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

Reply
Old 29th October 2010, 03:18 PM   #121
ddt
Mafia Penguin
 
ddt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 17,729
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
No problem at all, then, with a state which is a signatory to the Montreal convention being ordered to hand its citizens over to a foreign power for trial, in breach of that convention, and without the foreign power being required to produce any evidence?

No problem with the evidence they said they had actually being from a witness whom they paid to lie about it?

No problem with the hardship and deaths that resulted in Libya from an illegal demand made on the basis of so-called evidence that was not only fabricated but known to be fabricated?

Rolfe.
Good points about the US ignoring international law. Has Libya ever pursued this in the legal international arena - i.e., before the ICJ?
__________________
Founder of the group "The Truth about AnjezŽ Gonxhe Bojaxhiu aka Mother Teresa"

"I think it is very beautiful for the poor to accept their lot, to share it with the passion of Christ. I think the world is being much helped by the suffering of the poor people." - "Saint" Teresa, the lying thieving Albanian dwarf
ddt 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 2010, 03:30 PM   #122
Professor Yaffle
Butterbeans and Breadcrumbs
 
Professor Yaffle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Emily's shop
Posts: 17,578
I think Libya want this over and done with as much as anyone else tbh.
Professor Yaffle 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 2010, 03:55 PM   #123
Caustic Logic
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,494
Originally Posted by Beerina View Post
However, when one points out, say, the President of the US doesn't jump on this bandwagon, is he stupid? Uninformed? Certainly he'd be aware of the exact validity of the prosecution, not to mention loads of info still secret. Were two presidents in a row in on it? Three? Four?
That's a fair question, of course. All I can really say is I imagine there are secrets big enough and damning enough that consecutive governments will just agree to continue ignoring.

I would also imagine it's based on a cost-benefit analysis. Imagine a future where the mass media were unafraid to put some of the information we have here in front of the American public, and eventually 70% of the public is convinced the official story is a farce (and 22% unsure), and Senators here start demanding a new investigation to get votes. Whichever president is in office then will find a guarded way to finally admit the case might not have been fully right, and that "other parties" may have been "involved." That would be the tipping point - people would demand answers, and they're already available by and large. Because on that end the problem is supply-demand.

Quote:
Or is he hiding because he doesn't want to deal with the consequences? I don't claim to know the details -- but those who do and aren't just kibitzers on the sidelines aren't jumping on the bandwagon.

Why is that?
Same basic thing I'm sure. I admit it's baffling, and almost suggests that whole CT notion of "government controls the media to control the people" or better yet "the corporations control the government and media" to same effect. I don't know to what extent that's true, but somehow the United States, top-to-bottom, seems to turn a blind eye to what is, I think, a demonstratable mass cover-up. Of the true perpetrators of the worst pre-9/11 attack on US civilians? Sounds insane, but hey, the facts are sayin' what they're sayin'.

What do you think? Cause as I said, this is all strange and baffling to me as well.
Caustic Logic is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th October 2010, 03:55 PM   #124
ddt
Mafia Penguin
 
ddt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 17,729
Originally Posted by Professor Yaffle View Post
I think Libya want this over and done with as much as anyone else tbh.
Yes I understand, but I was referring to the period in the 1990s between that Megrahi was named as prime suspect and that he eventually was extradited to the Zeist trial. Rolfe argued that the UK, on behest of the US, was not following proper procedure to have Megrahi extradited. Methinks that would have been a case for the ICJ.
__________________
Founder of the group "The Truth about AnjezŽ Gonxhe Bojaxhiu aka Mother Teresa"

"I think it is very beautiful for the poor to accept their lot, to share it with the passion of Christ. I think the world is being much helped by the suffering of the poor people." - "Saint" Teresa, the lying thieving Albanian dwarf

Last edited by ddt; 29th October 2010 at 03:56 PM.
ddt 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 2010, 04:04 PM   #125
Caustic Logic
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,494
Originally Posted by ddt View Post
Yes I understand, but I was referring to the period in the 1990s between that Megrahi was named as prime suspect and that he eventually was extradited to the Zeist trial. Rolfe argued that the UK, on behest of the US, was not following proper procedure to have Megrahi extradited. Methinks that would have been a case for the ICJ.
I was thinking about this the other day. I think a lawsuit would be in order, and the fact the Libyans haven't tried yet is indicative that PY is right. I figure a two-prong approach might work - Megrahi suing for wrongful imprisonment, and one Libyan who had a close relative die from sanctions (demonstratable connection, wrongful death). Going on past precedent, $10 million a head might be appropriate, adjusted for verifiable sanctions linkage.
Caustic Logic is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th October 2010, 04:33 PM   #126
ddt
Mafia Penguin
 
ddt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 17,729
Originally Posted by Caustic Logic View Post
I was thinking about this the other day. I think a lawsuit would be in order, and the fact the Libyans haven't tried yet is indicative that PY is right. I figure a two-prong approach might work - Megrahi suing for wrongful imprisonment, and one Libyan who had a close relative die from sanctions (demonstratable connection, wrongful death). Going on past precedent, $10 million a head might be appropriate, adjusted for verifiable sanctions linkage.
Plus maybe still a case before the ICJ. Not that it matters much (mines in Nicaraguan waters anyone?). As to the dollar amount per head, you're way off. Don't you know that Libyan lives are less worth than American ones? Just compare the settlement, per head, that Libya had to pay for Lockerbie with the settlement the US paid to Iran for the downed Airbus. The wrongful imprisonment suit is a creative idea. It's a backdoor to get the conclusions of the Scottish Review Commission treated in court, albeit civil.
__________________
Founder of the group "The Truth about AnjezŽ Gonxhe Bojaxhiu aka Mother Teresa"

"I think it is very beautiful for the poor to accept their lot, to share it with the passion of Christ. I think the world is being much helped by the suffering of the poor people." - "Saint" Teresa, the lying thieving Albanian dwarf
ddt 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 2010, 05:09 PM   #127
Beerina
Sarcastic Conqueror of Notions
 
Beerina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 29,078
The point of my post is, of course, to point out the CT-like nature of the reasons why those who have greater details haven't admitted it. It's not an argument, but a warning flag of caution.
__________________
"Great innovations should not be forced [by way of] slender majorities." - Thomas Jefferson

The government should nationalize it! Socialized, single-payer video game development and sales now! More, cheaper, better games, right? Right?
Beerina 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 2010, 05:30 PM   #128
Professor Yaffle
Butterbeans and Breadcrumbs
 
Professor Yaffle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Emily's shop
Posts: 17,578
Perhaps you might like to look into the "evidence" for megrahi's guilt, Beerina, and see if you still see it the same way. I'd be interested to see how someone else sees it, coming to it fresh.
Professor Yaffle 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 2010, 09:22 AM   #129
Matt Berkley
New Blood
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 8
I wonder whether Mr Fhimah has, or had, a case for compensation. Officially he was under house arrest even before his detention in Holland from April 1999 to January 2001.

I have in mind the effects of failures by the CIA and/or DoJ and/or FBI and/or COPFS to take proper action in the light of the origins of Giaka's evidence. Of course, he is at least still alive unlike many who suffered from sanctions.

The number of deaths from sanctions is perhaps out of reasonable proportion to the total deaths anyone could reasonably attribute to Libyan support for terrorism.
Matt Berkley 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 2010, 11:48 AM   #130
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,980
Originally Posted by ddt View Post
Good points about the US ignoring international law. Has Libya ever pursued this in the legal international arena - i.e., before the ICJ?

Libya was in the Outer Darkness at the time. Recognised internationally as a terrorist state. The UN imposed these sanctions against it on the bare say-so of the USA and the UK.

About how far do you think they'd have got with that one? I think they had a pretty fair idea.

The situation was, more or less, you are a terrorist state, Libya, so you can think again if you imagine anyone is going to uphold your rights in any respect at all. The poster who said that Lockerbie was used to castrate Libya was bang on the nail. Lockerbie was the pretext, the excuse, to punish Libya to make Gadaffi realise the error of his ways.

Worked, too.

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 30th October 2010, 11:55 AM   #131
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,980
Originally Posted by Matt Berkley View Post
I wonder whether Mr Fhimah has, or had, a case for compensation. Officially he was under house arrest even before his detention in Holland from April 1999 to January 2001.

I have in mind the effects of failures by the CIA and/or DoJ and/or FBI and/or COPFS to take proper action in the light of the origins of Giaka's evidence. Of course, he is at least still alive unlike many who suffered from sanctions.

The number of deaths from sanctions is perhaps out of reasonable proportion to the total deaths anyone could reasonably attribute to Libyan support for terrorism.

Yes, but might makes right, and the USA was determined to show Libya who had the might. Fhimah was Libyan, so could be messed around with impunity. How dare he be a citizen of a state that supports terrorism?

It's as Professor Yaffle says. Libya wants this over and done with. To the point where I very much doubt they'd approve of Fhimah getting litigious. And he's Libyan, and has to live in the place. Same with Megrahi, I think. Look how quiet he went after he got back to Libya, compared to the protesting he was doing beforehand, and the evidence he swore he'd put in the public domain.

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 30th October 2010, 12:00 PM   #132
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,980
Originally Posted by Beerina View Post
However, when one points out, say, the President of the US doesn't jump on this bandwagon, is he stupid? Uninformed? Certainly he'd be aware of the exact validity of the prosecution, not to mention loads of info still secret. Were two presidents in a row in on it? Three? Four?

Or is he hiding because he doesn't want to deal with the consequences? I don't claim to know the details -- but those who do and aren't just kibitzers on the sidelines aren't jumping on the bandwagon.

Why is that?

Do I detect a hint of a belief that a US president only has to realise that there has been a miscarriage of justice, and he'll rush to intervene to fix everything?

The USA fitted Megrahi up in the first place, and successive US governments have shown no inclination at all to right that wrong. Same with all the political parties in Britain. First a Conservative government, then a Scottish Labour/LibDem coalition, then an SNP Scottish government, are lining up to shout "nothing to see here folks, the conviction is sound, move along."

It's being treated to the tried and tested way of dealing with things governments don't want looked into. It's being ignored. Big time.

Why is that do you think?

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st October 2010, 05:54 AM   #133
McHrozni
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 10,479
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
I think part of what motivates me in this is sheer frustration. It should be self-evident to anyone with a normally-functioning brain that the case against Megrahi wasn't proved beyond reasonable doubt. Reasonable doubt is simply bristling from every aspect.
In case this by any stretch of imagination includes me, I would like to remind you that I had agreed with you on that part ... in february or maybe march. If I recall correctly, you even quoted that post. However, as far as I see the question being posed here is not "was Megrahis' guilt proven beyond all reasonable doubt" but "do you (still) think Megrahi is guilty"?

The answers to these two questions can be different. This was pointed out to you before. I think it should be also pointed out to you that "reasonable doubt" does not equal "certainty in the opposite". The courts behave as though it does, and they should and you can behave as though it does, that's up to you, but you really don't have the right to demand from the rest of the world to do so as well.

McHrozni
McHrozni 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 2010, 06:33 AM   #134
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,980
That was a general point, not aimed at any particular individual.

Your position, as you say, is different. You agree that the evidence presented should not have been sufficient to convict beyond reasonable doubt. However, you still maintain that he carried out the bombing.

You are at pains to point out that this is not an irrational position in the abstract, which is of course true. Your problem comes in your inability to support this position with reference to any facts or evidence. Declaring that you don't believe the authorities would have pressed a weak case against Megrahi unless they had secret incontrovertible evidence they couldn't bring before the court is Twoofer logic.

Declaring that while it appears he actually had an alibi for the bombing (being in Tripoli when the bomb was introduced at Heathrow), you now think he masterminded the plot but deliberately engineered an alibi for himself while someone else was at the sharp end is pure laughing dog territory, given that there's no evidence at all to link him with the bombing other than his being at the airport at Malta that morning when the bomb was alleged to be there (but wasn't).

I repeat, why do you have such a deep need to believe Megrahi was involved in this crime, despite the absence of evidence against him?

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 1st November 2010, 12:37 AM   #135
McHrozni
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 10,479
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
I repeat, why do you have such a deep need to believe Megrahi was involved in this crime, despite the absence of evidence against him?
I don't have a particular need for that, I just think he was one of the key players, based on the reasons we discussed earlier. It's not a foolproof case, and I may be mistaken - but if you step back and examine your argument, so can you.

McHrozni
McHrozni is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st November 2010, 04:18 AM   #136
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,980
Originally Posted by McHrozni View Post
I don't have a particular need for that, I just think he was one of the key players, based on the reasons we discussed earlier. It's not a foolproof case, and I may be mistaken - but if you step back and examine your argument, so can you.

Of course. But both of us have to base our conclusions or beliefs on the evidence, and so far I haven't seen the slightest sign of you doing that.

You "just think" he was one of the key players, but the reasons we "discussed" earlier have nothing at all to do with any evidence for that. You announced that you didn't believe the authorities would press a very weak case against a suspect unless they had secret incontrovertible evidence they couldn't bring to court for security reasons. This is complete fantasy-land. Police press extraordinarily weak cases against innocent suspects all the time, simply because they need to be seen to be doing something and need to "get a conviction".

I pointed out that the evidence for the time and place of the bomb being introduced into the baggage system indicated this happened at about 4pm at Heathrow airport in London, when Megrahi was verifiably in Tripoli, 1,000 miles away. This not only completely nullifies the basis of the case against him, which is that he was at Malta airport at 9am, where the bomb was alleged to have been introduced, it actually gives him an alibi. Your response to that was to suggest that while someone else put the bomb on at Heathrow, Megrahi was deliberately showing himself on the Malta-Tripoli flight to give himself an alibi, because he was the "mastermind".

Again, this is fantasy football. The ONLY pieces of evidence which linked Megrahi to the bombing of Pan Am 103 were that he was alleged to have bouight the clothes from Toni Gauci, and his presence at Malta that morning coinciding with the alleged introduction of the bomb there. He didn't buy the clothes from Tony Gauci, and there's no evidence the bomb was ever within 1,000 miles of the island of Malta. There IS no other evidence against him.

So, you "just think". Well, as I said, one can "just think" the moon is made of green cheese, but thinking doesn't make it so. An explanation of what evidence you think still points to Megrahi being involved in the plot, whether as errand-boy or mastermind, would be good. So far, I've seen nothing but hand-waving.

If you want to persuade me I'm mistaken, you need to give me reasons for that. Bare declarations that you "just think", don't really cut it.

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 1st November 2010, 04:34 AM   #137
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,980
Originally Posted by Matt Berkley View Post
I wonder whether Mr Fhimah has, or had, a case for compensation. Officially he was under house arrest even before his detention in Holland from April 1999 to January 2001.

I have in mind the effects of failures by the CIA and/or DoJ and/or FBI and/or COPFS to take proper action in the light of the origins of Giaka's evidence. Of course, he is at least still alive unlike many who suffered from sanctions.

Actually, Matt, if you look at other comparable cases, Fhimah would be wasting his time. The comparable cases I'm aware of are English, but I have no reason to imagine it's any different in Scotland.

Compensation for wrongful imprisonment after a suspect has been cleared on appeal are only paid where the suspect is deemed to be "clearly innocent". This is an impossible standard of proof, as the appeal courts are not concerned with proving innocence beyond reasonable doubt, but with judging whether or not guilt has been so proved. I believe it's the same for suspects detained before trial, subsequently found not guilty. The police simply declare they had justifiable reason to suspect this person, end of story.

Thus, it comes down to some faceless bureaucrat or committee deciding, in secret, and on no known rules of evidence, whether a particular claimant is, in their opinion, "clearly innocent". It appears that they only make a positive decision when the real culprit has been caught and convicted, and it's very clear that the original suspect who was wrongfully convicted had no connection to the crime.

The most high-profile scandal in this respect was the refusal of compensation to Sion Jenkins about two years ago. He actually couldn't, possibly, have killed his foster daughter in the manner described. There was no time, no motive, and no evidence. The case was built on forensic expert witnesses grossly over-stating the significance of a certain piece of evidence while ignoring another piece, and on peripheral blackening of Jenkins' name in matters unrelated to the murder. Juries considering the case seem first to have been over-impressed by the forensic expert, who appeared to be acting as a prosecution advocate, and second by the feeling that surely the police wouldn't have cobbled together quite such a preposterous case against a normal, respectable person if there wasn't something in it! (Much as McHrozni believes the authorities wouldn't have cobbled together the weak case against Megrahi if there wasn't more to it than that.)

Jenkins was freed after spending six years in jail, his life ruined. But nobody else has been convicted of killing Billie-Jo, and the police, who are obviously peeved that their showcase conviction has been overturned, say they ain't looking for anyone else. So the faceless bureaucrat denied him any compensation for that.

In addition, the compensation paid out is miserly. They even deduct "bed and board" from it, charging the claimant hotel expenses for the time he was detained at Her Majesty's pleasure!

Fhimah would be wasting his time.

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

Last edited by Rolfe; 1st November 2010 at 04:36 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 1st November 2010, 05:17 AM   #138
McHrozni
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 10,479
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
There IS no other evidence against him.
Assuming you're right (which I disagree with), I would also add "that is publically available" at the end. But running around in circles is only fun for so long, and there is little point in furthering the debate there.

The case for Libyan connection is there regardless of Megrahi, though, which pretty much eliminates what most people would consider their main motivation for pursuing this case at all. Not that Libya didn't get what it deserved, with positive consequences down the line irrespective of their agents being behind Lockerbie or not, which also pretty much invalidates that case in the first place.

But let's not derail the thread. You have your own personal motivation in pursuing this, and I respect that.

McHrozni
McHrozni is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st November 2010, 05:47 AM   #139
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,980
There is a case for Libyan involvement, that's true. I don't think it's a terribly strong one, but it's there.

However, the thread isn't about whether or not Libya was involved in the atrocity. Given that the explosive used was apparently Semtex, and Libya was probably the main supplier of Semtex to terrorist groups in the 1980s, I'll give you that point right there.

You must bear in mind, however, that Libya is quite a big country. There are a lot of Libyans. A fair number of them were even Libyan secret service personnel. You can't convict an individual person simply on the grounds that his country may have had something to do with the atrocity, and he is a member of the security forces. And it is an individual person, with a mother, and a wife and children, and who is dying of prostate cancer, who was convicted and imprisoned.

There are Libyans who have known form in the terrorist department. Known connections to other bombings for example, or known involvement in planning. Megrahi is not one of them. No evidence showing that he had ever handled explosives, ever had any expertise in bomb-making, or had any involvement in the other terrorist attacks of the time where Libyan culpability was essentially proved.

It's perfectly simple to see what happened. Neither London nor Frankfurt wanted to acknowledge that the bomb might have gone on board at their airports. After about eight months of acrimony, with each trying to blame the other, the Maltese origin of the clothes was deemed sufficient to concentrate on Malta as the probable point of ingestion. Germany and Britain were both extremely happy with that.

Some time later it was decided, rightly or wrongly, that the evidence suggested possible Libyan involvement. Malta at that time was crawling with Libyans, with the LAA flights to and from Tripoli routinely over-booked and hordes of cross travellers fighting to avoid being bumped. It so happened that one Malta-Tripoli flight left at about the same time as the Frankfurt flight the investigators had decided the bomb must have been on (despite cast-iron evidence there was no unaccompanied luggage on that flight). So, it's no great surprise there were Libyans checking in at Malta at the same time as the Frankfurt flight was checking in. And one of these happened to be a Libyan security officer who was travelling under cover at the time.

It seems quite likely that no matter which day of the week you chose, you might well have had a decent chance of finding someone who might be a plausible suspect travelling on LN147 to Tripoli (the flight that departed at the same time as KM180 to Frankfurt). It was Megrahi's bad luck it happened to be him on 21st December 1988. That was the start of it, and the rest of the investigation was mainly geared to embellishing a case against a guy who just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

So that's my logic for saying that I don't see any reason to believe he had anything to do with it at all. Whether any other Libyan had anything to do with it is an entirely different question, and not really relevant.

Maybe you could come back with your reasons for believing that I'm mistaken, and show some evidence that he did in fact have some connection to the attack? Or are you simply going to keep on saying "I just think", and falling back on the Twoofer logic that you believe there must be other evidence that's being concealed from the public?

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

Last edited by Rolfe; 1st November 2010 at 07:17 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 2nd November 2010, 04:14 PM   #140
Bunntamas
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 310
A friend of mine just pointed me to this "oldie but goodie". It's quite a good read. Thought it was fitting for this thread. I find the following points particularly interesting:
Quote:
Because of the need for plausible deniability, covert operatives are instructed to stick to their cover story and maintain their innocence if they are caught. Al-Megrahi’s consistent denials and his many appeals, which often cite the PFLP-GC case in Frankfurt, have done a great deal to sow doubt and provide Libya with some deniability....
The evidence recovered in Scotland and al-Megrahi’s eventual conviction put a dent in that deniability, but the true authors of the attack — al-Megrahi’s superiors — were never formally charged. Without al-Megrahi’s cooperation, there was no evidence to prove who ordered him to undertake the attack, though it is logical to conclude that the ESO would never undertake such a significant attack without Gadhafi’s approval.

Now that al-Megrahi has returned to Libya and is in Libyan safekeeping, there is no chance that any death-bed confession he may give will ever make it to the West. His denials will be his final words and the ambiguity and doubt those denials cast will be his legacy.
(emphasis added)

~B.

Last edited by Bunntamas; 2nd November 2010 at 04:18 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 2010, 04:26 PM   #141
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,980
I don't really get it. If he was a covert operative who was reponsible for a horrendous atrocity, he'd deny it.

He denies it.

Therefore, he's a covert operative who was reponsible for a horrendous atrocity.

Er, there's something a bit wrong with that logic, unless I'm very much mistaken.

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 2nd November 2010, 04:28 PM   #142
Bunntamas
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 310
Try reading the whole article. Here's more:
Quote:
In the shadowy world of clandestine operations, this is the ideal behavior for someone caught committing an operational act. He has shielded his superiors and his government to the end. From the perspective of the ESO, and Moammar Gadhafi, al-Megrahi is indeed a hero.

Last edited by Bunntamas; 2nd November 2010 at 04:30 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 2010, 04:35 PM   #143
Bunntamas
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 310
And even more interesting:
Quote:
In a December 2003 letter to the United Nations, Libya accepted responsibility for the Pan Am 103 bombing. (In the same letter, Libya also took responsibility for the September 1989 bombing of UTA Flight 772, a French airliner destroyed by an IED after leaving Brazzaville, Congo, and making a stop in N’Djamena, Chad. All 170 people aboard the aircraft died when it broke up over the Sahara in Niger.)
I may be mistaken, but I think I recall reading that Megrahi had (prior to bombing PA103) traveled to Chad or the Congo. Such an innocent guy.
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 2010, 04:39 PM   #144
Bunntamas
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 310
HA! Oh, now I remember, it's in the indictment.
Quote:
(h) you ABDELBASET ALI MOHMED AL MEGRAHI did between 8 and 10 October 1988, both dates inclusive, at the premises occupied by Libyan Arab Airlines at Luqa Airport and Valletta, Malta and elsewhere in Malta attempt along with Mohammed Abouagela Masud, also a member of the said Libyan Intelligence Services, and others to the Prosecutor unknown, to travel to Ndjamena, Chad for the purpose of carrying out an operation on behalf of the said Libyan Intelligence Services
Maybe he was just collecting spare parts. Or rocks. Or something special for his wife, or girfriends at LAA, or maybe, dare I say.... explosives?????

Last edited by Bunntamas; 2nd November 2010 at 04:43 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 2010, 04:50 PM   #145
Caustic Logic
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,494
I'll read the article Bunntamas cites later tonight. For now:

Quote:
Because of the need for plausible deniability, covert operatives are instructed to stick to their cover story and maintain their innocence if they are caught.
Quote:
n the shadowy world of clandestine operations, this is the ideal behavior for someone caught committing an operational act. He has shielded his superiors and his government to the end. From the perspective of the ESO, and Moammar Gadhafi, al-Megrahi is indeed a hero.
Seems at least half-fitting for Richard Marquise and his denial, despite being caught, that the bureau knowingly put forth a liar named Giaka as evidence against Megrahi and Fhimah.
Caustic Logic is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd November 2010, 04:53 PM   #146
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,980
I am reading the article. Give me a chance to get through it.

This article, like a number of others I have read, is characterised by stating as fact a number of things which are not unchallenged fact at all. If the facts were as stated, then we wouldn't be having this discussion. This is just a quick run-through, I may not have caught them all.
  • Libya did not admit responsibility for the bombing of Pan Am 103. Libya's words were that it "took responsibility for the actions of its agents". It did not admit that bombing PA103 was one of these actions. (Come to think of it, Libya never even admitted that Megrahi was a Libyan agent.)
  • Marwan Khreesat is said to have been making dud bombs. No. Marwan Khreesat was instructed to make dud bombs. However, when the stash was discovered in April 1989, they were so live that a German bomb disposal operative was killed by one of them.
  • Pan Am 103 did not depart from Frankfurt and "stop" at Heathrow.
  • The device on Pan Am 103 would not have "detonated (as planned) while the aircraft was over the North Atlantic Ocean [except that] a delay in the plane’s departure from London resulted in the timed device detonating while the aircraft was still over land" - we went over that in a different thread.
  • Tony Gauci is said to have identified Megrahi as the man who purchased the infamous clothing. Tony Gauci never identified Megrahi as the clothes buyer.
  • The clothes purchase is said to have occurred on 7th December. This is highly disputed, with 23rd November always looking the more likely day of purchase, and evidence uncovered by the SCCRC indicating that in fact it could not have been 7th December.
  • The suitcase is said to have been "apparently sent from Malta aboard Air Malta flight 180 to Frankfurt". There is no evidence at all for that, and a great deal of evidence against it.
Much is made of the so-called "hero's welcome" Megrahi received in Libya on his return. However, it must be appreciated that there is also a perfectly innocent explanation for that. Megrahi was seen in Libya as the man who voluntarily surrendered himself for trial for a crime he didn't commit, and in so doing was instrumental in ending the years of sanctions. If you believed a compatriot of yours had done that, would you not want to cheer his arrival home? Assuming that these people were cheering someone they believed had been responsible for 270 deaths is going way beyond what the evidence supports.

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 2010 at 06:24 PM. Reason: Add more false statements I spotted
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 2nd November 2010, 05:01 PM   #147
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,980
Originally Posted by Bunntamas View Post
And even more interesting:

I may be mistaken, but I think I recall reading that Megrahi had (prior to bombing PA103) traveled to Chad or the Congo. Such an innocent guy.

Originally Posted by Bunntamas View Post
HA! Oh, now I remember, it's in the indictment.

Maybe he was just collecting spare parts. Or rocks. Or something special for his wife, or girfriends at LAA, or maybe, dare I say.... explosives?????

It was in the indictment that he went to Chad. There were a helluva lot of things in that indictment that turned out to be complete horse-feathers. It was so off-beam that they had to get it changed towards the end of the trial.

I don't know if he went to Chad or not. If he did, I don't know what he did there. If it had anything to do with explosives, nobody has ever connected that to Lockerbie.

If there was some actual evidence to connect Megrahi to the bomb that blew up PA103, that might be a marginally interesting extra piece of information. But in the absence of any such evidence, it's meaningless.

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 2nd November 2010, 05:18 PM   #148
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,980
A little thought experiment. What would the world look like if Megrahi had had nothing to do with the Lockerbie boming?
  • He would deny having committed the crime.
    • Check.
  • There would be no trace of the bomb or the suitase on the island of Malta.
    • Check.
  • He would not have been identified as the person who bought the clothes from Tony Gauci.
    • Check.
That is how the world looks.

A man denies having committed a crime. Indeed, that doesn't prove he didn't do it. But it is also normal behaviour for someone who didn't do it, so it can hardly be used to imply guilt.

The principle reasons for doubting Megrahi's involvement are these.
  • Tony Gauci originally described a man much older, taller and of heavier build than Megrahi
  • The date of the purchase appears to have been 23rd November, when Megrahi was elsewhere (and subsequent evidence has contradited the possibility that it just might have been 7th December, when he could have been the purchaser)
  • Tony Gauci never identified Megrahi as the purchaser, indeed repeatedly said he merely resembled the purchaser (but was too young)
  • There is no evidence of any unaccompanied luggage having travelled on KM180, and "considerable and quite compelling evidence that that could not have happened."
So really, citing articles that simply state that Gauci positively identified Megrahi as the purchaser, and that the date of purchase was 7th December, and that there was an unaccompanied suitcase on KM180, is begging the question to the nth degree.

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 2nd November 2010, 05:25 PM   #149
Bunntamas
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 310
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
So really, citing articles......is begging the question to the nth degree.
As you say, that "cuts both ways" re: all of the "stuff" (I'll save myself another yellow tag here and not state the expletive that comes to mind) you and others claim about Megrahi's innocence, but (unlike the prosecution) can't seem to prove in a court of law, a petition, inquiry, or anywhere else, with any credibility. Though pigs flying might be a consideration for you all.
Go ahead and wave your hand at the article, as you usually operate, under the auspices of "debate", when you have no credible answer to anything else anyone who opposes your views presents.
We have a verdict, regardless of your dissppointment and blusterings about it, it still stands.
As I've noted before, wouldn't it behoove you to be spending time on the issues about your government (which appears to be the real root of your gripes), as opposed to the Lockerbie case? Seems to me to be the more sensible thing to do. But then again, I guess sensible doesn't appear to be within the Scottish rhetoric, particularly considering Megrahi's release. Forgive the redundancy, but I find this quote from the article particularly appealing:
Quote:
His (Megrahi's) denials will be his final words and the ambiguity and doubt those denials cast will be his legacy.

Last edited by Bunntamas; 2nd November 2010 at 05:53 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 2010, 05:29 PM   #150
Bunntamas
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 310
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
I am reading the article. Give me a chance to get through it.
Sorry. I thought, based on your immediate reply that I s/could respond accordingly.
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 2010, 05:34 PM   #151
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,980
My first reply was to your post. I then proceeded to read the article. I don't doubt the sincerity of the writer, because these false statements can be found all over the place. Richard Marquise is a fertile source.

I do, however, have a problem with part of it, the part he leaves out. In all the cataloguing of the terrorist connections Libya had back then, he leaves out the biggie. The IRA. The people who were bombing England and Ireland, and killing children there. The people who were paying Gadaffi for the Semtex with money sent to them by US citizens, including high-level US politicians, with full approval of the US government. Money they went on sending despite the pleas of the UK government for the USA to stop supporting and arming this terrorist group.

Then there was the Good Friday Agreement of 1998, supported and welcomed and brokered by the USA, which "brought peace to Northern Ireland". In the course of that, all these terrorist bombers who had been convicted and imprisoned were freed. Some of them had only served a couple of years. None of them were ill. And the parents of these dead children had to see the killers of their sons and daughters walk free, with the blessing of their own and the US governments, and suck it up.

This is seldom mentioned by any of the US commentators who are so upset about the release of Megrahi.

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 2010 at 05:44 PM. Reason: Added a chunk. Hope it hasn't confused.
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 2nd November 2010, 05:57 PM   #152
Bunntamas
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 310
Ummm... Sorry, I'm no JREF expert, but isn't what you just wrote, e.g. bringing in the IRA / Good Friday events, etc, (which I believe belong in another thread) called a derail?
Can't keep with the topic because you have no other points / defense?
I think you've deemed that a "FAIL" in other comments.

Last edited by Bunntamas; 2nd November 2010 at 05:59 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 2010, 05:57 PM   #153
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,980
Could I just repeat something I've said before. If I thought Megrahi bought those clothes, even on the balance of probabilities, then we wouldn't be having this argument. If I thought the bomb suitcase travelled on KM180, then I'd be regarding Megrahi with a very suspicious eye, to put it at its mildest.

There's no question about that. The man who bought those clothes was part of the terrorist gang, I'm sure of it (though without knowing who he was it's impossible to guess just how much he knew). If the bomb travelled on KM180, Megrahi's presence at Luqa that morning is a big red flag.

But these are the things that are in dispute. It's pointless to cite articles that take the truth of these matters as their unexamined basic premise and go on from there. It's pointless to say, well I still can't accept that his presence on Malta that morning was just a coincidence, if the basis of the discussion is that the bomb appears to have been introduced at Heathrow.

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 2nd November 2010, 05:58 PM   #154
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,980
Originally Posted by Bunntamas View Post
Ummm... Isn't what you just wrote, bringing in the IRA, which I believe belongs in another thread called a derail?
Can't keep with the topic because you have no other points / defense?
I think you've deemed that a "FAIL" in other comments.

If you think I'm derailing the thread, then report the post. I believe it is relevant and appropriate comment.

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 2nd November 2010, 06:00 PM   #155
Bunntamas
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 310
Ooops edit for double post. See below.

Last edited by Bunntamas; 2nd November 2010 at 06:04 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 2010, 06:03 PM   #156
Bunntamas
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 310
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
Could I just repeat something I've said before. If I thought Megrahi bought those clothes, even on the balance of probabilities, then we wouldn't be having this argument. If I thought the bomb suitcase travelled on KM180, then I'd be regarding Megrahi with a very suspicious eye, to put it at its mildest.

There's no question about that. The man who bought those clothes was part of the terrorist gang, I'm sure of it (though without knowing who he was it's impossible to guess just how much he knew). If the bomb travelled on KM180, Megrahi's presence at Luqa that morning is a big red flag.

But these are the things that are in dispute. It's pointless to cite articles that take the truth of these matters as their unexamined basic premise and go on from there. It's pointless to say, well I still can't accept that his presence on Malta that morning was just a coincidence, if the basis of the discussion is that the bomb appears to have been introduced at Heathrow.
Note: There is NO EVIDENCE that the bomb was introduced at Heathrow.

Okay, so let's be honest Rolfe. On the basis of ALL of the EVIDENCE, do you really think Megrahi had absolutely nothing to do with the bombing of PA 103? REALLY?

Last edited by Bunntamas; 2nd November 2010 at 06:13 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 2010, 06:07 PM   #157
Bunntamas
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 310
Sorry to bail in the middle of this discussion, but I'm headed out for the evening.
Ciao for now.
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 2010, 06:09 PM   #158
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,980
Originally Posted by Bunntamas View Post
So, let's be honest Rolfe, do you think Megrahi had absolutely nothing to do with the bombing of PA 103?

Yes, I do. I've said that several times.

I think the bomb was introduced at Heathrow, but that the Frankfurt authorities were also ****-scared it might have been introduced on their patch. The two countries fought each other to a standstill for eight months, each trying to shift the blame to the other.

I think both parties were very very happy to agree on Malta as the point of ingestion, to the point where they simply wouldn't believe any evidence at all that showed the bomb couldn't have travelled on KM180. It was wonderful. They could (and did) then completely ignore all the weird freaky stuff at both of these airports.

I think only a raving idiot would have bought those clothes from Tony Gauci in that way, if the bomb was intended to be smuggled on to a plane only three miles away from his shop. And whoever these terrorists were, and whatever nationality they were, they were not raving idiots.

I think the clothes were a little misdirection, something for the police to play with, if the remains of them were found on the ground. Great place Malta, crawling with all sorts of suspicious characters. And I think Megrahi had the misfortune to be the suspicious character who happened to be boarding LM147 that morning.

So no, I don't think he had anything at all to do with Lockerbie. I don't know how often I have to say this. If I didn't believe that, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

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 2010 at 06:11 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 2nd November 2010, 06:19 PM   #159
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,980
Originally Posted by Bunntamas View Post
Sorry to bail in the middle of this discussion, but I'm headed out for the evening.
Ciao for now.

Good night. Past my bed-time anyway. (But you may be pleased to learn that I did finally manage to tidy my room.... well most of it.... )

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 2nd November 2010, 06:36 PM   #160
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,980
Originally Posted by Bunntamas View Post
Go ahead and wave your hand at the article, as you usually operate, under the auspices of "debate", when you have no credible answer to anything else anyone who opposes your views presents.

I've been guilty of back-editing a couple of my posts in this thread, so I suppose I shouldn't complain about a bunch of extra stuff appearing in this one.

Bunntamas, I know Megrahi was found guilty by the court. The basis of the discussion is that the verdict was perverse and flew in the face of the evidence. It's no answer, or indeed even a sensible contribution to the debate, simply to keep repeating that he was found guilty.

And I've deconstructed that article quite painstakingly, if you actually read my posts. I've pointed out seven clear errors of fact, and one rather large piece of dishonesty-by-omission. The errors of fact undermine the entire piece. The article is assuming what is required to be proved.

I have been giving you credible answer after credible answer, no matter how remote or tangentially relevant the points you bring up. This current talking point seems little more than an assertion that Megrahi's denials of guilt should in some way be taken to imply guilt. Served with yet more assuming of the very facts which are in dispute.

Bunntamas, you haven't even tried to support the suggestion that Megrahi bought these clothes, and your attempts to support the proposition that the bomb travelled on KM180 seemed to me to be baseless.

If the bomb went on board at Heathrow (being smuggled into AVE4041 before PA103A landed), and a six-foot-tall, burly, big-chested 50-year-old bought these clothes on 23rd November (which is what Tony Gauci actually said), then why should I think Megrahi had anything to do with 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; 2nd November 2010 at 06:38 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
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 11:43 PM.
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.