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

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


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 , Lockerbie bombing , Muammar al-Gaddafi , Mustafa Abdul-Jalil

Reply
Old 24th April 2011, 02:57 PM   #121
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,984
Originally Posted by Ambrosia View Post
I think that if Megrahi did have anything to do with it he was at best a behind the scenes facilitator type, if Libya was involved at all.

That's what one of the other defectors claimed if I remember rightly. That Megrahi hadn't actually done what he was convicted of doing, that is facilitated getting a bomb on board KM180 tagged for PA103, but somehow he had a minor role behind the scenes.

Well, if that happened to be true, it still leaves the Zeist trial the biggest crock of nonsense since the trial of James of the Glen. Which is what we've actually been discussing. But why should it be true? What are the odds that the investigators just happened on some guy to frame, who happened to be involved in another capacity they knew nothing about and never found out about?

I bear in mind that Megrahi may have relatives who are bad people,and he may have worked with some bad people, and his nationality and job may put him under suspicion of being a bad person himself - but there has never been any evidence at all of his involvement in any other terrorist attack, or in Lockerbie by any other means except the allegations that were discredited at Zeist.

All sorts of things might be true. I just have a preference for some evidence showing they're more than pure imagination though.

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; 24th April 2011 at 02:58 PM.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th April 2011, 03:44 PM   #122
Ambrosia
Good of the Fods
 
Ambrosia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,331
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
What are the odds that the investigators just happened on some guy to frame, who happened to be involved in another capacity they knew nothing about and never found out about?
Pretty long I'd guess. I'm not sure whether thats a good question to ask though.

I like to see evidence to support my beliefs as well. I particularly want there to be solid and compelling evidence to convict a person for mass murder.

Here's a good question to ask(imo).

Before entertaining the idea that Megrahi was involved at all with Lockerbie as some kind of backroom staff. Shouldn't there be clear and compelling evidence that Libya was involved? At all.

Where is the evidence that Libya knew about, authorised or carried out the bombing of PA103? I've yet to see any.

The only thing to suggest Libya might be involved is the multi-billion in payments they handed out much later, along with the statement that 'took responsibility for the actions of their agents' or something similarly weasely worded. Only they never admit that they did it, and junior Gadaffi claims later in a BBC interview that they lied about that to get the sanctions lifted.

Libya is a 'terrorist state' supplying all kinds of terror groups all kinds of materiel and funds over the years. There's still precious little of anything that connects them to this particular bombing, much less an employee of said state connected to the bombing.
Ambrosia is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd June 2011, 05:37 PM   #123
SnidelyW
Critical Thinker
 
SnidelyW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 486
There is a theory out there which has Iran sponsoring 'Abu Nidal and His Experienced Aviation Destruction Group' to avenge the mistaken destruction by the USS Vincennes (CG-49) of Iran Air Flight 655 over the Persian Gulf.

On 3 July 1988, the Vincennes, under the command of Captain Will Rogers III, fired two radar-guided missiles and shot down the Iran Air Airbus A300 airliner over the Strait of Hormuz, killing all 290 civilian passengers on board, including 38 non-Iranians and 66 children.

According to Captain Rogers, there had earlier been an attack on the Vincennes by Iranian motor boats. Crucially, the Vincennes then misidentified the Iranian Airbus as an attacking Iranian F-14 Tomcat fighter. A radio warning had been sent to the aircraft on both military and civilian wavelengths.

Regardless, the theory goes that Iran contracted the job out to the only group with known aircraft destruction experience, who hired a bomb maker named Khreesat, who made up several devices. Conjecture has them made in Syria, tranported to Germany, where they were all subsequently found - less one. The missing device was the one suspected of tearing Pan Am 103 out of the sky.

Megrahi may have been the most timely Libyan fall guy around at the time. Libya would have been a great choice given they had zero international credibility. Denial by the Libyans would have been paramount to guilt, given their blemished international reputation. All in all, the perfect dupe.

However, things didn't go quite the way they had been planned. A minor course alteration by the pilots of PA103 took them over land above Lockerbie, when they should have been over the open ocean. Boom. All of a sudden, it's raining evidence. Damning evidence for the perpetrators, over the farm fields near Lockerbie, and into the town itself.

Fast forward to today, when all of a sudden the Ghaddafi regime is crumbling, and any state secrets are up for grabs to the higest bidder. Moussa Koussa? Was he offered a home in the U.S.A.? Nope. the UK flew him to his new home in the U.K. on a private jet.

Whatever the Libyans knew or were complicit in (and it may have been, as you say a quid pro quo agreement for lifting sanctions and infusing the Libyan oil industry with new technology), it risks being leaked now that the intelligence doors are opening as the Libyan government cracks wide open.
__________________
"A foolish faith in authority is the worst enemy of truth"
(Albert Einstein, 1901)

Last edited by SnidelyW; 3rd June 2011 at 05:39 PM.
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 3rd June 2011, 06:23 PM   #124
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,984
Of course, this has been discussed in a lot more detail, in the various threads in the CT forum. (Somehow, all potential miscarriages of justice are regarded as CTs in this forum.)

There's one inaccuracy in your post though. There was no possibility that flight 103 would have been "over open ocean" when that bomb went off, no matter if it had sprinted off the blocks and taken off ten minutes earlier (the earliest possible take-off time), or had taken the Great Circle route over Ireland.

Nobody in their right mind, using a digital countdown timer, would have set it for only 45 minutes (tops) into a seven-and-a-half hour transatlantic flight, not with hours of open Atlantic ahead. Never mind the evidence raining down on land, if the plane had missed its slot (as it very nearly did, twice), the bomb would have exploded harmlessly on the tarmac, saving 270 lives and delivering all the evidence in one handy pile.

The bombs Khreesat was making, of course, were designed to go off about 30 to 45 minutes after take-off, no matter when that happened, or how delayed the plane was. PA103 fell out of the sky exactly 38 minutes after lifting off.

Except - a tiny fragment of PCB was found among the wreckage, with enough detail preserved to allow it to be identified as a part of a digital countdown timer supplied exclusively to Libya. What was that doing there? But, that piece of evidence had so many anomalies in provenance that any normal trial would have disallowed it - oh yes, and the forensics officer who dealt with it was the same man who was "let go" under a cloud after he was found to have fabricated the evidence that got the Maguire Seven falsely convicted.

And after that, the discussion really needs to head for the CT forum.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd June 2011, 06:39 PM   #125
Alt+F4
diabolical globalist
 
Alt+F4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 9,997
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
Somehow, all potential miscarriages of justice are regarded as CTs in this forum.
Not at all.
__________________
"My folks touched a lot of kids." - Jerry Sandusky
Alt+F4 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 June 2011, 07:14 AM   #126
SnidelyW
Critical Thinker
 
SnidelyW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 486
Yes, Rolfe, I fully acknowledge the 'inaccuracy' regarding the open ocean. I constructed that sentence in a deliberate way, because it is my belief, based on the available information, that the actual timer that fragmented PA103 was a 'barometric' timer, and not the countdown type presented as evidence against Megrahi at trial.

Regarding Megrahi, the fall of the Libyan government Qaddafi regime, and the hope Megrahi will begin singing like a canary - I don't think so. The reason is that Megrahi has already been portrayed as a walking dead man, certified by physicians as a person with a terminal illness. His 'sudden' death would surprise no one, given he's already living on borrowed time- according to the physicians who contributed to his release from a Scottish prison.

Given the above, Megrahi may be smart enough to go into hiding and never utter a peep, reasoning being that there may be people with a vested interest in ensuring additional details regarding PA103 never come to the attention of the media.

These are very troubling times for the citizens of Libya. I hope the information Libya has regarding any complicity in the destruction of PA103 is preserved.
__________________
"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 12th June 2011, 07:30 AM   #127
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,984
Megrahi is obliged, as a condition of his release on licence, to hold himself in constant readiness to be contacted by the East Renfrewshire social services. He is also forbidden from moving house.

Apparently he has some sort of internet service in his house which enables the social workers to contact him whenever they feel like it - Skype or something like that. And as of the last time the social workers said anything in public about that, which I think was last week, he was still in contact.

Given the instability, it is difficult to see where he could go. He surely also needs medical support. Also, remaining in good standing as a prisoner on licence of the Scottish justice system may be very important. If he broke his conditions, and moved house or went out of contact, he could be vulnerable to the US stepping in and declaring him to be their prisoner.

This is a horrendous position to be in, for someone who only picked up his coded passport when he went to Malta on personal business because it was the first one that came to hand that day. And I have to say that from a position of thinking he must have been on some sort of covert mission for Gadaffi that day, even though the evidence says it wasn't anything to do with the Lockerbie bomb, I've become progressively more inclined to believe his own story, and that he was merely a wheeler-dealer for the Gadaffi regime who was in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2012, 05:42 AM   #128
Duffy Moon
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 2,571
Abdelbaset al-Megrahi dies.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-18137896
Duffy Moon 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 20th May 2012, 06:53 AM   #129
The Central Scrutinizer
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Central Scrutinizer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 52,892
Now he's dead, forever guilty of mass murder.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...84J05H20120520
__________________
If I see somebody with a gun on a plane? I'll kill him.

Lupus is Lupus tor central scrutineezer
The Central Scrutinizer 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 20th May 2012, 07:15 AM   #130
Matthew Best
Philosopher
 
Matthew Best's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Leicester Square, London
Posts: 5,943
Lockerbie victim's father: "This is a sad day"

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-18138322
Matthew Best is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2012, 07:19 AM   #131
commandlinegamer
Philosopher
 
commandlinegamer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Mazes of Menace
Posts: 8,580
Forever? I wouldn't be so sure.
__________________
He bade me take any rug in the house.
commandlinegamer 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 20th May 2012, 08:49 AM   #132
Damien Evans
Up The Irons
Tagger
 
Damien Evans's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 33,780
Now we'll probably never know who really did it.
__________________
i loves the little birdies they goes tweet tweet tweet hee hee i loves them they sings to each other tweet twet tweet hee hee i loves them they is so cute i love yje little birdies little birdies in the room when birfies sings ther is no gloom i lobes the little birdies they goess tweet tweet tweet hee hee hee i loves them they sings me to sleep sing me to slrrp now little birdies - The wisdom of Shemp.
Damien Evans 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 20th May 2012, 08:58 AM   #133
The Central Scrutinizer
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Central Scrutinizer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 52,892
Originally Posted by Damien Evans View Post
Now we'll probably never know who really did it.
I think it was Oswald.
__________________
If I see somebody with a gun on a plane? I'll kill him.

Lupus is Lupus tor central scrutineezer
The Central Scrutinizer 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 20th May 2012, 09:53 AM   #134
AlBell
Philosopher
 
AlBell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,360
Re thread title: good news is at least both are now deceased.
AlBell 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 20th May 2012, 10:14 AM   #135
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,984
I just heard. It's very sad that someone has died still legally guilty of something he obviously had nothing to do with, but at least he had some time with his family.

This changes the legal situation somewhat in that it is now open to others to apply to mount a new appeal against the conviction. It is possible this might happen. There is a lot of disquiet in Scotland about the whole affair, as it is so obvious it was a stitch-up of the first order.

I suspect the fact is that we were fated never to know exactly who did it or exactly how it was done when the investigators decided in early 1989 to ignore all the evidence of security breaches at Heathrow and work on the assumption the bomb came in on the feeder flight from Frankfurt. That's a lot of basic detecting that simply didn't get done in those crucial early months.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2012, 11:33 AM   #136
tomwaits
Master Poster
 
tomwaits's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 2,288
I have not taken the BAR exam yet, but I do have some experience in law, both academic and hands-on. And I am absolutely astonished at the attitude of "The court said he was guilty, therefore he must have been guilty! Case closed!" I have read countless examples of judges and juries totally misreading the evidence, using faulty logic, and displaying some severe prejudices poorly disguised as "justice." As an example, it's well known how women and non-whites weren't given fair trials during most of the USA's existence (some say they still aren't, but that's a different topic). For people to just dismiss real evidence of a wrongful prosecution as a "conspiracy theory" shows astonishing ignorance at how easily justice can go awry. We should always be vigilant in making sure that cases are decided correctly based on the evidence, especially when the consequences are imprisonment or (Zeus forbid!) the death penalty. Isn't that the whole point of having an open trial?
tomwaits 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 20th May 2012, 02:50 PM   #137
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,984
You may be interested to read the full judgement of the count, available here. http://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/library...rbie/index.asp The pdf link doesn't seem to work, but the rtf version is fine. It really is the most appalling example of circular reasoning ("petitio principii") known to mankind. Not only is the burden of proof thrown squarely on the shoulders of the defence, the determination to bring in a conviction in the teeth of the evidence that Megrahi was over a thousand miles away when the bomb was smuggled into the baggage container is palpable.

Here's a back-to-basics overview for those unfamiliar with the facts of the case.
http://www.scottishreview.net/MoragKerr256.shtml

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2012, 05:34 AM   #138
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,984
Originally Posted by Ambrosia View Post
Before entertaining the idea that Megrahi was involved at all with Lockerbie as some kind of backroom staff. Shouldn't there be clear and compelling evidence that Libya was involved? At all.

Where is the evidence that Libya knew about, authorised or carried out the bombing of PA103? I've yet to see any.

Although that post goes back a bit, it's a very relevant question now. There was pretty much nothing to suggest Libyan involvement in the crime until the summer of 1990, a year and a half after the disaster. That's when Thurman matched PT/35b to the MST-13 timers that were specially manufactured for Libya by MEBO.

Given that two years had passed between the supply of the timers and Lockerbie, and that examples had been found elsewhere in Africa, and that Gaddafi was known as "the quartermaster to the world's terrorists" due to his supplying of Semtex and other munitions, it wasn't exactly a slam-dunk conclusion from this that Libya was involved. However there had been a thread running through the investigation from the start suggesting that the US government would sure like it to have been Libya, and they had completely run the investigation into the sand looking for a Palestinian link to getting the bomb on board at Malta, so obviously they went with it.

There were other small points as well. Tony Gauci thought the man who bought the clothes was Libyan. The radio model they finally decided had been used was one which had had a big consignment sold to Libya a couple of months before the bombing. And then there was the "fang-brief", but that's a whole other can of worms. But really, it was PT/35b.

Since the publication of John Ashton's book and the SCCRC report, we know two new things about PT/35b. One is that contrary to all suspicions, it seems really to have been in the chain of evidence as early as May 1989. And the other is that it was never part of one of the 20 MST-13 units exclusively manufactured for Libya by MEBO.

So, it's likely the PCB fragment was a deliberate, fabricated plant. And it was planted less than five months after the bombing.

Further discussion of that aspect is not really appropriate for this thread. Which is fair enough. I'm just saddened that such factual, evidence-based discussion is not allowed in this forum area, and all threads attempting to have such a discussion are immediately moved to "conspiracy theories".

I'm also saddened that people who see themselves as "critical thinkers" refuse point-blank even to read any of the very clear and very persuasive evidence that Megrahi had nothing to do with that atrocity, but instead insist that such discussion be moved out of their sight so they can continue to believe an innocent man to be guilty.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2012, 01:36 PM   #139
Antony
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: London, England
Posts: 1,715
Originally Posted by Damien Evans View Post
Now we'll probably never know who really did it.
On that question, nothing has changed. Since it's clear (to everyone familiar with the facts) that Megrahi had nothing to do with it, then it follows that he had no information to feed into any new investigation.
Antony is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2012, 02:04 PM   #140
Garrison
Illuminator
 
Garrison's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 3,693
If it was the Libyans and they simply threw Megrahi to the wolves to improve relations well then everyone involved is probably dead or in prison for other crimes committed before the overthrow of Gadaffi.
Garrison 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 21st May 2012, 02:17 PM   #141
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,984
I think we were fated not to solve this case when John Orr of the Dumfries and Galloway constabulary decided very early on in the inquiry that the bomb was not introduced at Heathrow. If you don't follow up your best leads, but instead spend three years baying at the end of a blind alley, finishing up by framing someone who happened to be acting a bit suspicious at the end of that blind alley, then you've blown your chance, really.

The circumstantial evidence says Jibril's PFLP-GC were behind it, and the bomb was made either by Marwan Khreesat or someone working to his methods, and the man known by the alias "Abu Elias" was involved in infiltrating the security, and the bomb was placed in the baggage container in the interline shed at Heathrow at about four o'clock in the afternoon.

However, since the cops spent all their time (before the CIA handed them Megrahi and Fhimah on a plate) looking for Karen Noonan's boyfriend, and trying to pretend Juval Aviv didn't exist, and then trying to find a connection with the Miska bakery and Abu Talb and his stash of Maltese clothes, then there's really no chance of finding out how Elias got the bomb on at Heathrow, if that's what happened.

They bleat and whine that they investigated the PFLP-GC and couldn't find any evidence they'd done it. Sure, because the only evidence they were prepared to look at was evidence that involved the feeder flight, and after August 1989 it had to involve KM180. Since nobody did that, it's not surprising they couldn't find evidence that the PFLP-GC had done it.

Even now, we have everybody up to and including the Nippy Sweetie insisting that they are absolutely gagging to have new evidence that will put them on the track of the "remaining" culprits. But the only evidence they will consent to look at is evidence that supports their fairy-story about the invisible levitating suitcase at Luqa, and Megrahi's presence there being important.

The elephant in the room they still won't even glance at is the Heathrow evidence.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2012, 02:20 PM   #142
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,984
That could be true, but there really isn't any serious evidence it was the Libyans. Much more likely to have been Jibril's gang of murdering terrorist bastards.

Not that that makes it any better, since none of them is likely to start singing like a canary now either.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2012, 05:12 PM   #143
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,984
Here are two obituaries of Megrahi.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/21/wo...ies-at-60.html

http://www.megrahiyouaremyjury.net/?p=598

The latter, by Megrahi's biographer, is perhaps predictably sympathetic. It is the former which is surprising. The New York Times, once at the forefront of those baying for "the Lockerbie Bomber" to be recaptured and to die in jail, seems to have had an unexpected look at the facts.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2012, 05:40 PM   #144
LashL
Goddess of Legaltainment™
 
LashL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 35,455
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
You may be interested to read the full judgement of the count, available here. http://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/library...rbie/index.asp The pdf link doesn't seem to work, but the rtf version is fine. It really is the most appalling example of circular reasoning ("petitio principii") known to mankind. Not only is the burden of proof thrown squarely on the shoulders of the defence, the determination to bring in a conviction in the teeth of the evidence that Megrahi was over a thousand miles away when the bomb was smuggled into the baggage container is palpable.

Here's a back-to-basics overview for those unfamiliar with the facts of the case.
http://www.scottishreview.net/MoragKerr256.shtml

Rolfe.

I read the full judgment quite some time ago and was appalled, too. In my view, there was no way that the Camp Zeist court should have found Megrahi guilty. The evidence was not even remotely close to proof beyond a reasonable doubt and the court seemed to tie itself in knots trying to make nebulous connections where none could objectively be shown to exist, while giving short shrift to exculpatory evidence and blatantly ignoring certain evidence. It was a most unfortunate verdict, indeed, and it is all but certain, in my view, that Megrahi did not commmit the crimes for which he was convicted and sentenced.
LashL 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 22nd May 2012, 03:27 AM   #145
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,984
You go a long way to restoring my faith in the legal profession. You wouldn't believe the rubbish I've heard from some lawyers insisting that the judges were entirely entitled to find as they did, for various "rules of evidence" reasons normal people find entirely spurious.

The judges did something quite subtle, in my opinion. Several times, they actually highlighted their own inconsistency and irrationality, and then said, "but nevertheless...." For example, "the absence of any explanation whereby the bomb suitcase could have been introduced at Luqa is a major difficulty for the Crown case" - then they just sailed past it without attempting to resolve the difficulty. Tony Gauci's identification was acknowledged as "not absolute", but then they found ways to say that of course he couldn't have been sure after ten years, but that proved it actually was Megrahi. They were at pains to say it was possible to over-interpret the evidence and find connections that weren't really there, but bearing that in mind....

The upshot of all this was that when it came to the appeal, and the defence pointed these irrationalities out, the appeal judges just said, yes but the trial court was aware of all that, they said so, and they took that into account, and they still decided he was guilty. It is not up to us to substitute our opinion for that of the trial court.

Tricksy one.

The bit about the absence of evidence of the bomb being smuggled past security at Luqa was probably the best bit. When the defence submitted to the appeal that this was complete moonshine, pure invention with no evidential basis, the appeal judges suddenly announced that "it has to be remembered that the Crown case was that security at Luqa had been circumvented by a criminal act."



I still don't get this. There is absolutely zero evidence that something happened, though obviously if it had happened it would have been a criminal act, that's what we're here in court talking about. But we can just say, oh well there's no evidence it happened because it was a criminal act, so that's fine, we can just say it happened then.

How does that work?

(When I challenged Ming Campbell, the former divorce lawyer turned MP turned Lord who vehemently defends the conviction on the grounds that he's a lawyer and we don't understand these things, and quoted the bit about "it was a criminal act", he just snapped back, "that's not true". It was at a public meeting, and I didn't have a copy of the bloody thing with me, and that's how they get away with it, every time.)

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd May 2012, 09:39 AM   #146
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,984
CNN are catching on.

Did someone else bomb Pan Am 103?

Quote:
After al Megrahi lodged an appeal whilst still in prison, the evidence was reviewed by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission. New evidence uncovered during the investigation and other evidence not submitted at al Megrahi's original trial led the review commission to state that he "may have suffered a miscarriage of justice."

The commission said there was no reasonable basis to suspect that al Megrahi purchased the clothes in Malta on the day alleged. It also said evidence that the clothes shop owner had seen al Megrahi's picture in a magazine article that linked him to the bombing before picking him out in a lineup was not put to the court.

The U.N. observer at the trial, Hans Kochler, has also called into question the verdict, telling the UK's Independent newspaper in 2009 that he believed al Megrahi to be innocent.

"I watched a case unfold that was based on circumstantial evidence. The indictment against him and Fhimah went to great lengths to explain how they supposedly planted a bomb on Flight 103, and yet Fhimah was acquitted of all the charges against him. It made no sense that al Megrahi was guilty when Fhimah was acquitted," he said.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th May 2012, 11:07 AM   #147
lane99
Muse
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 684
Originally Posted by Damien Evans View Post
Now we'll probably never know who really did it.
Well, we can be reasonably certain Libya was involved. They publicly admitted responsibility for it. And, years even before that, Khadaffi had already admitted it privately.
__________________
Qte: I wondered why the baseball was getting bigger. Then it hit me.


Twitter: @Perugiamurderfi
lane99 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 May 2012, 02:15 PM   #148
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,984
Wrong. Again.

The Americans decided Libya had done it, so they demanded Gaddafi hand over Megrahi and Fhimah. This was in fact contrary to international law, by which the accused had the right to be tried in a Libyan court. Gaddafi said, give us the evidence and we will put them on trial if the case is good enough.

Now it's not surprising the USA (who had the evidence) didn't agree to that, but they were actually in the wrong in law. Instead they went to the UN and said, Gaddafi won't hand over these evil terrorists, we demand you impost even more stringent sanctions on Libya until he does. The UN, without seeing any evidence, said, OK then.

This heralded a very bad time in Libya. No flights into or out of the country were allowed. Many supplies were denied access, including medical supplies. Many people died in ambulances driving across the desert to Tunis to try to access hospital facilities. Of course Gaddafi and his henchmen didn't suffer personally, but life in the country was very bad for ordinary people.

After eight years of this, a deal was struck. Megrahi and Fhimah agreed to hand themselves over for trial in a Scottish court, on the condition they were tried by a judicial bench rather than a jury (bad idea!), and Gaddafi was pressurised to admit responsibility and pay compensation. (This by the way was the reason Megrahi got the so-called "hero's welcome" in 2009 - he was indeed regarded as a hero who surrendered himself to a kangaroo court for the good of his countrymen.) Gaddafi wrote a weasel-worded letter in which Libya merely "accepted responsibility for the actions of its agents." Nowhere did he either admit Megrahi or Fhimah were actually Libyan agents, or that they had bombed that airliner. The SCCRC looked at that letter and said, right enough, that is not an admission of guilt or responsibility.

Yes, Gaddafi coughed up $2.7 billion in compensation. It was all to get these sanctions lifted, because Libya was hurting really badly after eight years of it all. It was a bargain, at that price. In particular, it was a bargain to get renewed access to western expertise and markets for Libyan oil.

None of that means Libya wasn't involved of course, but there is simply no evidence it was. The infamous PCB fragment has now been proved not to have been part of one of the exclusive batch of 20 supplied to Libya in 1986. We simply DO NOT KNOW who bombed that plane.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th May 2012, 10:28 PM   #149
SnidelyW
Critical Thinker
 
SnidelyW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 486
Well then, I guess we're left with waiting for Iran to admit they hired the only group who had aviation destruction experience, really, to exact revenge for the destruction of Iran Air 655.

I'm sure they'll step up without delay, now that Megrahi has died.

Won't they?
__________________
"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 24th May 2012, 10:39 PM   #150
Bunntamas
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 310
Originally Posted by lane99 View Post
Well, we can be reasonably certain Libya was involved. They publicly admitted responsibility for it. And, years even before that, Khadaffi had already admitted it privately.
Indeed.

Last edited by Bunntamas; 24th May 2012 at 10:41 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 25th May 2012, 01:14 AM   #151
commandlinegamer
Philosopher
 
commandlinegamer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Mazes of Menace
Posts: 8,580
Originally Posted by lane99 View Post
Well, we can be reasonably certain Libya was involved. They publicly admitted responsibility for it. And, years even before that, Khadaffi had already admitted it privately.
I shot JFK.

Ok, so I wasn't born at the time, but details, details...
__________________
He bade me take any rug in the house.
commandlinegamer 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 May 2012, 01:22 AM   #152
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,984
Originally Posted by lane99 View Post
And, years even before that, Khadaffi had already admitted it privately.

I didn't address this part before. Lane, we've already had this conversation.

Please report exactly what Gaddafi said, in the original language. As far as I know, he didn't speak English. Then provide an accurate English translation. Then provide reasonable proof that he actually said that.

You can't, can you?

The text of the letter which supposedly contains the public admission is freely available, and that is in English, and quite plainly admits nothing at all. Lane has had this pointed out to him before, but still he continues to claim the letter contains an admission of guilt.

This nebulous "private" admission, is it likely to be any more reliable?

Compare the incident last year when Megrahi was interviewed, I think by Reuters, and the press suddenly pounced on one phrase and declared he had "confessed". He was speaking in Arabic, so we were reliant on a translation. Not only that, the interview was edited when it was originally broadcast so that the phrase in question was presented out of context.

What Megrahi actually said was, in effect, "the west misrepresented me." He was talking about the campaign to portray him as an intelligence officer, one of Gaddafi's goons, someone involved in the worst excesses of Gaddafi's rule. His words were literally something like "the west exaggerated my name." Or, the west tried to portray me as something I wasn't.

This was clipped out of context, attached to an earlier part of the interview where he was talking about the bombing, and translated as "the west exaggerated my role" ("in the bombing" implied).

There was a fair-sized journalistic row about this. People who spoke Arabic and could make out Megrahi's words behind the voice-over protested that wasn't what he said. People who knew Megrahi pointed out that he'd been vociferously protesting his innocence for twenty years, and the SCCRC rather thought he was justified in that, why would he suddenly "confess" to a reporter now? Reuters refused to release the entire unedited tape and stood by their translation. But gradually journalists realised the truth, and that there was no confession. Recent reports surrounding Megrahi's death have correctly noted that he died having consistently asserted his complete innocence.

But if the tape of Megrahi's actual words hadn't been available, would the record have been set straight? I doubt it. Lots of people, mostly Americans, are very invested in wanting Megrahi and Libya to be guilty. They seize on any straw they can grasp to claim a confession, or an admission of responsibility. And they keep repeating the claim, even after it has been shown to be false, as Lane is doing with this "Gaddafi admitted responsibility" thing in relation to the letter.

So we're supposed to say, case closed, when Lane says he heard that some American claimed that Gaddafi admitted he was behind it in a private, unrecorded conversation? Oh, come on.

I don't know if Libya had anything to do with it. I just see no evidence it had, and a lot of evidence of Americans (starting with Reagan about four days after the plane came down) extremely keen to blame Libya, evidence or none.

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; 25th May 2012 at 01:25 AM.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th May 2012, 05:58 AM   #153
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,984
Oh, and Ahmed Jibril also "admitted responsibility" for the atrocity. Or rather, he boasted about it in private.

Which of these lying bastards should we believe? Let me think....

How about neither?

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th May 2012, 08:56 PM   #154
SnidelyW
Critical Thinker
 
SnidelyW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 486
Regardless of whether a garbled/misrepresented/mistranslated statement occurred, and even if one really wants to believe Megrahi had a hand in PA103, it still must be supported by evidence linking Megrahi to said act. It all comes back to the evidence.

Evidentiary links between Megrahi and PA103 do not line up. They never have. So, if the Americans are quite comfortable linking Megrahi with PA103, ignoring the lack of evidence, I say let them have their fantasy.

If they wish to contend there IS evidence linking Megrahi to PA103, then bring it out, and defend their contention he should have been convicted on that evidence.

In the U.S.A. there exists an organization called 'The Innocence Project', which, quoting from their web page, is "...dedicated to exonerating wrongfully convicted individuals...".

I suggest those very same ideals deserve consideration in the murder of their countrymen in the skies over Scotland.
__________________
"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
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

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 05:51 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.