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 2nd November 2010, 11:51 PM   #161
Caustic Logic
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,494
Alright, so this article, from just after Megrahi's release, is from Startfor (Strategy Forum?), a private company providing high-payers with security and intelligence info. Sounds good- one would presume they'd want to be accurate in their product.

Quote:
video of him being welcomed and embraced by Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi was broadcast all over the world
I hope they noticed how young the colonel is looking these days - a worrisome trend their terror-watchers will want to know about.

Quote:
official admission of Libyan responsibility for the Pan Am bombing
Never happened. Poor reading for context clues.
Quote:
The official admission of responsibility for the Pan Am bombing, coupled with the public denials, has resulted in a great deal of ambiguity and confusion...
There you go, and then let yourself get confused. That's great for intelligence analysts.

The middle part about the investigation is apparently based on a reading of the indictments and perhaps a book or something, with no independent or adequate analysis of the finer details. As Rolfe points out, they just parrot the December 7 purchase date, the "identification" of Megrahi as the buyer, the self-evidenct bag from Malta, and so on. I'll spare us all a re-hash of it.

What seems to be the crux of it for Bunntamas - the little clues that just so seem to prove the guilty conscience over there. How on Earth, one might ask, could we deny these obvious signs?

Quote:
In the shadow world of covert action it is not uncommon for the governments behind such actions to deny (or at least not claim) responsibility for them.
And Libya's denied it, so... That's an argument I suppose. But you know who else has never confessed to the bombing? Iran. An Iranian group, Guardians of the Islamic Revolution, did take credit a couple hours after the event, so they must be innocent by this logic. But then, have you seen Ahmed Jibril's ridiculous denials? That looked real guilty to quite a few people for a few months there in '89.

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.
Well we're not all agreed that he was "caught," but he was clearly named. I'm not sure what you're driving at here, unless it's Megrahi's denial to Pierre Salinger and elsewhere that he was Abdusamad or was on Malta 21 December. In this context, I take what Stratfor is saying - if not universally true, it's at least reasonable. And I'd take his denial of something that was known and fairly evidenct as a sign that he was on a serious mission for his country, and had maintained that denial until well past the point of being indicted based ON that clandestine presence.

He had to be either stupidly reflexive or highly pressured by callous superiors, in my opinion, to keep that up at that time, rather than coming as clean as possible. It's been a rope that many, many, people have been glad to wrap around Megrahi's name, over and over, for years. It gets pretty old, in fact...

But point taken, if I understand it. He was in secret agent denial mode about his Malta trip.

Quote:
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....
More confusion. It's not Megrahi's calling on these facts that "sow doubt." It's the facts themselves.

A nation with an amazingly symmetrical greivance (Iran, IR655), a group within Iran (Guardians...) appointed to exact the revenge, much evidence of a selected contractor (PFLP-GC) with the known ability to rip planes from the air, and a known technology in their possession just six weeks before the bombing. Add to that a missing device from this batch, a missing airport security expert apparently in possession of said bomb, a security breach at Heathrow, and a mysterious brown hard-shell Samsonite case reported inside container AVE4041, but with no known origin. And then an explosion inside that type of case in about that spot of AVE4041 at a time matching the known parameter's of the PFLP-GC bombs (38 min. after takeoff), followed a couple hours later by a claim of responsibility by the Iranian Guardians.

None of these facts are terribly disputed. Just tossed aside because we can be "so sure" the bomb came from Malta in this ridiculous Libyan plot with less than half the motive, bad timing, spotty evidence, weak links, bad science, liars and bribes, physically implausible evidence, more gaps...

But you're right, Megrahi seems to have been legitimately up to something, probably illegal, on Malta that day. And the Libyans did take responsibility for (mumble mumble) and have otherwise denied the bombing, both of which might conceivably be consistent with knowing they're guilty. I wouldn't argue with either of those points, but that's about as far down that road I can see going.

Fair 'nuff?

Last edited by Caustic Logic; 3rd November 2010 at 12:30 AM.
Caustic Logic is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd November 2010, 12:26 AM   #162
Caustic Logic
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,494
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
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.
Well put and completely accurate. In case anyone doesn't know, that's faulty argumentation.

And I didn't cover the whole "Hero's welcome" part of that impressionistic painting of an intelligence report, but Rolfe's take on that is spot on. You cannot just read your own biases and presumptions onto a whole other nation's people, as so many do, and conclude the people there were cheering Megrahi FOR killing 270 people.

We get pissed at hell when they do presume of us that we're all Satanic mass-murdering imperialists driven to destroy Islam. But it's okay when you're pretty sure this whole nation of Libya is full of crazed Islamists who yearn for American death and so on... (directed at that whole idea, not Bunntamas, unless she holds such views).

A reasoned observer or historian must consider what they most likely did think as Said Gaddafi held up Megrahi's hand on his first breath of Libyan air in over a decade. Some supposition is involved, but I propose they though, by and large, this was an innocent man, who made a pretty hefty sacrifice that allowed all their lives to improve, returning to his homeland before his imminent (so it was thought) death. Man, who couldn't cheer for that? Frontest page news ever. Especially given the stern disapprobation of those murderous lying snakes in Washington (from the Libyan "street" perspective as I imagine it). "Don't cheer the "Lockrbie bomber?" Bite it, USA!"

Last edited by Caustic Logic; 3rd November 2010 at 12:36 AM.
Caustic Logic is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd November 2010, 01:27 AM   #163
Caustic Logic
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,494
Originally Posted by Bunntamas View Post
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,
Funny you should have said that just yesterday. The petition just closed, well down from where it should have been for signatures (1649 last I saw, despite being unavailable for about half of its allotted time). This will likely go nowhere, as the last day's events have shown WRT Scotland's parliament.

Beyond the petition, you may be aware, Dr. Swire and some others have been looking into reviving Megrahi's appeal. Admittedly, they don't seem to quite be sure what is and isn't possible, but no one can rule it out yet. That would be a legal ruling, by precedent perhaps a third wrong one, but still something beyond all this 'idle chit-chat.'

Then came the Cadder ruling, and Scotland's emergecy response, and its troubling section seven and its "finality of judgment" clause. Rushed through parliament in a day by Kenny "I didn't pressure nobody to drop no appeal" MacAskill. Passed comfortably. Adds new hurdles to appeals just like Megrahi's. As Rolfe has pointed out, it will effect many (other) innocents as well. And she can surely address the issue better than I. It still confuses me just what's going on here and what's so different after this law as opposed to before.
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 3rd November 2010, 04:14 AM   #164
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,980
Originally Posted by Caustic Logic View Post
I hope they noticed how young the colonel is looking these days - a worrisome trend their terror-watchers will want to know about.

Good catch CL! I totally failed to spot that one. I wouldn't be surprised if there are more - the article was simply riddled with errors and falsehoods. That was a minor point, I suppose - what does it matter who met Megrahi at the airport? Except, it's emblematic of this unthinking piece of journalism that seems to be happy to parrot anything that conforms to its prejudices without bothering to check if it's actually true or not.

This seems to be fairly typical of US commentators on the Lockerbie incident. They blandly state as fact the very points that others are disputing. Frank Duggan goes further - he seems mostly to make it up as he goes along, from the times I've heard him speak on the subject. It's very disappointing.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd November 2010, 04:22 AM   #165
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,980
It's so tempting to get distracted here. I keep deleting replies to various posts, because they would just lead us down more pointless blind alleys.

Getting back to the core of the matter, Bunntamas edited her post after I'd replied to it, and made it more emphatic. So maybe it needs a more emphatic reply.

Originally Posted by Bunntamas View Post
Note: There is NO EVIDENCE that the bomb was introduced at Heathrow.

Note: There is indeed EVIDENCE that the bomb was introduced at Heathrow.
  • It is absolutely undisputed that security at Heathrow was diabolical, and it would have been easy for a terrorist to gain access to the baggage area. For example, there were thousands of airside passes in existence, and nobody seemed at all sure who had them. All they'd have needed was one of these and a plausible uniform.
  • There was a very serious breach of security in that area only 18 hours before the flight departed, with a padlock "cut like butter" to give access to the airside space.
  • The container labelled up to collect interline baggage for PA103 was left unattended in that area for long periods during the afternoon.
  • A suitcase fitting the description of the bomb bag was seen in that container, in the approximate position of the eventual explosion, before the Frankfurt feeder flight landed.
  • The only suitcase fitting that description which was recovered after the crash was the one in little pieces that had had the bomb in it, and none of the relatives of the passengers whose luggage was in that container before PA103A got in (the interline passengers) reported their relative having owned such a case, or having unrecovered luggage.
This, you know, is actual evidence. You may want to argue about it, but you can hardly say it's "NO EVIDENCE".

Originally Posted by Bunntamas View Post
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?

Let's be honest? Is there anyone at all on this forum who thinks I'm just pretending to believe Megrahi is innocent of involvement in this crime?
  • On the basis of the evidence, I believe the bomb was introduced into baggage container AVE4041 at Heathrow airport about 4 o'clock in the afternoon, before the flight from Frankfurt had landed (and when Megrahi was verifiably in Tripoli).
  • On the basis of the evidence, I believe the Maltese clothes were bought on 23rd November (when Megrahi was verifiably not on Malta) by a man of about 50 years old, six feet or more in height, heavily built and with a large chest and head. In other words, not by Megrahi.
Given that this is my belief, based on the EVIDENCE, why should I imagine Megrahi had anything to do with the atrocity?

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd November 2010, 05:11 AM   #166
Caustic Logic
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,494
Oh come on, Rolfe, be HONEST now.

I don't want to say anyone's being dishonest here, but I do think at the lest we're working on at least two different definitions of "evidence" and thus talking past each other. I'm kind of partial to Rolfe's, and a little confused by Bunntamas' definition.

Perhaps something typed here while I finally sleep will help clear that up?
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 3rd November 2010, 06:33 AM   #167
Buncrana
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 458
Just about no one comes out of the Lockerbie affair with much credit, but worse, there are those who continually bluster and cry about oil deals and misconstrued medical advice, while choosing to completely ignore whether the man rotting in gaol was even guilty or not.

The Scots used compassion as cover for what injustices were about to be revealed into the public domain during the forever delayed 2nd appeal advocated by the SCCRC in 2007. Understandably perhaps as the holes in the original case and conviction were as wide as the Clyde. Westminster, despite it's obvious deceitful and underhand MOU between Blair and Gaddafi, played dumb in manoeuvrings which undoubtedly they had a role, while the American politiciansd do what they do best and bury their heads in the sand only coming for air to shirk any responsibility of the original pathetic conviction and evidence they presented, invite ridicule and announce some other piece of irrelevance around the 'compassionate release'.

Meanwhile, the real murky goings-on that does indeed require light shed upon it, namely the conviction at the politically manipulated court Kamp Zeist, are either by choice, motivation, self interest or prejudice, are blithely ignored. These politicians, lawyers and individuals have been spared the indignity, embarrassment and possibly more serious consequences of any impropriety in one of the most shameful miscarriages of justice in recent years, perhaps ever, down to the poor health of the convicted. It certainly saved everyone a whole load of very unwanted and bad publicity. Not to mention accountability.

The shocking and terrible attack on the airliner Pan Am 103 should have not went unpunished, but that is exactly what the Scottish govt, and successive US and UK govts have precisely allowed. Appallingly, over the space of 6 short months in 1988 the deaths of 560 innocent civilians have been allowed to go without any recourse for the perpetrators of these horrific acts. With God on their side, MacAskill, Blair and Bush have been only too happy to impose their granted divinity upon the masses, they too will be judged on their actions by a higher authority on departing this world. Good luck with that one guys, I'll say a prayer for you all tonight….

As someone who was raised and schooled in Africa, including Rwanda, Congo, Zambia and Kenya, and having returned on many occasions, I find it quite amusing the portrayal painted of these states and citizens in much of the Western media, and dare I say, is perfectly illustrated by the insecure, ignorant and insular attitudes of some Americans. Irony is certainly lost on these individuals, as it is precisely their own governments who have, for many decades and longer, plundered, abused, destroyed, oppressed and enriched themselves to the cost of many of these 'non-white' nations. To many in the continent of Africa, the West are themselves the perpetrators of terror and lies. With a long history of it. So while the US and UK caterwaul about Libya and it's support of terror groups, they'd do well to remind themselves of their own transgressions on these very same matters.

Back at Kamp Zeist, the evidence in the case didn't really matter. Evidently. Who would complain that two of Gaddafi's henchmen were in the dock, and who would care at the ridiculous evidence presented given this would simply be another couple of non-white terror supporting states citizens being sent down? Megrahi, the sole bomber was convicted with no previous record of terrorist activity or intent, no accomplices as Fhimah was found 'not guilty', no discernible personal motive, a man implicated by no solid evidence of any kind: forensic, circumstantial or even testimonial. He had no reason for doing it, yet he did it; that’s what we’re supposed to believe. Do they think we are all stark raving mad?

Thankfully though, not all were connived into this absurd theory and perverse conviction. A few independent minds around the world saw the whole thing as an exercise in cynicism, a convenient stitch-up of a couple of nameless, unlamented patsies. Their views appeared, in print and on the internet, but they were not heeded. Until in 2007, these gaping holes, doubts and contradictions, were vindicated by the SCCRC ruling finding 6 grounds for a possible miscarriage of justice.

And now we have Bunntamas screaming there is "NO EVIDENCE" that the bomb was introduced at Heathrow. I sincerely hope and presume this was typed with a wry smile on her face, because there's a damn sight more evidence that the bomb was introduced there that at the place she has persistently claimed there was 'plenty of evidence'. Plenty of evidence, with the full weight and support of all the US and UK investigators could muster, which ultimately constituted absolutely none. Zilch, zero, nada. So much for Western government and law enforcement diligence and intelligence eh? With all the resources at your disposal for your case, and not a shred can be presented. If that's success, then I'll take 'a fail' , just as apportioned to Rolfe by Bunntamas in a previous post, every single day of the week.

Last edited by Buncrana; 3rd November 2010 at 06:42 AM.
Buncrana is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd November 2010, 07:38 AM   #168
Alt+F4
diabolical globalist
 
Alt+F4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 9,997
Originally Posted by Caustic Logic View Post
A reasoned observer or historian must consider what they most likely did think as Said Gaddafi held up Megrahi's hand on his first breath of Libyan air in over a decade. Some supposition is involved, but I propose they though, by and large, this was an innocent man, who made a pretty hefty sacrifice that allowed all their lives to improve, returning to his homeland before his imminent (so it was thought) death. Man, who couldn't cheer for that? Frontest page news ever. Especially given the stern disapprobation of those murderous lying snakes in Washington (from the Libyan "street" perspective as I imagine it). "Don't cheer the "Lockrbie bomber?" Bite it, USA!"
If Megrahi is innocent than how much of his "pretty hefty sacrifice" helped stand in the way of finding the real killers? Bite it, Libya!
__________________
"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 3rd November 2010, 07:43 AM   #169
Alt+F4
diabolical globalist
 
Alt+F4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 9,997
Originally Posted by Buncrana View Post
With God on their side, MacAskill, Blair and Bush have been only too happy to impose their granted divinity upon the masses, they too will be judged on their actions by a higher authority on departing this world. Good luck with that one guys, I'll say a prayer for you all tonight….
Well said but you left out the other Bush, Clinton, Obama and Major....at least.
__________________
"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 3rd November 2010, 08:08 AM   #170
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,980
Originally Posted by Alt+F4 View Post
If Megrahi is innocent than how much of his "pretty hefty sacrifice" helped stand in the way of finding the real killers? Bite it, Libya!

You're blaming Megrahi for the fact that he was railroaded to a conviction in a show trial, and that his own government appears not to have permitted him to give a full explanation of what he was doing that day?

The blame for Megrahi being railroaded lies squarely with the people who railroaded 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 online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd November 2010, 08:12 AM   #171
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,980
I'm trying to remember Bunntamas's reasons for maintaining that the bomb travelled on KM180. As far as I recall, it went something like this.
  • Libyan Arab Airlines was in charge of security at Luqa airport in 1988.
    • No, it wasn't. Air Malta was.
  • "I think it would have been very easy to have got an unaccomanied bag on that flight."
    • OK, tell us how.
  • Megrahi was a charming fellow who could have persuaded someone to let him past security.
    • How do you cope with the fact that he didn't go airside that day, and no charmed person ever came forward or was exposed as having assisted him?
  • The Maltese government of the time was in the pocket of Libya, and would have threatened and beaten its citizens to aid and conceal the smuggling of the bag on to the flight.
    • Malta isn't like that now, if it ever was. Why have none of those threatened and beaten citizens come forward to explain what happened?
  • The Maltese baggage handlers refused to give evidence at Zeist.
    • The Maltese baggage handlers took industrial action on the matter, based on the intrusive investigation and baseless accusations they were subjected to.
Have I missed anything? None of this is evidence. No known loophole in security where the bag could have been introduced. No known breach of security whereby it could have been smuggled airside. No sighting of any candidate for the role of introducing the bomb, in a small airport where everybody knew everybody else. No known way in which the 55 passenger bags on the flight could have been 56. No report of a brown/maroon/bronze Samsonite suitcase anywhere at all.

Above all, we can quote the opinion of Lord Osborne, one of the appeal judges, as regards the possibility of an unaccompanied suitcase travelling on KM180. "There is considerable and quite convincing evidence that that could not have happened."

This is what we have to set beside the evidence detailed above which supports the proposal that the bomb was introduced at Heathrow.

Who is it who has evidence on their side, I ask?

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd November 2010, 08:15 AM   #172
Alt+F4
diabolical globalist
 
Alt+F4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 9,997
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
You're blaming Megrahi for the fact that he was railroaded to a conviction in a show trial, and that his own government appears not to have permitted him to give a full explanation of what he was doing that day?

The blame for Megrahi being railroaded lies squarely with the people who railroaded him.

Rolfe.
I'm not sure what you mean "permitted". Do you mean the Lybian government wouldn't allow him to give an honest account of his whereabouts that day?
__________________
"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 3rd November 2010, 08:58 AM   #173
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,980
It seems the likeliest explanation, certainly.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd November 2010, 11:32 AM   #174
Beerina
Sarcastic Conqueror of Notions
 
Beerina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 29,082
Originally Posted by Professor Yaffle View Post
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.
I don't know this. I have no intention of looking into it.

I just find it odd that those who should know aren't on the bandwagon.
__________________
"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 3rd November 2010, 11:36 AM   #175
Beerina
Sarcastic Conqueror of Notions
 
Beerina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 29,082
Originally Posted by Buncrana View Post
The Scots used compassion as cover for what injustices
That's another CT warning flag -- why wouldn't they reverse the conviction and just flat-out release him, stating they goofed and the real people got away?

They're "brave" enough to risk international condemnation to let the guy go for "justice", but without actually giving him justice? In other words, they're still ballless wonders because they can't go to the logical extent of their conclusions, but just take a cheap weasel way out.
__________________
"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 3rd November 2010, 12:57 PM   #176
Buncrana
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 458
Originally Posted by Beerina View Post
That's another CT warning flag -- why wouldn't they reverse the conviction and just flat-out release him, stating they goofed and the real people got away?

You honestly believe that it would be that simple? Sorry everyone we er, goofed, and we let the real people away. End of story, lets move on, it's all in the past?

Somehow, I'd very much doubt that families of the victims (not too mention a sizeable chunk of the public) would be satisfied with that explanation. Ignoring the aspect of sanctions, the whole investigation and evidence presented, the court case and conviction at Zeist now being at the center of an international scandal, there is also a great deal of people's lives, time, effort and money that have transpired by way of the conviction.


Originally Posted by Beerina View Post
They're "brave" enough to risk international condemnation to let the guy go for "justice", but without actually giving him justice? In other words, they're still ballless wonders because they can't go to the logical extent of their conclusions, but just take a cheap weasel way out.
The release was under the Scottish justice provision for 'Compassionate Release', which essentially has nothing to do with "justice" and takes no consideration on the prisoner's guilt, or not as the case may be. This particular route of release is marked by "humane" considerations and given Megrahi was diagnosed with terminal cancer was eligible for such an application.

While I am in no doubt that indeed Megrahi is suffering from terminal cancer, and therefore the Scottish govt acted accordingly in this respect by affording compassionate release, as I previously stated, in keeping with the US and UK govts, they would be privately delighted that it would perhaps allow the opportunity to seek the cessation of the 2nd appeal in return for compassionate release, although this was in itself not binding on Megrahi. And, of course, this would be in stark contrast to the statements made in public. The appeal, had it continued, was anticipated to reveal some very embarrassing and damaging information for both the US and UK govts to contend with, and any 'international condemnation' of the compassionate release would be a picnic in the park compared to the issues the appeal, and any quashing of the conviction, may reveal.

Last edited by Buncrana; 3rd November 2010 at 01:00 PM.
Buncrana is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd November 2010, 01:57 PM   #177
Caustic Logic
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,494
Originally Posted by Alt+F4 View Post
If Megrahi is innocent than how much of his "pretty hefty sacrifice" helped stand in the way of finding the real killers? Bite it, Libya!
The whole thing. Again, I don't feel there's adequate evidence for anyone in Libya being involved, and the US and Scottish authorities, in fabricating a case against Libya, via a case against Megrahi the Libyan, ensured that his whole sacrifice (and it was supposed to be bigger) coverd hugely for the embarrassing reality of who did it. So again, bite it USA. (and that time it's me saying it)

Last edited by Caustic Logic; 3rd November 2010 at 02:18 PM.
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 3rd November 2010, 01:59 PM   #178
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,980
This is rather sweet, what Beerina seems to believe. That politicians the world over no sooner see what appears to be a miscarriage of justice, but they'll ignore law and due process and say, we goofed, you're free. Which planet is he on?

The way this is supposed to be done is that you have a commission to look at the evidence, and hear more evidence, and then decide whether it might have been a miscarriage of justice. And if the commission say yes, then a legal right to an appeal is created. So the convicted person appeals, and his lawyers present his case, and the judges listen, and if it really was a horrible goof-up, then the conviction is quashed.

Guess what. We got nearly to the end of that. Another few months, and it would have been a done deal. But there was that pesky part about hearing the evidence. And the people who knew what that evidence was, took a long hard look at what was coming, and decided no way. Megrahi was told he could go back home to Libya right now, but only if he dropped the appeal.

The US government, the UK government, the Scottish government and even the Libyan government are completely unanimous that they absolutely do not want that appeal before the court, and they absolutely do not want to see Megrahi acknowledged as having had no hand in the Lockerbie bombing. Why? Good question.

But no matter who wants to turn the other way and ignore it all to death until it goes away, that doesn't make the evidence, or rather the lack of it, any better.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd November 2010, 04:21 PM   #179
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,980
Just trying to drag this back to the point we were discussing, I'm repeating the evidence for the bomb being introduced at Heathrow, compared to what I understand Bunntamas's arguments were in favour of it being introduced at Malta.

Evidence for Heathrow.
  • It is absolutely undisputed that security at Heathrow was diabolical, and it would have been easy for a terrorist to gain access to the baggage area. For example, there were thousands of airside passes in existence, and nobody seemed at all sure who had them. All they'd have needed was one of these and a plausible uniform.
  • There was a very serious breach of security in that area only 18 hours before the flight departed, with a padlock "cut like butter" to give access to the airside space.
  • The container labelled up to collect interline baggage for PA103 was left unattended in that area for long periods during the afternoon.
  • A suitcase fitting the description of the bomb bag was seen in that container, in the approximate position of the eventual explosion, before the Frankfurt feeder flight landed.
  • The only suitcase fitting that description which was recovered after the crash was the one in little pieces that had had the bomb in it, and none of the relatives of the passengers whose luggage was in that container before PA103A got in (the interline passengers) reported their relative having owned such a case, or having unrecovered luggage.
  • Lord Osborne said of the suggestion that the bomb could have been introduced at Malta, "There is considerable and quite compelling evidence that that could not have happened."
Bunntamas's counter to that "considerable and quite compelling evidence", as I remember (and no doubt if I'm wrong she'll put me right), is....
  • Libyan Arab Airlines was in charge of security at Luqa airport in 1988.
    • No, it wasn't. Air Malta was.
  • "I think it would have been very easy to have got an unaccomanied bag on that flight."
    • OK, tell us how.
  • Megrahi was a charming fellow who could have persuaded someone to let him past security.
    • How do you cope with the fact that he didn't go airside that day, and no charmed person ever came forward or was exposed as having assisted him?
  • The Maltese government of the time was in the pocket of Libya, and would have threatened and beaten its citizens to aid and conceal the smuggling of the bag on to the flight.
    • Malta isn't like that now, if it ever was. Why have none of those threatened and beaten citizens come forward to explain what happened?
  • The Maltese baggage handlers refused to give evidence at Zeist.
    • The Maltese baggage handlers took industrial action on the matter, based on the intrusive investigation and baseless accusations they were subjected to.
I would also point out that the investigators spent a very long time and an enormous amount of effort trying to find some plausible means whereby that bomb could have been got past security at Malta, or evidence that this might have happened. They tapped private phone lines and tailed people and investigated all their friends and acquaintances, and they found nothing.

In the end, the prosecution had to admit defeat, and simply fell back on the assertion that the bomb must have been smuggled on at Malta, despite their inability to find any trace of that. This was the basis of their case. That's what the baggage handlers were so pissed off about - that they appeared to stand accused of complicity in the bombing, without the slightest shred of evidence, and that they were being asked to come to Zeist as witnesses when the prosecution clearly regarded them as accomplices.

This is the basis for my belief that the bomb went on at Heathrow. No, I can't place anyone at Heathrow that afternoon who might have been the culprit. However, anyone who has ever been to Heathrow knows what a huge, anonymous place it is. And nobody seems to have checked all the passengers boarding other flights out of that airport at the relevant time. Who knows how many shady characters might have been travelling somewhere that day, without going airside, without doing anything at all suspicious, but still available to be framed....

I would welcome a discussion of the relative strengths of these competing theories.

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; 3rd November 2010 at 04:23 PM.
Rolfe is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd November 2010, 11:22 PM   #180
Caustic Logic
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,494
Originally Posted by Alt+F4 View Post
If Megrahi is innocent than how much of his "pretty hefty sacrifice" helped stand in the way of finding the real killers? Bite it, Libya!
I've been dwelling on this all evening for some reason. Alt+F4, could you explain a little more what you mean here? Because it seems kind of like an accusation that Megrahi was using himself as a human shield to protect the truly guilty parties in Libya.

First, that holds within it the assumption that Megrahi was not himself guilty as charged, a position I'd be surprised to hear you support.

Second, there's not much clear or compelling evidence against Libya, aside from the case assembled against Megrahi and Fhimah.

Third, if the real killers were other than the two "Libyan agents" charged, then it's true their being at the center of attention and blame helped cover for the true villains. Libyan or not.

But it was the American and British authorities who put that case together, not Megrahi or Fhimah. So IF I've got your gist right, and it has any validity, the question becomes, well, the same one you asked but perhaps read differently. That is, "why did the authorities move to frame the wrong people and thus shift attention from the real terrorists, Libyan or otherwise?"

But that's just how I'm reading it. You don't give a lot of context, you know.
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 3rd November 2010, 11:31 PM   #181
Meed
boundless constraint
 
Meed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 5,197
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
But none of that is in the slightest degree necessary to the appreciation of the simple point that they got the wrong guy. And yet this is the aspect that simply dare not speak its name. Alex Salmond says he doesn't doubt the safety of the conviction. Americans from Richard Marquise to Frank Duggan are lining up to scream GUILTY GUILTY GUILTY. And even in this forum, home to alleged critical thinkers who take great pride in judging on the evidence, many of the same hermetically sealed minds.

It drives me absolutely screaming bonkers.
That's just how the media works in the US. It's very rare to see moral criticism of our foreign policy or the reporting of things that would make it appear obviously bad. At least in major newspapers and network/cable television. Blunderous? Sure, tactical mistakes in foreign policy can be admitted and discussed. But not crimes or moral failings.

I honestly don't really know why this phenomena occurs. Something you said earlier (I can't remember if it was the poll thread you linked to or this one) may be a part of it. It was that when you posted about Megrahi some people thought you were just trying to piss off Americans. If I've learned anything from spending way too much time on message boards, there are many people who will react negatively to any criticism or even implied criticism (i.e. reporting things that make the country look bad) of the US. The reaction will often be that this says something bad about the author, first and foremost. They clearly hate America, are radicals, are trying to make America look bad, probably think terrorism is the bees knees, etc. Other times it will be to just gloss over and ignore such content. Psychology has demonstrated that humans have a powerful tendency to ignore information that does not agree with their world view and seek out and pay attention to information that does. Finally, one can spin the facts so that the supposed bad deed is not a bad deed at all, but simply a tactical blunder if not a noble deed.

How might all that relate to the media? Well, it could impact the media in a few ways. One, if target audiences are perceived to display such attitudes then certain things just become a bad idea to write. Two, journalists may have these attitudes themselves. Surely not all journalists. But then it may be that journalists who have this type of attitude are considerably more likely to be hired by the mainstream press.

Trends perpetuate. Unspoken norms are perceived and not typically challenged. In group/out group biases are powerful and known to distort views. Psychologists can create IG/OG bias just by taking a bunch of strangers, randomly dividing them into two groups and having them engage in some activity. Oddly, most people don't seem to have any hang ups about expecting other (non Western in particular) countries to have media that is hopelessly biased in their country's favor. Yet somehow the blinders seem to go on when we regard our own.

Maybe there are other reasons. That is just the best explanation I can come up with. Perhaps British media is better.

Last edited by Meed; 3rd November 2010 at 11:34 PM.
Meed is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th November 2010, 07:11 AM   #182
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,980
I don't know about better, but different, yes. I don't see the same tendency in British media to close ranks and declare firmly that Britain is always right and anyone criticising a British decision or action must "hate Britain". The British media are still perfectly capable of closing ranks and selectively reporting on how they want things to be, though.

I find it hard to relate to some of the motivations expressed or suggested in these threads. Bunntamas keeps suggesting that I'm concerned about the Megrahi conviction because I have issues with the Scottish government. I don't know what these issues are supposed to be. (In reality, I have issues with the Scottish government - as regards the dropping of the appeal - because I'm concerned about the Megrahi conviction.)

Beerina and some others seem to see the issue as one of either defending or attacking the Scottish government, though he thinks I'm defending it. It seems to be enough for such posters to get as far as some conclusion that will still allow them to criticise the Scottish government for something, and retire vindicated. At the same time, the possibility that the US government has not been acting with the greatest of probity thoughout is conveniently sidelined.

I have to say I'm moderately baffled by the unbroken wall of offical denial that has been erected surrounding the issue of the (non) safety of this conviction. I don't really think discussion of the reasons for it is appropriate outside the CT section. To my mind, it implies a cover-up of something pretty substantial, possibly gross negligence on the part of US security agents (+/- German personnel) leading up to the incident. And that even now, over 20 years later, the fallout from revealing this is something the authorities are not prepared to deal with.

That's just speculation of course, and I think any more detailed discussion of it should take place in a different thread. However, I do find it very strange when posters come along and essentially discount the possibility that government agencies might have reasons for covering stuff up, and declare that the whole thing must be horse-feathers because if there was any truth in it, Superman Obama would undoubtedly have stepped in to sort it all out.

The evidence is the evidence, and leads where it leads. Why various authorities are responding in the way they are is a separate issue.

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

Last edited by Rolfe; 4th November 2010 at 07:17 AM.
Rolfe is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th November 2010, 01:51 PM   #183
Caustic Logic
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,494
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
The evidence is the evidence, and leads where it leads. Why various authorities are responding in the way they are is a separate issue.

Rolfe.
Exactly. I can certainly see why this could be a sticking point for a lot of people, and the answer isn't just a simple A B or C thing we can know for sure. I don't think the failure of leaders to acknowledge Megrahi's likely innocence can be accepted as a valid debunk of his innocence.

And thanks for the comment, Cornsail. Some relevant insights that people should consider. It's funny how we could all know and agree, in once context, that of course governments have interests, ignore things they'd rather not deal with, and manage to project these same interests on the public to whatever degree they can. With media help it becomes quite easy, and for whatever reason, the mass media is helping. It's obvious - just look at a few news reports and how many mention the actual and troubling evidence, as opposed to just repeating "Lockerbie bomber?"

But when we see it in action most of us refuse to actually see it. And then someone will use that failure of the masses to see it as another debunk yet...

Alt+F4, any comment on the question above?
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 4th November 2010, 02:26 PM   #184
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,980
I'm not entirely sure what Alt+F4 actually meant.

I know the judges said that if Megrahi had explained the real purpose of his trip to Malta on 20th/21st December (using the Abdusamad passport) they might have been less inclined to find him guilty. However, I'm not so sure about that.

The use of the Abdusamad passport and his absolute refusal to say anything definite about the reason for the journey are strong pointers it was some sort of Libyan secret service undertaking. So maybe he did visit a Maltese joiner to arrange getting a quotation for building a wooden staircase in his house in Tripoli (one suggestion put forward by the defence), that hardly requires the use of a diplomatic passport and an undercover identity. So that wasn't the main reason for the trip.

It does however illustrate that a journey may have more than one purpose, or more than one objective may be achieved. So, supposing Megrahi had spilled the beans on whatever covert mission Gadaffi had sent him on that day - legal or illegal. Were the judges likely to say, well that's OK then, we realise you were smuggling aircraft parts (or whatever it was), so we realise now you weren't smuggling a case on to KM180? I doubt it. They'd have been just as likely to use any illegality that was revealed as proof of villainy, and to have decided that the journey was intended to kill two birds (or 270 people) with one stone.

So really, I don't think keeping mum about the reason for that journey is likely to have damaged the defence case significantly. I hardly think revealing it would have caused the case to collapse and sent the investigation off in hot pursuit of the real culprits. Not considerig the intellectual back-flips the judges were prepared to perform to manfacture a guilty verdict from a virtually complete absence of evidence. Let's be realistic about this.

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

Last edited by Rolfe; 4th November 2010 at 02:31 PM.
Rolfe is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th November 2010, 10:35 PM   #185
Beerina
Sarcastic Conqueror of Notions
 
Beerina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 29,082
Originally Posted by Buncrana View Post
You honestly believe that it would be that simple? Sorry everyone we er, goofed, and we let the real people away. End of story, lets move on, it's all in the past?
The alternative is everybody in the know sitting around saying, well, ok, you guys let them go and the rest of us will save face bitching about how pathetic you are.

Does not sound so great of a plan to me. Especially since what we are talking about would probably come out anyway -- witness all the people around here talking about the guy's innocence. It's hardly the "big secret" now, is it?

I don't have any great answers -- I am just pointing out far too much matches CT templates. That should concern you.
__________________
"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 5th November 2010, 02:09 AM   #186
Caustic Logic
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,494
Originally Posted by Beerina View Post
The alternative is everybody in the know sitting around saying, well, ok, you guys let them go and the rest of us will save face bitching about how pathetic you are.
Like myself, Buncrana is given to some hyperbole. And I consider your point a fair consideration, I think. Not sure what the "bitching about how pathetic you are" part, but it is hard (for most) to give credence to a conspiracy which, at its heart, is designed to absolve the true perpetrators of such an attack. I can only say most people involved probably don't see it that way. Simple cgnitive dissonance is what it is, and well syudied. Add to that legal rulings to the effect of their case being true, the whole world moving to its mandates for years, etc., and what started as a lie by a small handful with many unwitting or half-witting accomplices, could well take on a life of its own.

But, even if that may still sound outlandish, as Rolfe says, "the evidence is the evidence and leads where it leads." Seeing all that I have, I'm having a a hard time seeing how all this wrongness could happen without at least some kernel of conspiracy.

Quote:
Does not sound so great of a plan to me. Especially since what we are talking about would probably come out anyway -- witness all the people around here talking about the guy's innocence. It's hardly the "big secret" now, is it?
In itself, no, not the kind of thing a government would chose to do. I imagine someone had to deem the alternative worse yet, for reasons we can't fully know. State secrets of various kinds. A lot is now known, but not everything. As you say, there's a danger of the truth leaking out, especially in a case this huge. And the fact is, it has come out. To some degree, it started falling apart at day one, accelerating after the trial and the SCCRC ruling. That's how cases often fall apart, in a steady erosion of certainty. But in this case it was barred from legal fulfillment.

The facts are right there, but world governments have ignored them and maintained the status quo. So legal reality lags behind the demonstratable kind. The mass media and the world public are still behind as well, in a clearly related trend that is otherwise a bit mysterious. And this is the basic problem I think that motivates those of us who get fired up to try and change the legal and popular realities. Something about actual truth belonging at the base of these, but missing at the moment.

Quote:
I don't have any great answers -- I am just pointing out far too much matches CT templates. That should concern you.
No, I'm concerned, just not distracted from what facts and evidence tell me, despite your own uninformed misgivings. But I do appreciate you sharing them, seriously. I only suggest again you re-think your plan to continue to avoid a detailed look here.
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 5th November 2010, 02:18 AM   #187
Caustic Logic
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,494
And I think it bears repeating what the Megrahi case is up against. We've seen some of the problems, the total lack of support on the Malta end, the near-absence of support from any other airport (one locker-paper), the non-ID of Tony Gauci, the post-trial non-witness status of once star witness Giaka, the questions over physical evidence pointing to Libya, the absence of an accomplice, the illogic of the whole alleged plot ...

against this:
A nation with an amazingly symmetrical greivance (Iran, IR655), much evidence of a selected contractor (PFLP-GC) with the known ability to rip planes from the air, and a known technology in their possession just six weeks before the bombing. Add to that a missing device from this batch, a missing airport security expert apparently in possession of said bomb, a security breach at Heathrow, and a mysterious brown hard-shell Samsonite case reported inside container AVE4041, but with no known origin. And then an explosion inside that type of case in about that spot of AVE4041 at a time matching the known parameter's of the PFLP-GC bombs (38 min. after takeoff), followed a couple hours later by a claim of responsibility by the Iranian-government affiliated Guardians of the Islamic Revolution.

(revision: I only though I had a source for the Guardians being tasked with the job) Otherwise, this is all looking pretty coherent to me, involves no Libyans, and has been tossed aside only because something had managed to lead things over to these Libyan guys on Malta. And gave us this ridiculous case that has helped cover for the previously open case.
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 5th November 2010, 04:17 AM   #188
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
The alternative is everybody in the know sitting around saying, well, ok, you guys let them go and the rest of us will save face bitching about how pathetic you are.

Does not sound so great of a plan to me.

Well, no. I think that's called a false dichotomy. One other possibility is that every group is doing whatever it believes will best further its own interests. If most of these interests add up to CYA, then the effect may be much the same.

Originally Posted by Beerina View Post
Especially since what we are talking about would probably come out anyway -- witness all the people around here talking about the guy's innocence. It's hardly the "big secret" now, is it?

It's been "out" for years, indeed decades. The world is crawling with both articles and documentaries (not to mention blog sites) pointing out the gossamer-thin nature of the case against Megrahi, highlighting the perverse nature of the verdict when considered in the light of the actual evidence, and indeed examining the possibility that some key items of evidence might actually have been fabricated.

From the early period after the indictments we have The Maltese Double Cross, a 1994 2˝-hour award-winning documentary, and a number of similar productions running up to Silence over Lockerbie in 1998.

After the trial (which ended in 2001) there was an eruption of negative comment. In the period between the end of the hearings and the announcement of the verdict it was widely expected that both accused would be acquitted, to the point where there was a positive "WTF??" reaction when the guilty verdict against Megrahi was announced. Examination of the judges' written Opinion of the Court provided no answers. After summarising a bunch of evidence positively heaving with extremely reasonable doubt (to put it mildly), the judges simply said well we're going to find him guilty anyway.

Principle commentary from that period includes the blistering report of the official UN observer to the trial, Dr. Hans Kochler, who believed the verdict was a politically-managed stitch-up, Lockerbie: Flight from Justice by Paul Foot and The Lockerbie Trial: A Perverse Verdict by David Morrison.

In more recent years we have Gideon Levy's Lockerbie Revisited (2009), a BBC Newsnight investigation and a play at the 2010 Edinburgh Festival Fringe, Lockerbie: Unfinished Business. It was noted that nobody who saw that play left the theatre under any illusion that Megrahi had carried out the bombing. Prose contributions have included a 2009 article by renowned human rights lawyer Gareth Peirce, The Framing of al-Megrahi.

The question of how something can be in plain sight like that and yet be given a smart body-swerve by the mainstream news every time the subject comes up is quite interesting.

Originally Posted by Beerina View Post
I don't have any great answers -- I am just pointing out far too much matches CT templates. That should concern you.

And that seems to be at least part of the answer. If the doubts and concerns can be labelled "conspiracy theorising", that's quite a good way to get them discounted.

However, the question of "why" is indeed more suited to the Conspiracy Theories forum and has indeed been discussed there in some detail. As I said, the evidence is the evidence. It should stand on its own, and sceptics should be capable of examining it on its own merits or demerits without resorting to "hey, but that would be a conspiracy theory, and we all know these aren't true".

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; 5th November 2010 at 04:59 AM.
Rolfe is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th November 2010, 04:25 AM   #189
MRC_Hans
Penultimate Amazing
 
MRC_Hans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 20,477
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
As I said, the evidence is the evidence. It should stand on its own, and sceptics should be capable of examining it on its own merits or demerits without resorting to "hey, but that would be a conspiracy theory, and we all know these aren't true".

Rolfe.
I haven't enough knowledge of the case at hand to discuss it, but the above is very true: A conspiracy theory cannot be dimissed just for being that. Unless you want to define 'conspirace theory' as an unfounded conspiracy claim, but even that would render the argument circular.

Any conspiracy theory must be evaluated on the evidence, .... just like any other claim.

Hans
__________________
If you love life, you must accept the traces it leaves.
MRC_Hans is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th November 2010, 04:49 AM   #190
Caustic Logic
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,494
Thanks, Hans.

Just a funny thought I had to type up before nodding off:

Professor Black recently mentioned a standing rumor in the Scottish legal arena, that two of the three judges wanted to acquit both Megrahi and Fhimah, and one wanted to convict both. To avoid a split decision, they all agreed to convict one and acquit one. The rumor doesn't seem to know which of three was hot to convict, or based on just what.

So all it would take to achieve the travesty of the Zeist verdict would be such a bargain, two decent judges, let's say Lord Sutherland and Lord Coulsfield, and then a Lord MacHrozni. There just MUST be "sooper seekrit" evidence!

Sorry Rolfe for misappropriating that phrase before without crediting you.

Sorry McHrozni, and Lord MacLean. it was just too perfect to pass up. Cheers!

Last edited by Caustic Logic; 5th November 2010 at 04:52 AM.
Caustic Logic is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th November 2010, 07:53 AM   #191
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,980
I don't think anyone can deny that cover-ups happen. Darat recently mentioned the cover-up in the Roman Catholic Church of the fact that numerous clergy were into kiddie-fiddling in a big way. Of course, we only know about the ones that were unsuccessful.

I don't know what's being covered up in relation to Lockerbie, but I'm pretty certain something is. There's enough evidence and informed speculation regarding US operations at Frankfurt in connection with the PFLP-GC, and the DEA controlled drugs shipments, to lead me to suspect that's the locus. Someone trying to prevent the Iranian revenge for IR655, and maybe trying to give the terrorists enough rope to hang themselves with, and maybe complicated with drug shipments and deals relating to the Beirut hostages, and getting way too clever. Getting so clever it crosses the line into gross negligence, and the terrorists succeed - maybe by going for a Heathrow introduction while everyone is watching Frankfurt?

It doesn't need many people to misdirect an investigation like this, if they have influence in the right places. And I think it was misdirected, bit by bit, over the next two years, until all anyone could see was Megrahi in Malta that morning with his diplomatic passport, and a completely imaginary trail linking him to the explosion.

And then as time passes, the cover-up becomes self-perpetuating. It becomes about covering up the cover-up, as much as about concealing the original sin. Too many people have too much invested in the version that has been current for 20 years to be comfortable about revising it. It's a bit like Lord Denning and his infamous remarks about denying the Birmingham Six right of appeal. If the appeal is valid it means police were lying and the entire investigation was corrupt and this is such a dreadful prospect that any right-thinking person must agree it should not be allowed to happen. If Megrahi is innocent that means that eight years of punitive sanctions on Libya and forcing Gadaffi to pay billions of dollars in compensation to the victims' relatives were unjustified. Oh dear.

I notice it even in this forum. JREF members realise one by one that the evidence being presented really does support the contention that Megrahi wasn't the culprit. This doesn't turn into a big crusade though - people mostly just shuffle uncomfortably and go away and do something else. In Scotland there's a significant proportion of the population, perhaps even a majority, prepared to concede that "he probably didn't do it". But they're not storming the barricades about it. A shrug, and "what can you do?"

It does seem to be a media thing. Individual programmes get broadcast, and articles get written, pointing out the flaws in the evidence and the problems with the conviction. But the main news bulletins continue to refer to "the Lockerbie bomber" and singularly fail to stir up any public outcry about the injustice.

I don't really understand it. Maybe it is all NWO mind control or something. But none of that changes the evidence, and the conclusions that can be drawn from the evidence.

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; 5th November 2010 at 08:10 AM.
Rolfe is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th November 2010, 10:14 AM   #192
Buncrana
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 458
Originally Posted by Beerina View Post
The alternative is everybody in the know sitting around saying, well, ok, you guys let them go and the rest of us will save face bitching about how pathetic you are.

Does not sound so great of a plan to me. Especially since what we are talking about would probably come out anyway -- witness all the people around here talking about the guy's innocence. It's hardly the "big secret" now, is it?

I don't have any great answers -- I am just pointing out far too much matches CT templates. That should concern you.
I think CL and Rolfe have pretty comprehensively answered those points Beerina. All I would add is simply that I'd urge you (and anyone else who is interested) to have a read at the Zeist Court Judgement and determne for yourself whether it makes rational sense.

The judgement is relatively short at 82pages (PDF), but primarily read the judges summation on the evidence uncovered determining how the bomb bag came to be inserted on a flight at Luqa, Malta. Examine the Judges summary relating to the shop keeper's evidence surrounding the date of sale and identification of the purchaser. These two paticular areas were the foundation and central pillars of the case supporting Megrahi's guilt. In conclusion, I'm fairly confident you too will have the doubts and ask the very questions that are asked in this thread.
Buncrana is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th November 2010, 12:42 PM   #193
dirtywick
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,974
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
I notice it even in this forum. JREF members realise one by one that the evidence being presented really does support the contention that Megrahi wasn't the culprit. This doesn't turn into a big crusade though - people mostly just shuffle uncomfortably and go away and do something else. In Scotland there's a significant proportion of the population, perhaps even a majority, prepared to concede that "he probably didn't do it". But they're not storming the barricades about it. A shrug, and "what can you do?"
What should you do?
dirtywick is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th November 2010, 12:44 PM   #194
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,980
Good question.

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; 5th November 2010 at 01:56 PM.
Rolfe is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th November 2010, 12:51 PM   #195
Alt+F4
diabolical globalist
 
Alt+F4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 9,997
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
I notice it even in this forum. JREF members realise one by one that the evidence being presented really does support the contention that Megrahi wasn't the culprit. This doesn't turn into a big crusade though - people mostly just shuffle uncomfortably and go away and do something else. In Scotland there's a significant proportion of the population, perhaps even a majority, prepared to concede that "he probably didn't do it". But they're not storming the barricades about it. A shrug, and "what can you do?"
I think that after all these years the issue should be left to the families. They probably have more information than anyone on the outside. They should decide what the next step should be.
__________________
"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 5th November 2010, 01:01 PM   #196
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,980
Originally Posted by Alt+F4 View Post
I think that after all these years the issue should be left to the families. They probably have more information than anyone on the outside. They should decide what the next step should be.

That's a fairly bizarre thing to say. There are very good reasons why the victims of crime, or their relatives, do not have special standing in most western jurisdictions. Mainly because the desire for revenge or retribution can cloud anyone's judgement. And it's certainly not true to say that being a relative of a victim gives anyone privileged information or insight.

And then again, which families would you consult? The Swires? The Berkleys? The Cadmans? The Dix family? The Moseys?

Or the Flynns, the Cohens and the rest of their group?

You going to take a vote or something?

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; 5th November 2010 at 01:58 PM.
Rolfe is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th November 2010, 02:58 PM   #197
Caustic Logic
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,494
Originally Posted by Alt+F4 View Post
I think that after all these years the issue should be left to the families. They probably have more information than anyone on the outside. They should decide what the next step should be.
I was hoping you'd explain the "standing in the way of the real killers" thing, not toss out another silly statement with no rational basis. But hey, you're not here to meet my needs.

But if you stand by this, wich family members should get a say? A majority I'm sure would demand Megrahi captured and sent back to prison, and no new probe, despite his likely innocence they just won't let themselves see. I think everyone agrees he's not likely going to be sent back. A smaller and smarter portion wants a new and saner trial/review/investigation, perhaps to identify the "real killers" as you put it, but the governments have so far blocked that at every turn.

So as it stands, neither of these family groupings are quite satisfied with what the governments have done. If they're to start working one way or the other, perhaps your solution should be sent to all involved authorities?
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 5th November 2010, 04:15 PM   #198
Alt+F4
diabolical globalist
 
Alt+F4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 9,997
Originally Posted by Caustic Logic View Post
A majority I'm sure would demand Megrahi captured and sent back to prison, and no new probe, despite his likely innocence they just won't let themselves see.
Evidence?

Quote:
A smaller and smarter portion wants a new and saner trial/review/investigation
Again, evidence? You really have no idea what each of the 270 families would want pursued at this point.

Quote:
So as it stands, neither of these family groupings are quite satisfied with what the governments have done. If they're to start working one way or the other, perhaps your solution should be sent to all involved authorities?
Some are satisfied, some are not. After all these years, if few others seem to still care, the families are all that still matters. I say good luck in finding justice. They most likely know more about the case than you do.
__________________
"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 5th November 2010, 04:20 PM   #199
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 40,980
It's getting quite tedious. Still nobody prepared to support Megrahi's conviction with reference to the actual evidence.

We've had various general statements of villainy. He was a Libyan secret service agent. Er probably, but why this particular Libyan secret service agent, with no prior involvement in terrorist activities? But he was at the airport when the bomb was smuggled into the baggage system. No, he appears to have been about 1000 miles away from the airport where the bomb was smuggled into the baggage system.

Well he went to Chad, once. No, we don't know that, but even if he did, how does that relate to the Lockerbie bombing? But this is a conspiracy theory so it must be nonsense. Really, so there has never ever been an attempted cover-up in the entire history of the world? [ThePrestige] OK you win see if I care. [McHrozni] I just think there must be secret evidence that he really did it anyway.

And so it goes on. I'm almost tempted to switch sides and see if I can make a better case for Megrahi's guilt myself! (I did that, several months ago, but I couldn't make it fly and Buncrana laughed at me.)

Now we're being told that "the families" must know best so they should get to decide. Would that be the Bunntamas family, who with the greatest of respect has enormous holes in her knowledge of the case and clings to an assertion of Megrahi's guilt that doesn't seem to be based on anything but a terror of not having someone to blame? Or the group of UK families, who have declared their intention to resurrect the dropped appeal process in order to get the conviction quashed and a new inquiry launched?

Beerina's right about one thing. This is all going to come out some day. It would just be nice if that happened while it still counted as news, rather than waiting till it gets published in the history books.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th November 2010, 04:22 PM   #200
Alt+F4
diabolical globalist
 
Alt+F4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 9,997
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
That's a fairly bizarre thing to say. There are very good reasons why the victims of crime, or their relatives, do not have special standing in most western jurisdictions. Mainly because the desire for revenge or retribution can cloud anyone's judgement. And it's certainly not true to say that being a relative of a victim gives anyone privileged information or insight.
I never said they should have special standing in any court. In a murder proceding it's not unusal for the prosecution to consult with the victims or the families if they wish to further pursue a case that might have few avenues of approach left. I also think it is naive to believe that victims and their families are not privileged to information not available to those who get all their information from the media/Internet.
__________________
"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
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 09:35 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.