that there was insufficient evidence to convict Megrahi and so on, but these way understate the situation. It's entirely misleading to suggest that the case against Megrahi is simply not quite good enough to convict, but he might actually be a mass-murdering bastard anyway.

The bomb was introduced at Heathrow, some time in the afternoon of 21st December, while John Bedford was on his tea break. It might have been smuggled into the building during the previous night. Megrahi spent that night on Malta, and was in Tripoli by the afternoon of the 21st. This is what is normally referred to as an "alibi".

Originally Posted by CTB View Post
I've spent months trying find a way that might remotely connect him. As it turns out, the only 'chat' I've heard believing in the conviction are folks calling Mr Megrahi " A worm " ( copyright Frank Duggan ) and referring to me as " A ****-eating primate " ( Copyright Bunntamas.) This is the best the believers in Mr Megrahi's guilt have got.

Foul-mouthed invective seems to be the resort of those with no factual argument to make. We see it with the Amanda Knox "guilters" as well.

Originally Posted by CTB View Post
There is no connection between Mr Megrahi to any explosive device. ( PM me for a court transcript. I'll send you a pdf of 13Mb)

Correct. My pdf is 14Mb. I have it parked on a server, so I just PM people the url. It's kind of interesting that Bunntamas derides people who have closely studied the court transcript and other primary documentation as "googling" for evidence. The evidence is publicly available, or the vast bulk of it anyway (there are one or two court productions I wouldn't mind facsimiles of). Google is quite a good way of tracking this down.

Originally Posted by CTB View Post
There is no connection between him, even unknowingly, placing said device on a plane in Malta.

All there is belongs in the imagination of the judges. ( PM me, I'll send you a copy of their judgement. It's worthy of a Lifetime Stundie award of unthink )

Megrahi's defence were criminally negligent. I'm told Taylor was paid 3,000 a day. He couldn't even cross-examine Gauci effectively. He seems to have believed it was self-evident that the evidence wasn't there to convict his client, so he didn't have to do any work. (OK, he did destroy Giaka, and that should have been enough. His failing there was probably assuming that the judges realised that was case over, as everyone else watching did.)

The judgement was online as a pdf, but the link was broken last time I checked. Not to worry, I saved it, as did lots of other people I imagine. Unthink is a good way of putting it. (There is apparently a similar document in the Kercher murder trial, the "motivations report" of the Massei court that convicted the two students. I'm told it features wild speculation dressed up as evidence to a quite remarkable degree, but as it's a 400-page document in Italian I'm not likely to read it - even though it has been translated by eager web-sleuths.)

Originally Posted by CTB View Post
IMO, no-one actually knows who blew up 103. Could that be proved otherwise then there is nobody in government, from the last 30 years, that would commit career suicide by saying, " Actually, we do know, but we don't really care."

I'm less interested in who actually did it than how we managed to create such a cluster of an investigation that we jailed an innocent man for ten years, then sent him home to be reviled and spat on for the rest of his days.

It seems pretty likely the bomb was one of those made by Khreesat, or someone working with him to his modus operandi. It seems pretty incontrovertible that the bomb was smuggled into the baggage container at Heathrow, mid-afternoon on 21st December. It's likely it was smuggled into the building for later retrieval in the early hours of that morning, by terrorists who then retreated to monitor the situation, entering later with black-market passes and uniforms to complete the job.

What we don't know is who these people were, though one of them may well have been the terrorist known as Abu Elias. The investigators didn't follow up the Heathrow leads at all, or if they did they didn't make the results of that investigation public. In fact, it's likely that such follow-up would have been futile due to the extraordinarily lax security at Heathrow meaning that several terrorists could have been wandering around in airline overalls all afternoon, completely unremarked. (I have a feeling they may have tried to investigate Heathrow and got nowhere for exactly this reason, and this then became another compelling reason not to consider Heathrow as the point of introduction.)

Do the politicians know who really did it? I don't think so. These people have closed their minds to anything but the official version, because it's just too damn inconvenient to consider anything else. Q.v. my conversation with Ming the Merciless.

Does anyone in the investigation know who really did it? Not on this side of the pond, I don't think. Within the CIA, I wouldn't discount it. Khreesat was a CIA asset, and the CIA was actively inflitrating the PFLP-GC at the time, specifically to try to prevent something like Lockerbie from happening. If all this went spectaculary wrong, so that their double-agent was forced to make live bombs (or made them voluntarily), and the Germans jumped the gun with the Autumn Leaves fiasco, leading to the outcome that a CIA-run operation had actually facilitated the very terrorist operation it was trying to prevent - well, they're not going to tell us about it, are they?

Originally Posted by CTB View Post
In popular opinion, the Lockerbie Bomber is Libyan. It doesn't matter if it's Mr Megrahi or not.

But that's the crucial distinction. We don't know who smuggled the bomb into Heathrow and into the container. Could it have been a Libyan operation, at least partly? There's no evidence it was, and the Pan Am facility at Heathrow being right beside the Iran Air facility is also interesting. But we don't know. There's no denying Gaddafi had the means, motive and opportunity to be involved.

This isn't about "did Gaddafi or some random Libyan blow up Pan Am 103?" Answer to that is, could be, we don't know. This is about "did Abdelbaset al-Megrahi blow up Pan Am 103?" Answer to that is very definitely no. He wasn't there.

Originally Posted by CTB View Post
The Scottish and British politicians really want to draw a veil over 270 murders. I've got my own opinion about that, but it's for a different thread.

Of course they do. If you feel like starting a thread on what that's all about, I'll participate with interest. The bomb was introduced at Heathrow. The court was presented with a ridiculous scenario where it was sent unaccompanied on a three-flight hop from Malta. Even discounting Megrahi, how on earth did we get to that point?

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; 31st October 2011 at 03:28 AM.
Rolfe is online now   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 31st October 2011, 04:24 AM   #507
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,971
Originally Posted by SnidelyW View Post
I've watched the Al-Jazeera documentary and if former Detective Thomson is correct, wouldn't his assertion that the evidence chain is severely damaged call into question all the evidence used against Megrahi?

I think George Thomson over-eggs the cake in some places. For example, he makes a big deal about the handwritten copy of Tony's first statement apparently having one sentence about the clothes purchaser being Libyan squeezed in at the end of a line, and suggests it was added retrospectively. He thinks you can read it to imply that the purchaser was Tunisian. This doesn't really fly, as references to the man being Libyan are also present in parts of the manuscript that are quite clearly not added retrospectively. I think the part that seems to have been squeezed in is still contemporaneous. Far better to examine why Tony thought the man was Libyan. He thought this because the man was an Arabic speaker who did not seem to be Tunisian. To Tony, Arabs came in two flavours, Libyan and Tunisian. If not Tunisian, then Libyan. Actually the man could have been anything from Saudi to Jordanian.

I also think it's counter-productive to appear to suggest that if protocol hasn't been followed to the letter (as in the taking of the timer fragment to America), this means the evidence should be discounted even if there's no way the lapse in protocol could call the item into question. Destroy the timer fragment by showing how it seems to have been added retrospectively to the chain of evidence in the summer of 1989, not because the documentation of its travels is a bit convoluted.

Originally Posted by SnidelyW View Post
One would think that the police service would have to meet a standard for collection and preservation of evidence. For the Crown to then say "well, we have evidence which has been properly collected, documented, and handled, so we can proceed to trial", one would think they have to be satisfied those standards were met.

It appears those standards were not met, looking back now.

I believe the police collecting the evidence were doing their absolute best in very adverse conditions. The countryside was littered with debris, most of it irrelevant but how to separate the wheat from the chaff? There's only about six hours of daylight at that time of year, it's cold, and it rains a lot. Not to mention the wind. Your hands freeze and the paper gets wet and you can't write. They picked up most of that disintegrated plane and its contents, trying to adhere to the rules of evidence all the time. It was impossible. But on the whole they didn't do too badly.

It wasn't the Crown's fault that someone decided the best way to advance the case was to introduce a piece of evidence that would undermine the theory that a Khreesat barometric trigger had been used (which would have had to have been introduced at Heathrow) by faking up a fragment of a digital timer, which could have allowed the device to be flown in on a feeder flight. Or at least I don't think it was. That was all done in England, with the co-operation of the CIA.

It was the Crown's fault that Tony Gauci was leaned on and suggested to and pressurised and shown way too many photos though. It was the Crown's fault that nobody ever took his repeated statements about the purchaser's age into consideration. It was the Crown's fault that they (eventually) co-operated with the DoJ to offer Tony money and inducements in kind while he was a crucial witness.

Originally Posted by SnidelyW View Post
There seem to be two more key questions to be answered here- Why were so many procedural 'errors' seemingly made by the Scottish police - whom I am certain are proud, conscientious professionals, and why didn't the Crown ensure the evidence was unassailable before proceeding to trial? After all, Lord Fraser stated that all knew "the eyes of the world" would be on the case.

What happened?

"I am in blood steeped in so far, that, should I wade no more, returning were as tedious as go o'er."

I think many of the cops were proud conscientious professionals. I also think some of them were not. It may be no coincidence that the man Megrahi hates most in all this is Harry Bell, the detective who pressurised Gauci into identifying him as the clothes purchaser. I also think the evidence, good and bad, was probably about the same standard as in most cases that get to court in Scotland.

The real question is, why did anyone think that evidence was enough to get a conviction? None of the physical evidence connects to Megrahi except the clothes, through Tony's preposterous identification. I think the fiscal believed Tony had really identified Megrahi as the clothes purchaser, which would count for a lot. However, it wouldn't have been enough to convict without Giaka.

The main problem was that the US authorities were telling the prosecution team that they had an eyewitness who could place both Megrahi and Fhimah at Luqa airport with a brown Samsonite suitcase. Added to the rest, that could have done it. (Actually, I think they told the prosecution they had even more than that - Cannistraro certainly told a BBC interviewer they had a lot more than that.) The prosecution was stupid enough, and negligent enough, to believe them. They should have probed Giaka's evidence and his credibility for themselves, but they didn't, they just trusted the Americans that Giaka was the goods.

Because the Americans were saying they had this solid evidence impicating both Libyans, the prosecution put together the best case they could, I think having convinced themselves that somehow, the right men had been charged. When Giaka was exposed in court as a lying fantasist, they were stuck with it. The real scandal is that the judges officially excluded Giaka's evidence, but didn't let that stop them bringing in a guilty verdict.

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; 31st October 2011 at 04:27 AM.
Rolfe is online now   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 November 2011, 07:06 PM   #508
Bunntamas
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 310
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
Megrahi was acquainted with Edwin. I'm sure lots of people were, and are, for their sins. Megrahi was never known to have had one of the timers in his possession, and was not connected with the sale of the timers to Libya. Indeed, his acquaintance with Bollier post-dates the sale of the timers.

Rolfe.
Care to explain why Megrahi, such a "simple man", just looking for a carpenter for a staircase, would be "acquainted" with Edwin / MEBO, who make timers for bombs, and by Edwin's own admissions, said timers were designed, and tested in the Libyan desert for blowing up airliners? Why Megrahi and Fimah rented office space from Edwin? Care to explain all those trips to Switzerland, which ironically happens to be MEBO / Edwin's headquarters, by Megrahi, the "simple man"?

~B.

Last edited by Bunntamas; 1st November 2011 at 07:17 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 2nd November 2011, 04:34 AM   #509
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,971
Wait a minute, are you trying to claim that because Megrahi was acquainted with Ebola, and had business dealings with him, that means he blew up Pan Am 103? (I don't believe Fhimah had business dealings with him, nor that Fhimah was a party to the office space transaction. If you have such evidence, present it, but otherwise, do try to get your facts straight.)

Mebo was and is a Swiss company manufacturing electronics, indeed with a particular interest in military applications. Meister and Bollier must have known hundreds of people. They probably knew scores of Libyans, one way or another, because they did a lot of business with the Libyan government.

Remember, we do not accept that Megrahi bought the clothes from Tony Gauci. If he had, I'd consider that alone sufficient evidence to implicate him in the plot, even though it's doubtful if it would have made the "beyond reasonable doubt" threshhold. But HE DIDN'T BUY THE CLOTHES! The SCCRC found evidence that the clothes were bought on a day Megrahi wasn't even in Malta, never mind the wild inconsistencies with the description of the purchaser.

Remember, we do not accept that the bomb travelled on KM180. We accept the compelling evidence that it was smuggled into the baggage container at Heathrow airport before the feeder flight from Frankfurt arrived.

In that context, Megrahi's acquaintance with Ebola is neither here nor there. Maybe he was gun-running for Gaddafi. So what? Where is the evidence to connect him to the bombing of Pan Am 103? There isn't any.

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; 2nd November 2011 at 04:52 AM. Reason: Premature submission
Rolfe is online now   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 2nd November 2011, 11:55 AM   #510
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,971
I just noticed this bit.

Originally Posted by Bunntamas View Post
by Edwin's own admissions, said timers were designed, and tested in the Libyan desert for blowing up airliners?

[citation needed]

They were timers. The uses claimed for them included blowing up ammunition dumps. The MST-13 wasn't even a particularly suitable choice for attacking Pan Am 103, if that's what was in your mind.

So far as I know, and I have to say that I'm currently well ahead on points as regards knowledge of the facts of this case, neither Bollier nor anyone else ever "admitted" these timers were designed or intended for blowing up airliners. And you only have to look at the intact timer to realise that isn't the case, anyway. It would have had to have been taken out of its casing to come anywhere close to fitting into a radio-cassette player.

And Fhimah was never involved in any rental of office space from MEBO. Bunntamas, stop making stuff up.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is online now   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 November 2011, 02:41 AM   #511
Kaosium
Philosopher
 
Kaosium's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 6,695
Carried over from another thread, just kind of curious about something, nothing untoward intended.

Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
It's off topic, sorry, but it just came up today and it's extremely angering.

The USA agreed to cede the right to try the Lockerbie suspects to Scotland, where the crime took place. (The USA had no real jurisdiction other than US citizens being among the victims.) The USA fully co-operated with the trial to the point where they were de facto prosecuting the case, with the Scots lawyers as their sock puppets.

The defendant was convicted, and sentenced. He is still serving his sentence, according to the law of Scotland, which the USA agreed should deal with this case. Megrahi is still legally Scotland's prisoner. But because they think they see electoral advantage in appearing tough, US politicians think they can completely ignore the legal processes of a friendly state, whose processes they previously accepted. They don't approve of the sentence, so they want to re-try the convicted man.

They can probably do it too, because might makes right, and the USA is the biggest bully on the block. Which is why Knox will never be extradited.

Along with, because the Supreme Court will uphold the Hellmann verdict, of course....

ETA: Apart from the slander charge against Lumumba, which I can't understand and rather hope they reverse.

Rolfe.
So basically what you're saying is for Megrahi to get another trial and be exonerated, it would take the Scottish courts ceding their jurisdiction and thus (statutory not constitutional) double jeopardy protections and for him to be tried in a US court, which would be a nightmare for any federal court or prosecutor as per the quote from the link you posted? So in other words as long as the trial isn't fixed then it would clear his name and embarrass the Scottish Courts? That wouldn't be very nice at all! No wonder some Scots are pissed, especially this guy!

However, did this actually happen? I couldn't find any other reference to it online except this, which also refers to this. The link from "The Firm" appears to be down at the moment. I thought it was kinda funny that if I went to that Herald site and read real fast before the box came up imploring me to log in, it seemed to refer to the Robert Black piece and was of course dated a day later. Other than that is a reference to someone seeing an article in that storied publication of probity and verity, the Daily Mail, that wasn't available online, which apparently isn't unusual as they don't pay much attention to Scotland--or so the story goes. So we have a down website, a reference to the article by Robert Black, and a claim from a claim of a Daily Mail siting?


My question is, would this necessarily be a bad development for Megrahi? I did come up with this report about six weeks old where the two New York Senators did some grandstanding politicking (must I explain why? ) on the issue, and a primary candidate wanted to give him a trial. Isn't that exactly what some people wanted anyway?
__________________
"Honi soit qui mal y pense."

Last edited by Kaosium; 4th November 2011 at 03:50 AM.
Kaosium 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 November 2011, 03:52 AM   #512
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,971
This has just appeared. I agree though, it's not well sourced and may be apocryphal.

The problem is that the US fabricated the case against Megrahi in the first place to present to the Scottish court. There is no doubt they will do that again if they get the chance. They will certainly seek to re-intruduce that lying toad Giaka. The chances of Megrahi getting a fair trial in the USA are nonexistent. This is all about revenge. It would be disconcerting even if they had the right man.

The other problem is that Megrahi is a cancer patient, though how much into remission is not clear. He appears weak and wasted in the video we've seen of him recently. There seems little chance he would survive in a US prison long enough to get to trial.

And that's ignoring all the problems with jurisdiction, and the fact that Megrahi is at present Scotland's prisoner, obliged to fulfil the terms of his release on licence, actually at this moment serving a sentence for the crime the Americans want to re-try him for. And that the USA participated fully in the original prosecution which was done with their full agreement.

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; 4th November 2011 at 04:36 AM.
Rolfe is online now   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 November 2011, 03:54 AM   #513
Kaosium
Philosopher
 
Kaosium's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 6,695
Originally Posted by Bunntamas View Post
LOL. Once again, Googleing / media and forum blather do not define EVIDENCE, such as that which was presented in court and resulted in a guilty verdict. And spare me the Gauci bribe crap. You all know there was much more EVIDENCE against Megrahi, upon which the judges based their GUILTY verdict. And no, I'm not going to engage in further feces hurling here. I've barfed enough after observing the JREF Megrahi forum primates.

~B.
If Megrahi were to be tried in a US court and exonerated for lack of evidence, would you believe he was innocent then?

If as a result of the revolution in Libya it were to come to light that he wasn't involved, or evidence uncovered that it was someone else entirely, would you then accept the fact he was innocent?
__________________
"Honi soit qui mal y pense."
Kaosium 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 November 2011, 04:44 AM   #514
Kaosium
Philosopher
 
Kaosium's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 6,695
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
This has just appeared. I agree though, it's not well sourced and may be apocryphal.
It could be, the current president has been kinda on a roll in that regard, and of course the election year has now officially started. Perhaps this guy would have some credibility on the subject, as well as the Robert Black QC guy, as letting people know they got the wrong guy is especially important. Most Americans (really!) have no idea he's innocent or at least that the case was a joke. Bagging a terrorist would be good publicity, grabbing ahold of this brier branch is fraught with political peril.

Americans never really incorporated the idea of the 'loyal opposition,' if one side is mucking things up, especially after doing well on this issue beforehand, it is not impossible they might get an otherwise surprising earful from the other side. The whole case from the American side, including waving around our State Department, was put together under a president of the same party as this one, thus an argument could be made it's all their fault and they don't know what they're doing on this issue!


Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
The problem is that the US fabricated the case against Megrahi in the first place to present to the Scottish court. There is no doubt they will do that again if they get the chance. They will certainly seek to re-intruduce that lying toad Giaka. The chances of Megrahi getting a fair trial in the USA are nonexistent. This is all about revenge. It would be disconcerting even if they had the right man.
I dunno about that for sure, they didn't seem too anxious to have others of a similar nature tried by American courts, there was an entirely different arrangement made there if you'll recall! ( )

He'd be dealing with Federal courts, right? Not some circuit court in backwoods Deliverance territory, he'd get exposure which is something lacking in the US on the issue. Pan Am 103 people have heard of, but not so much the rest of the story.


Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
The other problem is that Megrahi is a cancer patient, though how much into remission is not clear. He appears weak and wasted in the video we've seen of him recently. There seems little chance he would survive in a US prison long enough to get to trial.

And that's ignoring all the problems with jurisdiction, and the fact that Megrahi is at present Scotland's prisoner, obliged to fulfil the terms of his release on licence, actually at this moment serving a sentence for the crime the Americans want to re-try him for. And that the USA participated fully in the original prosecution which was done with their full agreement.

Rolfe.
Then it might just be something that could blow up in the face of whoever pulls the pin, they might just know that as well. Politicians pontificate, bureaucrats bloviate, it doesn't always mean anything.

You remember that parade of fools in the other case stepping forward to 'back' the prosecution at the end? It didn't matter, did it? They were just saying what they were supposed to, they didn't know anything about it nor were they going to do anything.
__________________
"Honi soit qui mal y pense."
Kaosium 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 November 2011, 05:58 AM   #515
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,971
Originally Posted by Kaosium View Post
If Megrahi were to be tried in a US court and exonerated for lack of evidence, would you believe he was innocent then?

If as a result of the revolution in Libya it were to come to light that he wasn't involved, or evidence uncovered that it was someone else entirely, would you then accept the fact he was innocent?

That's probably an unfair question, Kaosium. She believes Megrahi is guilty and that the evidence supports this, so it's a hypothetical question based on, to her mind, a false premise.

If there were the guarantee of a genuinely fair trial with a presumption of innocence and an honest look at the evidence, that would be very positive. At this stage, though, it's the prospect of dragging a seriously ill man back to jail after he's already served over ten years for a crime he didn't commit that concerns me.

But no, he didn't buy the clothes, and the bomb was never anywhere near Malta, and there's nothing else to connect him to the atrocity even if you do think he was gunrunning for Gaddafi, and that's what needs to be highlighted.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is online now   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 November 2011, 06:11 AM   #516
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,971
Originally Posted by Kaosium View Post
It could be, the current president has been kinda on a roll in that regard, and of course the election year has now officially started. Perhaps this guy would have some credibility on the subject, as well as the Robert Black QC guy, as letting people know they got the wrong guy is especially important. Most Americans (really!) have no idea he's innocent or at least that the case was a joke. Bagging a terrorist would be good publicity, grabbing ahold of this brier branch is fraught with political peril.

Americans never really incorporated the idea of the 'loyal opposition,' if one side is mucking things up, especially after doing well on this issue beforehand, it is not impossible they might get an otherwise surprising earful from the other side. The whole case from the American side, including waving around our State Department, was put together under a president of the same party as this one, thus an argument could be made it's all their fault and they don't know what they're doing on this issue!

Maybe I'm being unduly cynical, but I view the posibility of a fair trial with enormous scepticism. The mood music coming out of the USA isn't about a fair trial for a man who may well have been falsely convicted, it's about taking harsher vengeance against a man we believe the Scots were too soft on.

The concept of presumption of innocence in this case seems impossible to achieve in this context.

Originally Posted by Kaosium View Post
I dunno about that for sure, they didn't seem too anxious to have others of a similar nature tried by American courts, there was an entirely different arrangement made there if you'll recall! ( )

Well that's the view of several commentators on the Black blog. America wants revenge, and the probability is that they're going to send a team in to find the guy at home on his deathbed, where he is legally obliged to be according to the terms of his release from prison in Scotland, and just kill him.

Originally Posted by Kaosium View Post
He'd be dealing with Federal courts, right? Not some circuit court in backwoods Deliverance territory, he'd get exposure which is something lacking in the US on the issue. Pan Am 103 people have heard of, but not so much the rest of the story.

Well, he's got plenty material to mount a defence, that's for sure. I just don't see a US court giving him a fair hearing. And this is a tired man, old before his time, who has already been locked up for ten years, has seen his country disintegrate around him, and is dying of cancer.

Originally Posted by Kaosium View Post
Then it might just be something that could blow up in the face of whoever pulls the pin, they might just know that as well. Politicians pontificate, bureaucrats bloviate, it doesn't always mean anything.

You remember that parade of fools in the other case stepping forward to 'back' the prosecution at the end? It didn't matter, did it? They were just saying what they were supposed to, they didn't know anything about it nor were they going to do anything.

I hope it's just talk. But there is an extraordinary political will around in the USA, Scotland and the UK as a whole, to load all the blame for Lockerbie on Megrahi and handwave away all exculpatory evidence, and all the evidence pointing to the bastards who actually did it. It's hard to battle against that sort of power.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is online now   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 November 2011, 01:38 PM   #517
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,971
Kaosium, this discussion started on the Amanda Knox thread, where Americans were insisting that Knox would never be extradited back to Italy. You are among those who do not believe Knox should be extradited, even if the Italian courts turned against her and requested it.

Megrahi isn't a pretty girl, but that shouldn't deprive him of all sympathy. He was accused out of a clear blue sky of a crime he knew nothing about. On the basis of the accusation he lost his job and was kept under house arrest for eight years. During that time his country was severely damaged by sanctions directly designed to force his extradition. After eight years, he voluntarily surrendered to trial in order to have these sanctions which were killing his countrymen lifted.

He expected a fair trial, although some people warned him he wouldn't get it. "Some people" were right. He was convicted on evidence that shouldn't have been sufficient to support the issuing of a parking ticket. His first appeal was brought on the wrong grounds by his incompetent advocate. He was transported to a foreign country he had never visited, and a foreign culture, and imprisoned. After nearly ten years in jail, with his second appeal taking longer to get to court than Jarndyce v Jarndyce, he was diagnosed with terminal cancer.

In order to be allowed to return home under the compassionate release provisions, he was pressurised to withdraw his appeal, which he did, probably believing he wouldn't live to see it completed anyway. He was able to return home, although being reviled internationally as a mass murderer seemed to be the price. He was treated for the cancer and responded better than expected.

Then his country fell apart around his ears, because NATO supported a bunch of thugs who wanted the upper hand over the previous bunch of thugs. He lost the medical treatment he was relying on, and his home was looted. He probably doesn't have much longer to live, because you can't defy the odds on that cancer indefinitely.

Greenock jail isn't Butlins, but it's not that bad. My cousin's husband is a chaplain there. Megrahi got on well with the other prisoners, and nobody seemed to believe he was guilty of terrorism, not even the prison officers. What are US jails like? You tell me.

You don't think Knox should be extradited to Italy, and I agree with you. But Knox is young, and not terminally ill, and has her whole life in front of her. And Capanne is said to be reasonably pleasant. Megrahi is coming up for 60, with not much longer left to live. He's frail and ill. He's been jailed for 10 years already. Do you really think that dragging him off to a US jail is a reasonable course of action, or a compassionate one?

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; 4th November 2011 at 01:39 PM.
Rolfe is online now   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 November 2011, 05:02 PM   #518
CTB
Thinker
 
CTB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 203
Politicians, eh? I don't trust 'em as they continually prove themselves to be willfully clueless about anything the rest of us think is important. In my experience this is often different to the actual important 'stuff' of any given day.


The thing I do not understand about trying to extradite Mr Megrahi is this:

He has been found guilty of the Lockerbie bombing. In my opinion wrongly so. He was released, but he's still the man convicted. If you were to ask the Scottish government about this they will tell you that they have no doubt about his guilt ( at the same time as telling you that they could not possibly comment. Politicians, eh? )

Now, just how can anyone be found guilty again? It's not like the USA are chasing him on any kind of double jeopardy rule. He was put in the gaol. That is a fact. The Scots let him go home to die a slow death. The only thing that seems to wind folk up is that his death is too slow and lingering/not slow enough and too cozy for their enjoyment.

I think there are certain people in the USA govt who have found a nice cash cow to milk. Mr Megrahi's death will not bring closure. Perhaps the USA want to chase down Libyan villains and Mr Megrahi will spill the beans? Well, Mr Koussa's in Qatar, try asking him.

I chatted recently with a colleague who has always assumed that Mr Megrahi was just a patsy. At no point has he considered that Libya were never involved in the first place. It did not compute.

We could chat to the old Libyan regime lackeys till the cows come home. Does anyone honestly think that someone's going to say, "Yup, I did it." ? After all The Crown actually called, as a witness, a known terrorist, with form and all the right connections. Funnily enough Abu Talb said, " Wasn't me."

The USA got their result and torture the families decades later with notions of getting to the truth by scouring Libya for scoundrels. IMO, the scoundrels are elsewhere. As they have always been.

The JFM petition is all the more important for getting to the root of where it all went wrong for the puny world of Scottish justice and accountability thereof. A blind faith in US foreign policy could be a hint.

I don't think the USA are interested in rendering Mr Megrahi because it would force a sizable stink of people to actually look again. Ineffectual Senators ripping-off family members for lobbying cash? That sounds much more believable.
__________________
- CTB


" ...in the land of the blind the one-eyed man is not king, for he can never get folks to see things his way."

Last edited by CTB; 4th November 2011 at 05:10 PM.
CTB 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 November 2011, 06:09 PM   #519
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,971
Originally Posted by CTB View Post
Politicians, eh? I don't trust 'em as they continually prove themselves to be willfully clueless about anything the rest of us think is important. In my experience this is often different to the actual important 'stuff' of any given day.

The trouble is, they are important. They have a lot of power, even someone who used to be a bus conductor who could barely find the right change, but schmoozed his way up the T&GWU. Or someone who never did a day's work outside being a party "researcher", in his life.

Originally Posted by CTB View Post
The thing I do not understand about trying to extradite Mr Megrahi is this:

He has been found guilty of the Lockerbie bombing. In my opinion wrongly so. He was released, but he's still the man convicted. If you were to ask the Scottish government about this they will tell you that they have no doubt about his guilt ( at the same time as telling you that they could not possibly comment. Politicians, eh? )

Now, just how can anyone be found guilty again? It's not like the USA are chasing him on any kind of double jeopardy rule. He was put in the gaol. That is a fact. The Scots let him go home to die a slow death. The only thing that seems to wind folk up is that his death is too slow and lingering/not slow enough and too cozy for their enjoyment.

And there you have it. The reason they want to try him again isn't anything to do with having doubts about his guilt, re-opening the appeal or anything like that. They have no intention of running a fair trial with proper rules of evidence and a presumption of innocence. All they want to do is make a dying man's last months even more hellish than they're set to be anyway.

Somehow, the proposal that the Americans just snatch Megrahi and jail him again, or kill him, on the basis of the guilty verdict they already got, doesn't fly. I'm not quite sure why not, really. But it doesn't. They seem to see another trial as a way of imposing a harsher penalty than the Scottish courts did. Because they think Scotland was soft on a mass murderer. So they reason, try him again, get a brand new guilty verdict, and we can be as vicious as we like. We can kill him, we can put him in solitary, we can put him on death row, we can put him in the most appalling hell-hole of a prison we can find, we can let him die uncared-for in a cold cell, because that's what we want to do.

Sometimes Americans make me want to vomit.

Originally Posted by CTB View Post
I think there are certain people in the USA govt who have found a nice cash cow to milk. Mr Megrahi's death will not bring closure. Perhaps the USA want to chase down Libyan villains and Mr Megrahi will spill the beans? Well, Mr Koussa's in Qatar, try asking him.

Oh, it's quite clear that's where that slimeball Duggan is coming from. He got his knees under the table there and no mistake. I have no idea how much these very rich people (all the families are multimillionaires off the back of this) have paid him and are paying him to be their spokesman, but I imagine it's a lot.

And yet, for all he's being paid, he is unbelievably ignorant about the facts of the case. In that interview with Gorgeous George, EVERY SINGLE POINT HE MAKES IS WRONG. That takes skill. Maybe he does know better, but just says whatever he thinks will play best and assumes nobody will be crass enough to challenge the man speaking for "the families". I suppose if you want the cash cow to keep milking, you have to keep the families worried and distressed, and misinformation and lies probably do that quite well.

Originally Posted by CTB View Post
I chatted recently with a colleague who has always assumed that Mr Megrahi was just a patsy. At no point has he considered that Libya were never involved in the first place. It did not compute.

Many people think Gaddafi must have known about the plot, because Middle Eastern terrorism is quite a small world. And he probably supplied the Semtex. But I think that's just speculation. There's no evidence Libya had any more to do with it than it had to do with the Warrington IRA bomb.

Originally Posted by CTB View Post
We could chat to the old Libyan regime lackeys till the cows come home. Does anyone honestly think that someone's going to say, "Yup, I did it." ? After all The Crown actually called, as a witness, a known terrorist, with form and all the right connections. Funnily enough Abu Talb said, " Wasn't me."

Yeah, well, he would say that, wouldn't he. He had a record of terror and murder as long as your arm, all read out in court, but they believed him, and even said he didn't have the means or opportunity to have done it. While Megrahi, who didn't have such a record and had far less means or opportunity, wasn't believed. (I think it was a spoiler, actually - bring him in as a prosecution witness to say, wasn't me, and you spike the defence guns. Same as with Bedford and Maier and Borg all being called for the prosecution, when they should have been defence witnesses.)

As for the Libyans saying, yup I did it, no chance. What the west actually wants is easier than that though. They just want someone to say, I know it was a Libyan operation and Gaddafi was behind it. Oh yes, and that Megrahi really did do it. I don't think they're that interested in finding these hypothetical others, but they'd sure like some reinforcement of the case against Megrahi to shut up all these people who've noticed that the Emperor is walking around in his birthday suit. That mistranslation of what he said to Reuters was part of that.

Originally Posted by CTB View Post
The USA got their result and torture the families decades later with notions of getting to the truth by scouring Libya for scoundrels. IMO, the scoundrels are elsewhere. As they have always been.

It's all about backside-covering, and has been since about week 2. Why, might be an interesting question.

Originally Posted by CTB View Post
The JFM petition is all the more important for getting to the root of where it all went wrong for the puny world of Scottish justice and accountability thereof. A blind faith in US foreign policy could be a hint.

Well, I hope. The Scottish government, whom I strongly support in pretty much every other area, is behaving like a bunch of complete tossers on this. And I type that with my blue wrist-band on, too.

Originally Posted by CTB View Post
I don't think the USA are interested in rendering Mr Megrahi because it would force a sizable stink of people to actually look again. Ineffectual Senators ripping-off family members for lobbying cash? That sounds much more believable.

Probably. I hope so. But some of the people sounding off on this are so profoundly ignorant and so profoundly self-satisfied that I fear what they might actually do.

If only Alex and Kenny would realise that quashing that preposterous Zeist verdict is the way to credibility and semi-heroism for them. They'd be vindicated at a stroke. I can't understand why they don't see 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; 4th November 2011 at 06:11 PM.
Rolfe is online now   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 November 2011, 10:13 AM   #520
Kaosium
Philosopher
 
Kaosium's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 6,695
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
Kaosium, this discussion started on the Amanda Knox thread, where Americans were insisting that Knox would never be extradited back to Italy. You are among those who do not believe Knox should be extradited, even if the Italian courts turned against her and requested it.
Not a 'should' but a 'won't' as in ironclad, guaranteed. For the reasons stated there, it simply can't happen. Neither could it happen to Raffaele (extradition at least) were he to come here, which is not entirely impossible. Incidentally as Bruce Fisher posted this isn't just google-fu, there's people that don't post here that know, I'm just doing that part for fun and for the entertainment and information of others interested.

As for this one there's other factors making speculation far less clear-cut, as the 'different sovereigns' one is an exception, however as you noted it's kinda murky there too, so I wouldn't think so either, but that is complicated in more than one regard. He's Scotland's prisoner and on his deathbed, so how does he end up here? I don't even understand the argument being made. Blather from politicians is just that, non sequitur.

Frankly I've seen no reliable indications that it's even a remote possibility, merely dubious speculation. I will say that reading that Robert Black site and about Jim Swire when I was poking around, that it's almost like they want Americans to dislike them and Megrahi. I'm guessing this is a winning political strategy over there? Just blame everything on Americans and that brings sympathies in Scotland where it actually matters?


Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
Megrahi isn't a pretty girl, but that shouldn't deprive him of all sympathy. He was accused out of a clear blue sky of a crime he knew nothing about. On the basis of the accusation he lost his job and was kept under house arrest for eight years. During that time his country was severely damaged by sanctions directly designed to force his extradition. After eight years, he voluntarily surrendered to trial in order to have these sanctions which were killing his countrymen lifted.
You misunderstand me, I don't lack empathy for Megrahi, as a matter of fact that pic of him on his deathbed reminds me of my father who died of 'Multiple Myeloma' which ate his skull from the inside out. Something like that, they gave me a shiny pamphlet on it with high-quality paper, I didn't read it. There was (eventually) something about 17 tumors eating away his brain too.

At any rate he looked something like that, which means I also understand how the estimates can be off as well, as that happened too. First the good way, then the other way when the 17 tumors mysteriously appeared six months after being given a 'clean bill of health.' At first he lived longer than expected, then he was given 1-2 years and died within six months and it was a mercy when he did.

Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
He expected a fair trial, although some people warned him he wouldn't get it. "Some people" were right. He was convicted on evidence that shouldn't have been sufficient to support the issuing of a parking ticket. His first appeal was brought on the wrong grounds by his incompetent advocate. He was transported to a foreign country he had never visited, and a foreign culture, and imprisoned. After nearly ten years in jail, with his second appeal taking longer to get to court than Jarndyce v Jarndyce, he was diagnosed with terminal cancer.
What is the best 'evidence' against him anyway? Everything I've come across is what I term 'negative evidence'--it comes across more as evidence of an incompetent or corrupt prosecution. I do it that way to avoid the tendency some have of adding up 'possibilities' or 'half-clues' until they add up to 'guilt' because that's silly in my view. The guy they thought was his 'partner' was actually in Sweden. That's a huge negative. The whole tenuous string from the clothes in Malta is ridiculous and frankly even if he did buy the clothes not all that indicative of being a sinister mastermind anyway.

Frankly from my (highly limited) reading I don't think Libya was even involved, other than perhaps peripherally. I'm sure this piece must be well-known in the debate? Strange how that works out, I know something (peripheral) about that. I've got a theory the truth never got out on that one, and not for the reasons some would assume, and at any rate I know all sides of that are lying or mistaken about some things. Weird.


Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
In order to be allowed to return home under the compassionate release provisions, he was pressurised to withdraw his appeal, which he did, probably believing he wouldn't live to see it completed anyway. He was able to return home, although being reviled internationally as a mass murderer seemed to be the price. He was treated for the cancer and responded better than expected.

Then his country fell apart around his ears, because NATO supported a bunch of thugs who wanted the upper hand over the previous bunch of thugs. He lost the medical treatment he was relying on, and his home was looted. He probably doesn't have much longer to live, because you can't defy the odds on that cancer indefinitely.

Greenock jail isn't Butlins, but it's not that bad. My cousin's husband is a chaplain there. Megrahi got on well with the other prisoners, and nobody seemed to believe he was guilty of terrorism, not even the prison officers. What are US jails like? You tell me.

You don't think Knox should be extradited to Italy, and I agree with you. But Knox is young, and not terminally ill, and has her whole life in front of her. And Capanne is said to be reasonably pleasant. Megrahi is coming up for 60, with not much longer left to live. He's frail and ill. He's been jailed for 10 years already. Do you really think that dragging him off to a US jail is a reasonable course of action, or a compassionate one?

Rolfe.
The point I was trying to make was that I thought the information suggesting the possibility highly speculative, and frankly comes across as weird. I don't know where people are getting the idea that Megrahi is high up on some enemies list, thus couldn't get a fair trial even if it was possible to try him again, or that anyone would really want to. This isn't a political winner for anyone, and might open up scabs they'd rather stayed closed, and were it to come to light it seems to me it's been so long the ones who would most want to keep things hidden aren't in position to do anything about it. I made a mistake when assuming when this case was put together, apparently it happened under Bush the Elder, those guys are long gone and haven't exactly been flavor of the month in quite some time on either side for various reasons, and I'm not just talking about the politicians who might have been involved behind the scenes.

Actually all things considered it might just get him his medicine and clear his name before he dies. That's not entirely impossible. What does seem less possible is that it could happen, that part hasn't yet been explained. The black-bag boys is possible, I just kinda doubt it, sometimes the guys at the top know things they don't say, and Obama and the State Dept guy seemed to be talking between the lines. Ignore what they had to say, ('we're not soft on terrorism!') filter it out, and then read the rest. With this guy, read what it says under 'political style' and note I didn't write it, a supporter might have!

Of course, I don't know anything about this one other than she's kinda hot, so I ought to believe everything she says--thus forget the rest of this post!
__________________
"Honi soit qui mal y pense."

Last edited by Kaosium; 5th November 2011 at 10:16 AM.
Kaosium 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 03:15 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.