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

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags Lockerbie bombing , Pan Am 103

Reply
Old 17th September 2009, 05:51 AM   #81
A'isha
Miss Schoolteacher
 
A'isha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Birmingham, AL
Posts: 15,221
Originally Posted by Caustic Logic View Post
Holy crud, typed this hours ago but never submitted.



You should check the "all of it" part. I agree that this 'unlikely' scenario is entirely possible, weird things happen, and I'm no expert. And this is a good counter-point, like others above. But one thing here is this alleged timed bomb happened to blow up 38 minutes after leaving Heathrow, while (coincidentally?) the PFLP bombs recently IDd were designed to blow up 35-45 minutes after takeoff. Consistent with one of these planted at Heathrow, OR a badly-timed time bomb earlier. I'm willing to call it undecided there.
Well, I was simply addressing the "this is suspicious because no self-respecting terrorist would ever do something like that" part of Rolfe's post by pointing out that terrorists have done something like that in the past.

If there's other evidence (like the consistency with the timing of other PFLP bombs), then that's what should be the source of suspicion, not incredulity that terrorists would ever do something as dumb as mis-set a timer or send bags containing bombs through multiple airport checkpoints, because, again, all of that actually happened before Lockerbie.
A'isha 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 17th September 2009, 12:01 PM   #82
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,728
Yes, there's a lot of evidence. I was just trying to set the scene, really. If the timer fragment is genuine, its existence has to be factored in to any theory about what happened. If, on the other hand, it was planted, as many people believe, then WTF???

We know that the authorities weren't playing this one straight. The situation surrounding Giaka demonstrates that. However, it could be anything from a genuine belief in the defendants' guilt leading to "sexing up" of the evidence, to a cover-up of a MIHOP. I think the latter is in the realms of paranoid fantasy, but I'm intrigued as to where on the spectrum the highest probability lies.

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 17th September 2009, 12:35 PM   #83
Ambrosia
Good of the Fods
 
Ambrosia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,483
The "Official story" about MST-13 can be disputed. At the original trial it is claimed that it was found in a grey shirt in January 1989 by DC Gilchrist and another officer DC McColm.

When Gilchrist bags the shirt he labels it "charred cloth" at some time later he, or some unknown person, overwrites the word "debris" on the bag, it's not noticed that there is debris within the cloth until it's examined later in May of 1989. the official verdict of the trial says in regard to this:

Quote:
On 13 January 1989 DC Gilchrist and DC McColm were engaged together in
line searches in an area near Newcastleton. A piece of charred material was found by
them which was given the police number PI/995 and which subsequently became
label 168. The original inscription on the label, which we are satisfied was written by
DC Gilchrist, was “Cloth (charred)”. The word ‘cloth’ has been overwritten by the
word ‘debris’. There was no satisfactory explanation as to why this was done, and
DC Gilchrist’s attempts to explain it were at worst evasive and at best confusing. We
are, however, satisfied that this item was indeed found in the area described, and DC
McColm who corroborated DC Gilchrist on the finding of the item was not crossexamined
about the detail of the finding of this item. This item was logged into the
property store at Dextar on 17 January 1989. It was suggested by the defence that
there was some sinister connotation both in the alteration of the original label and in
the delay between the finding of the item and its being logged in to Dextar. As we
have indicated, there does not appear to be any particular reason for the alteration of
the label, but we are satisfied that there was no sinister reason for it and that it was not
tampered with by the finders. As far as the late logging is concerned, at that period
there was a vast amount of debris being recovered, and the log shows that many other
items were only logged in some days after they had been picked up. Again therefore
we see no sinister connotation in this. Because it was a piece of charred material, it
was sent for forensic examination.
In May of 1989 the charred shirt is examined by Thomas Hayes of RARDE in May of 1989. His notes as a forensic examiner are in a loose leaf file, and the report on this shirt and it's contents is numbered 51. Pages 52-56 of his file are renumbered and were originally numbered by Hayes as 51-55.

September 1989 Allen Fereday sends DCI Williamson a polaroid picture of the fragment, asking for help in identifying it, explaining this picture is the best he can do in the short time. SOP would have been to photograph the shirt and the fragment when it was examined. SOP is also to make a seperate drawing of the fragment at time of examination and renumber the fragment as a seperate piece of evidence, this was not done either. SOP is to test the fragment for traces of explosive, also not done.

The official verdict in referring to Hayes reads as follows:

Quote:
There was also found embedded a fragment of
green coloured circuit board. The next reference to that last fragment occurs in a
memorandum sent by Mr Feraday to CI Williamson on 15 September 1989 enclosing
a Polaroid photograph of it and asking for assistance in trying to identify it. Again the

defence sought to cast doubt on the provenance of this fragment of circuit board, for
three reasons. In the first place, Dr Hayes’ note of his examination was numbered as
page 51. The subsequent pages had originally been numbered 51 to 55, but these
numbers had been overwritten to read 52 to 56. The suggestion was put to Dr Hayes
that the original pages 51 to 55 had been renumbered, the original page 56 had been
removed, and that thus space was made for the insertion of a new page 51. Dr Hayes’
explanation was that originally his notes had not been paginated at all. When he came
to prepare his report based on his original notes, he put his notes into more or less
chronological order and added page numbers at the top. He assumed that he had
inadvertently numbered two consecutive pages as page 51, and after numbering a few
more pages had noticed his error and had overwritten with the correct numbers.
Pagination was of no materiality, because each item that was examined had the date
of examination incorporated into the notes. The second reason for doubt was said to
be that in most cases when a fragment of something like a circuit board was found in
a piece of clothing, Dr Hayes’ practice was to make a drawing of that fragment and
give it a separate reference number. There was no drawing of this fragment on page
51, and the designation of the fragment as PT/35(b) was not done until a later date.
Finally it was said that it was inexplicable that if this fragment had been found in May
1989 and presumably photographed at the time, his colleague Mr Feraday should be
sending a memorandum in September 1989 enclosing a Polaroid photograph as being
“the best I can do in such a short time”. Dr Hayes could not explain this, and
suggested that the person to ask about it would be the author of the memorandum, Mr
Feraday, but this was not done. While it is unfortunate that this particular item which
turned out to be of major significance to this enquiry despite its miniscule size may
not initially have been given the same meticulous treatment as most other items, we
are nevertheless satisfied that the fragment was extracted by Dr Hayes in May l989
from the remnant of the Slalom shirt found by DC Gilchrist and DC McColm.
This MST timer fragment is the single most important piece of evidence in the entire trial.

Why is Feraday never called to explain his memo, and the questions that arise from it about the chain of custody of this vital evidence.

The SCCRC in a report that's voluminous, and still kept secret for the most part, which took 4 years to compile, finds that questions about the fragments authenticity and whether or not it was planted are unfounded.

Originally Posted by SCCRC
Underlying those submissions was the allegation that evidence
of the timer fragment had been fabricated in order to implicate Libya in
the bombing. The Commission undertook extensive enquiries in this
area but found nothing to support that allegation or to undermine the
trial court’s conclusions in respect of the fragment.
So far this tends to cement the "Official Story" as being correct, and that breaches of SOP and other issues are simply the result of sloppy work.

Enter Ulrich Lumpert.

His affidavit made one month after the release of the SCCRC report both undermines the conclusions regarding the fragment of the trial and the SCCRC report, but offers a plausible alternative version of the origin of this fragment. It also calls into question the actions of Hayes, Feraday and Gilchrist.

There is also evidence presented in the film "Maltese double cross" where a volunteer searcher, involved with the crash scene recovery, states that he was asked by police at a later date to sign bags of evidence that he had not seen before, to the effect that he or his team had found that evidence during their search, which casts a little doubt on the veracity of Gilchrist and McColms statements regarding what they found.
Ambrosia is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th September 2009, 03:38 PM   #84
Caustic Logic
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,494
Daaang. And that's what happens when you look close. Who can look closer yet and find the debunk?
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 17th September 2009, 04:30 PM   #85
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,728
I was aware of the SCCRC's statement that they had found no indication that evidence had been fabricated. I hadn't quite realised they'd specifically said it was the timer fragment they were talking about, but it was obviously part of it.

Robert Black is very condemnatory of this part of the report. Why, he asks, does the SCCRC find it necessary or appropriate to pre-emptively exonerate the investigating authorities on this matter? He thinks it's inappropriate and improper.

At the risk of sounding like a troofer, I don't trust the SCCRC as far as I could throw it on this matter. Sure, admit evidence that Gauci's identification was unsound, that's not hugely embarrassing to anyone at this stage. And without Gauci's identification, the case against Megrahi probably falls on appeal. I wonder if this might have been politically acceptable at this stage in the game, so long as the spotlight isn't shone on the areas that are more embarrassing than the discrepancies in Gauci's evidence. But digging further? That's a different kettle of fish.

My radio alarm is tuned to Radio Scotland, and for a few weeks a year or two ago, every single bloody morning it seems I was waking up to someone pontificating about the ultra-top-secret document Megrahi's defence team wanted to have released as evidence. The court ordered its release, and the Westminster government promptly slapped a public interest immunity certificate on it. The stated reason was that publishing the document would be damaging to Britain's relations with a friendly power.

It got sillier and sillier, and last time I tried to find a web article describing the machinations, I failed to get anything specific. However, Megrahi described the ruling (which his team were challenging) in his post-release interview. His account is exactly as I remember from the radio coverage at the time.

Quote:
He is also deeply critical of the Court of Session proceedings, where a special advocate was appointed to represent him because of the confidential nature of many pieces of evidence.

"I met the special advocate just one time and when I met him he said he doesn’t know anything about the documents and he said that he is not entitled to get in touch with me once he does know about it. Where is the justice in that? He is meant to represent my interests yet he cannot talk to me about a piece of crucial evidence. It could be of benefit to me and to the case, but they just say it is top secret and I am not entitled to see it or to see him again."

Yup, that's right. Neither Megrahi nor his lawyers were to be allowed to see the document(s). A "special advocate" was appointed by the court (Megrahi could not choose this person) who would look at the documents on his behalf. After he had seen them, he was forbidden from having any more contact with either Megrahi or his defence team, so that he couldn't possibly divulge anything about the contents. How he was supposed to argue Megrahi's case in court on this basis, I have literally no idea.

The "friendly power" remark was widely believed to be code for "the USA will be very very pissed-off if we make these documents public". The subject of the documents, which I had no clue about at the time, seems to be assumed to be the provenance of the timer fragment.

Some people, including but not necessarily limited to the US authorities, are prepared to fight tooth and nail to keep aspects of the Lockerbie investigation secret, even after more than 20 years. The UK government are certainly complicit in this, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if the Scottish legal establishment is as well. This isn't troofer paranoia, it's simple fact.

The question is, why? Early on, it was put like this.

Originally Posted by Cecil Parkinson
I was discussing with the Lockerbie relatives whether we couldn’t have some form of public inquiry which would have meant, because the security services were involved, inevitably a certain amount of suspicion – and I wondered whether I couldn’t get a High Court judge to look into the security aspects privately and report to me.

If I could get the relatives to agree with that, if I got that done, that would satisfy them. Because when you get into the Lockerbie business – how did we find out certain information, how did we know this, how did we know that? – you would have had to recall not only our own intelligence sources but information we were recovering from overseas. Therefore that had to be a closed area.

This suggests it's about protecting sources. This is a legitimate concern, but surely one which becomes somewhat less compelling more than 20 years later, with the international scene transformed several times over in that time.

Private Eye had a rather different take on the secrecy.

Originally Posted by Paul Foot
Just as likely was the fear in both their minds [Thatcher and Reagan] that the Lockerbie bombing had exposed a gaping hole in their intelligence services which would, if the matter was fully aired, be proved to have been incompetent to stop a murderous plot they knew about.

Rather than simply protecting sources, this suggestion is that the security operation was so incompetent that it would be unacceptably embarrassing to have this made public. This is certainly a better reason for continuing to hold secrecy even in the face of court orders, 20 years later.

However, how far does it go? Is it just about concealing incompetence, possibly incompetence so serious that a known bomb-maker was released for operational reasons, and promptly went right on with his original plans to blow up an airliner?

Or is there evidence that the cover-up went further than that, beyond pressurising and bribing witnesses and presenting a known liar in the witness box, even beyond removing evidence from the crash scene (which seems very likely to have happened), to actual fabrication of evidence?

If that was the case, as I said, I would not trust the SCCRC one inch to expose the truth, given the obvious anxiety in very high places to have certain aspects of this affair kept very quiet indeed.

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 17th September 2009, 04:56 PM   #86
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,728
Originally Posted by Cecil Parkinson
I was discussing with the Lockerbie relatives whether we couldn’t have some form of public inquiry which would have meant, because the security services were involved, inevitably a certain amount of suspicion – and I wondered whether I couldn’t get a High Court judge to look into the security aspects privately and report to me.

If I could get the relatives to agree with that, if I got that done, that would satisfy them. Because when you get into the Lockerbie business – how did we find out certain information, how did we know this, how did we know that? – you would have had to recall not only our own intelligence sources but information we were recovering from overseas. Therefore that had to be a closed area.

You know, what's this all about? Although that quote is from 1994, Parkinson is talking about events that happened in September 1989. Following the smackdown of Paul Channon in March, when his gung-ho "we've got the bastards" went suddenly into reverse on Thatcher's orders, Parkinson (his successor) had to back-track on a promise of an inquiry into the affair, in September.

We lose track of the timeline of all this, but I think it's important. As early as nine months after the disaster, well before anyone is talking about Libya (in fact just about the time Feraday is sending his polaroid to Williamson, well before Thurman identifies it as part of an MST-13 timer), the affair is being swept under the carpet because of security concerns.

They're not covering up the framing of Libya at this stage - they haven't actually framed Libya at that point. So what the hell is so sensitive? The details of the investigation and handling of the Frankfurt PFLP-GC cell, which possibly allowed Khreesat to go free unjustifiably, to bomb an airliner? Or whatever it was in the wreckage that had the US authorities with personnel on the ground allegedly interfering with the evidence as early as three or four hours after the crash?

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 17th September 2009, 06:33 PM   #87
Ambrosia
Good of the Fods
 
Ambrosia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,483
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
We lose track of the timeline of all this, but I think it's important. As early as nine months after the disaster... the affair is being swept under the carpet because of security concerns.

They're not covering up the framing of Libya at this stage - they haven't actually framed Libya at that point. So what the hell is so sensitive?
Hostages?

Specifically hostages taken by "Islamic Jihad" in Beruit circa late 80's. In late 89 Terry Anderson and Terry Waite were both hostages, and they'd just hanged Col William Higgins. Perhaps the pursuit of the PFLP-GC was "low-keyed" because of this ongoing hostage crisis and various shady deals that were bing done to try to effect their release. Perhaps threats of more direct action that would risk the lives of many more US/UK citizens in that area if they continued "hot-pursuit" of PFLP. Perhaps somehow Vincennes or even Iran-Contra is tied in here as well.

The Iran Iraq war has just finished and the "West" have been pretty much on "Iraqs side" or it would certainly have been made out that way to Iranians via Iranian media.

Salman Rushdie?

In February 1989 Khomeini declares a fatwah against him , Iran is in uproar over The Satanic Verses.

Maybe several things combined, perhaps there is no big single reason for keeping quiet.
Ambrosia is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th September 2009, 03:51 AM   #88
Ambrosia
Good of the Fods
 
Ambrosia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,483
The history of the PFLP-GC makes interesting reading.

"Profiles in terror:the guide to Middle East terrorist organizations" Aaron Mannes (2004) pp 324 [ linky ]

"Encyclopedia of modern worldwide extremists and extremist groups" Stephen Atkins (2004) pp160 [ linky ]

1956 Ahmed Jibril joins the Syrian army rises to Captain in the Engineers, and trains as a demolitions expert. 58 he's expelled from the army for "radical politics" 1959 moves to Cairo and forms the PLF (Palestine Liberation Front) 1961 he returns to Syria and re-enters the army. '67 the PLF joins the PFLP (Popular Front for Liberation of Palestine) In '68 Jibril splits from the PFLP when it's leader George Habash falls out with Syria. He forms the PFLP-GC that year.

1970 he bombs his first 2 planes both on the same day (21st Feb) SwissAir SR330. (he uses a barometric triggered bomb in the cargo hold.) and Austrian Airlines SE-210 Caravelle which returns safely to Frankfurt despite having a 3x2ft hole blown in it's fuselage at 14000ft. In May of 1970 he really makes the headlines with the Israeli schoolbus bombing.

During Israels 1982 war PFLP-GC captures 3 Israeli soilders, and for their return to Israel he negotiates the release of over 1000 Palestinian terrorists among them Sheikh Ahmed Yassin (leader of Hamas)

in 83 Jibril supports a Syrian backed rebellion against Arrafat. Around this time Jibril announces the PFLP-GC will once more stage international terrorist attacks.

Interestingly in 1987 up pops an actual bona fide link from Libya to PA103, albeit somewhat flimsy.

In '87 under pressure from the international community Syria reduces support for terrorism the PFLP-GC relocates, according to Aaron Mannes to Libya fighting on Libyas behalf in Chad. Also forges a partnership with Hezbollah in 1987.

in 89 Libya under pressure itself to reduce support for terrorism, but not yet even thought about in connection to PA103 throws the PFLP-GC out and they go back to Damascus.

We also know that the PFLP-GC had an underground base in Lebanon near Al Maniyah 20km south of Beruit. On 8th December 1988 2 weeks before the bombing of 103 the Sayaret Golani (Israeli Special Forces) along with IDF forces raided it using their classified weapon (exploding Rottweilers) one objective being to assassinate Jibril. Known as "Operation Blue and Brown"
Ambrosia is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th September 2009, 06:56 AM   #89
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,728
Originally Posted by Tippit View Post
What would the CIA's motive have been, and what was the political outcome of the attack?

As to who might have planted the fragment (if it was planted), I don't know. However, CIA involvement in all this started three or four hours after the crash, with operatives flown up from London combing the ground looking for something. As the search and investigation continued, the Scottish police were shadowed by CIA (and/or FBI? I'm never very sure which is what with these agencies). The CIA was controlling the investigation and the prosecution. It had its own lawyers in the court at Camp Zeist, advising the prosecution lawyers.

It was the CIA that was running Giaka as an agent, even though they knew he was only a car mechanic and had little if any Libyan security information. It was the CIA that was pressurising Giaka to provide "information" about Megrahi and Fhimah, information it presented to the Court as fact, while concealing the evidence that he was making it all up for personal gain.

So I can see why the default assumption is that, if evidence was fabricated, it was the CIA that was doing that. The cover-up has always been traceable to the USA protecting its interests in some way.

However, it's inevitable that Scottish (and some English) authorities were complicit in this. Exactly what the relationship was, I couldn't say, but it's quite clear that both US and UK governments were are determined to keep certain aspects of the affair under wraps.

Why? Take your pick. It could be about the political inadvisability of getting into a scrum with Iran, especially in the run-up to Desert Storm. It could be about something the CIA agents on the plane were carrying or undertaking. It could be related to the quantities of drugs that were allegedly found in the recovered luggage. (There's a complicated CT involving the substitution of a drug courier's suitcase with the bomb, which links these last two points.) It could be about covering up either incompetence or lethal miscalculation in the handling of the PFLP-GC cell in Frankfurt. It could even be related to influencing the South African peace process, bearing in mind that Pik Botha and some colleagues were pulled off that flight at the last minute, but another South African negotiator was on the flight.

I have no idea. The first suggestion is the popular one. The thing about a cover-up is, you don't know what's being covered up. My point is that the question of whether the timer fragment was genuine or planted makes a great deal of difference when trying to decide just what is being covered up.

Originally Posted by Travis View Post
[....] make sure that it was "evil" American agents who themselves put the bomb on the plane (presumably before going somewhere to kill puppies for sport)? If you're going to create a thread just to piss off Americans don't half ass it, make sure you have President H.W. Bush himself giving the order to bomb the plane then laughing maniacally while thunder claps in the background.

I'm creating a thread to examine certain aspects of the cover-up surrounding the PA 103 bombing. This cover-up has been going on for 20 years, and while it's far from clear what the hell is going on, and there are numerous pet theories, it's extremely well documented. I was surprised, two years ago, to find nothing about it in the forum. If you want to dismiss a ton of suspicious occurrences on the grounds that America can do no wrong, then feel free to go away.

While I think it's quite clear that the USA and specifically the CIA have been the driving force behind the whole thing, they haven't been short of help. The UK government has co-operated to the full. The Scottish police force is not above suspicion. And the Scottish criminal justice system staged a kangaroo court show trial in Holland in which a man was convliced of murder on evidence I wouldn't hand out a parking ticket on.

If you think this is all horse-feathers because it may show up the US government in a poor light, then I'm astonished by your naive trust in your government. All the more so when I read so many assertions (from Americans) in other threads that the US government is so incompetent and corrupt that it can't be trusted to run a whelk stall.

In true twoofer fashion, I'll point out that I'm just asking questions, and encourage you to look at the evidence.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th September 2009, 07:06 AM   #90
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,728
Originally Posted by Ambrosia View Post
Hostages?

Specifically hostages taken by "Islamic Jihad" in Beruit circa late 80's. In late 89 Terry Anderson and Terry Waite were both hostages, and they'd just hanged Col William Higgins. Perhaps the pursuit of the PFLP-GC was "low-keyed" because of this ongoing hostage crisis and various shady deals that were bing done to try to effect their release. Perhaps threats of more direct action that would risk the lives of many more US/UK citizens in that area if they continued "hot-pursuit" of PFLP. Perhaps somehow Vincennes or even Iran-Contra is tied in here as well.

The Iran Iraq war has just finished and the "West" have been pretty much on "Iraqs side" or it would certainly have been made out that way to Iranians via Iranian media.

Salman Rushdie?

In February 1989 Khomeini declares a fatwah against him , Iran is in uproar over The Satanic Verses.

Maybe several things combined, perhaps there is no big single reason for keeping quiet.

I remember that the hostage situation has been brought into one of the suggested explanations for the attack. That Oliver North was running a "drugs for hostages" operation similar to the "arms for hostages" one, involving CIA-sponsored drugs couriers carrying stuff into New York on PanAm flights. One of these couriers was on the flight, allegedly. This story says that Charked McKee was on his way back from North Africa unexpectedly to blow the whistle on the operation, and so one of the drug suitcases was switched for the bomb suitcase, to get him out of the way.

I think that one is so much horse-feathers, but there are aspects of the scenario that might support it. You have to wade through all the stuff and decide which bits are credible.

I think this is what's so hard about this one. There are so many weird coincidences surrounding the flight and the bombing, and it's hard to decide what's really coincidence and what's signficant. Also, there are so many suggested scenarios for what really happened or what's being covered up, which one to pick?

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; 18th September 2009 at 07:48 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 18th September 2009, 07:32 AM   #91
GlennB
Loggerheaded, earth-vexing fustilarian
 
GlennB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Arcadia, Greece
Posts: 23,732
Originally Posted by Travis View Post
I don't get it, why go through all this trouble to exonerate Al-Megrahi without also going through the trouble to make sure that it was "evil" American agents who themselves put the bomb on the plane (presumably before going somewhere to kill puppies for sport)? If you're going to create a thread just to piss off Americans don't half ass it, make sure you have President H.W. Bush himself giving the order to bomb the plane then laughing maniacally while thunder claps in the background.

Sorry if I sound grouchy but your slanted take on the USS Vincennes shootdown reveals a bias here.
Travis - if people were discussing the evidence surrounding a case such as The Birmingham Six, (or one of the many other miscarriages of justice that have occured in the UK) should Brits here assume the thread was designed to piss off Brits?

Or is it just possible this discussion has some inherent merit?
GlennB 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 18th September 2009, 07:52 AM   #92
manierisme
Student
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 31
Megrahi has released hundreds of pages worth of documents related to his pre-release appeal.

http://www.megrahimystory.net/

Last edited by Professor Yaffle; 18th September 2009 at 08:07 AM. Reason: Fixed link for you
manierisme 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 18th September 2009, 11:28 AM   #93
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,728
Thank you, I just heard that on the news and was about to Google for it.

Hundreds of pages? Sigh....

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th September 2009, 06:30 PM   #94
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,728
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
I've come across more material relating to the saga of the fragment.

I don't know how far to credit de Braeckeleer. I think his assertion that the bomb was placed outside the baggage container is a bridge too far. However, he seems to have pulled together a lot of stuff about the timer fragment, much of which is corroborated by other sources.

http://english.ohmynews.com/articlev...85213&rel_no=1

This seems to me to assert that the fragment was created in June 1989 in order to be introduced into the Pan Am wreckage. It's the first time I've heard of Inspector Fluckiger, which just shows how much of the trial evidence there is to assimmilate. I'm not quite sure where this part is going or why, but it all fits with Paul Foot's account - perhaps not surprisingly because de Braeckeleer seems to be basing a lot of his account on the same material, that is the Camp Zeist evidence.

Anyway, the above link has a lot of very clear photos showing the discrepancies de Braeckeleer is reporting Ullpert as having identified.

More photos can be found on the site MeBo has put up about it all.

http://www.lockerbie.ch/

This is weird stuff, all hysterical English, big bold bright fonts, and hyperbole. I have little idea what is going on there. It's half way to the Time Cube. Nevertheless, it has pictures.

Rolfe.

Just bumping this post, in the hope that someone might have the inclination to look at the photographs of the timer fragment(s) shown there, and see if they can make any sense of what is being claimed.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th September 2009, 07:15 PM   #95
dropzone
Master Poster
 
dropzone's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 2,014
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
Was the MST-13 timer fragment planted in the wreckage of Pan Am 103?
Are you suggesting that the guys from Mystery Science Theater 1300 were involved in it 700 years ago?
dropzone is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th September 2009, 07:50 PM   #96
LONGTABBER PE
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,528
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
Just bumping this post, in the hope that someone might have the inclination to look at the photographs of the timer fragment(s) shown there, and see if they can make any sense of what is being claimed.

Rolfe.
I actually read that

I wont stand on it without actually reviewing the actual results ( are those posted anywhere?) and examining the fragments with my firms own equipment obviously.

I'm even more convinced now that if the states theory regarding the device and the explosive are correct- its a fabrication and probably with at least some defense cooperation too.

Too many red flags to suit me.
LONGTABBER PE is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st September 2009, 03:37 AM   #97
Caustic Logic
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,494
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
Just bumping this post, in the hope that someone might have the inclination to look at the photographs of the timer fragment(s) shown there, and see if they can make any sense of what is being claimed.

Rolfe.
I have looked at it a bit but can't help too much. As I showed earlier, this passage from the site is incorrect - the proportions match up.
Quote:
There is a small glitch... It is obvious that the fragment PT35(b) does not come from one of the 20 machine-made MST13 timer delivered to Libya. The location of the T shaped touch pad, its absolute and relative dimensions do not match. Moreover the curvature of the fragment round edge equally differs. Compare LDB003(a) and LDB003(b)!
I'll take your word for now on the outside-the-compartment claim. As for his others, there are few technical specifics about the board to discuss. The timeline issues he brings up are interesting. Have you verified his source material as legit? Stuff like:

Quote:
MR. BURNS: Don't answer that question.
<snip>
MR. TURNBULL: Don't answer that.
If so this is valuable information that seems to support Lumpert's powerful claims. Again, MEBO has some question marks over them, but it's very interesting stuff.

I didn't really understand the second link.

Originally Posted by LONGTABBER PE View Post
I actually read that

I wont stand on it without actually reviewing the actual results ( are those posted anywhere?) and examining the fragments with my firms own equipment obviously.

I'm even more convinced now that if the states theory regarding the device and the explosive are correct- its a fabrication and probably with at least some defense cooperation too.

Too many red flags to suit me.
I'm not entirely sure what you mean here, but you seem to have doubts this was really an operative MEBO-made timer supplied to the Libyan government and then used for a timer to carefully blow 103 up right over Scotland so the proof could be found and traced right back. Or am I wrong?

Originally Posted by dropzone View Post
Are you suggesting that the guys from Mystery Science Theater 1300 were involved in it 700 years ago?
Lol. I keep seeing the same thing myself, and Tom Servo is my imaginary co-investigator on this case. No wait, it's Crow. Nonetheless, this is no B-movie to laff at...
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 21st September 2009, 05:08 AM   #98
Ambrosia
Good of the Fods
 
Ambrosia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,483
Timer fragment photo comparison:

Quote:
There is a small glitch... It is obvious that the fragment PT35(b) does not come from one of the 20 machine-made MST13 timer delivered to Libya. The location of the T shaped touch pad, its absolute and relative dimensions do not match. Moreover the curvature of the fragment round edge equally differs. Compare LDB003(a) and LDB003(b)!
Photoshoppe to the rescue!

The solder terminal shaped like a "1" or a "T" doesn't match.

The curve of the board *does*, at least those photos do, and the parallel tracks of solder beneath the "1" and where they bend match as well.

Obviously you need to compare the actual fragment and a whole board, those photos he is comparing could have been manipulated.

I cut round the fragment pic semi-carefully (I could do a much better photo compare job, but this is close enough) recoloured it and pasted it ontop of the whole board pic and lined it up carefully.

Judge for yourself (and make your own comparison if you don't take my word for it )



The very slight discrepancy between the edge line of the curved bit on close inspection looks like a shadow beneath the board caused by bad lighting/poor quality photo. Also my cutting out could easily have taken out 1 pixels width, I didn't spend too long on it. I also think that the fragment pic needs to be enlarged slightly by 1 or 2%, it's not quite spot on, and we have no idea what camera settings are used in each pic or whether they were both identical.
Ambrosia is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st September 2009, 06:12 AM   #99
LONGTABBER PE
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,528
Originally Posted by Caustic Logic View Post


I'm not entirely sure what you mean here, but you seem to have doubts this was really an operative MEBO-made timer supplied to the Libyan government and then used for a timer to carefully blow 103 up right over Scotland so the proof could be found and traced right back. Or am I wrong?
Rolfe got me started on this in another thread and being in ops in different areas back during that time- there was other information floating around.

I never really even thought about ( much less read about) the bomb proper until that other thread but some of Rolfes comments piqued my interest.

I have applicable skills in several areas ( SF and demolitions dealing with terrorists for decades, Professional Engineer, former LE) and currently in theater and deal with IED's all the time.

I cant say yes or no and wouldnt without actually examining the actual physical remains and reviewing the actual testimony ( and exercising extreme caution regarding ALL information on the internet) but what I see ( which is somewhat consistent) raises extreme doubts in my mind as to the accuracy of the whole bomb theory as it is currently presented.

The basis of my concerns stems from the physics of the type of explosives used, the alleged physical construction of the device, my own forensic experience and a high degree of knowledge and experience on how terrorists work.

So, as long as you understand I'm not a CT type, not "selling" or attempting to promote or "prove" an alternate theory, cannot divulge some information because of my own NSA statements and have no care or interest whether this guy is guilty from a "hands on" perspective versus culpable knowledge standpoint- I'll show you some of the "red flags" I see and why I believe them questionable.

First, some baseline information- the reference for these is FM 5-25 ( newer version FM 5-525) which is the "bible" for demolitions and such and I'm flying from memory since I dont have a copy in front of me so give me some leeway regarding generalizing from memory.

Semtex is the first cousin to C4. They both are mallable, easy to work with, reliable and one is white/pearl looking and the other red/orange. Both commonly used in military/terrorist operations, readily available. Both have to be shock detonated ( need to have a cap detonator of some description) and both are "white" explosives. ( thats a reference to their color during explosion referencing their speed of burn in feet per second. Semtex burns around the 25k fps range thus is "white hot" during explosion as opposed to maybe a gas bomb which is much slower and an "orange" or "red" explosion)

All explosions have the same effects from physics- they burn, develop immediate dynamic overpressure, have physical shock and thermal shock and like any other violent release of stored energy- they explode in a sphere with energy at the same level/rate at all points.

1) the fragments themselves- If this was TNT, black powder or other slow explosive- you expect the casing to be blown "apart" and find fragments- just the properties of this explosive make that highly improbable as the components were plastic/polymer ( the board and alleged tape player) and they were in direct physical contact with the explosive.

The construction and proximity alone means they should have been vaporized and incinerated. ( one of the reasons professional bomb makers put them in contact is for that exact effect and it works)

There was a fraction of a second and a few cubic feet of air in the alleged suitcase so theres a possibility it was more "blown apart" than consumed.

This is important because you have a bomb with soft components touching, inside a case, inside a pressure vessel ( the hold)

Thats 3 levels of collection for heat,force and violent movement before it "exited" thru the plane wall. ( the difference between taking 2 exact charges and detonating 1 on the surface of the ground or under the ground)

Thats more than enough time to vaporize thin plastic.

Then given the after effects and dispersal of the plane and the crash over the area from that height- I find it virtually impossible that ANY component would be found.

2) The alleged timer itself. A timer is a timer is a timer and nothing more. 1st year engineering students make them. The focus on a specific timer ( especially one that is manufactured and possibly COULD be traced if components were found) for a professional or even experienced bomb maker is absurd.

Listen to the engineer part of me

if you believe version A where there is a timer board ( circuit board functioning) the bomb maker would need builders schematics to know ALL the functions of said board and its susceptability to EMF and other external influences so he would know how to wire it. ( component manufacturers ALWAYS build extra/hidden functions in boards for future upgrades) He would have to know all of this or risk premature detonation, malfunction or what ever. He would also need to know this for power consumption since this was a battery device. ( dont want it to run dead and expire before it blows up) It HAD to be "switched on" at some point.

If you believe version B and it was the inert prototype- first you ask why and how someone stole a prototype. OK, maybe they didnt know. Back to Mr. Bombmaker expert- now an expert bomb maker would see this ( has to have some knowledge of circuits since he builds bombs right?- he wouldnt live long if he didnt) He had to custom rig it at that point- he didnt have a choice

All of this James Bond/Mr Spock complexity and risk and effort from a "professional" bomb making "expert" when a normal expert could go to Radio shack and custom build a better one for $10 in less than an hour or simply go buy a cheap alarm clock and wire it into the buzzer. Bomb made- problem solved.

3) the alleged planting- here is a ARMED bomb and Mr Terrorist wants to blow up his plane. The timer is running and so is the battery.

They factored in wait times, conveyor speeds, human error, baggage apes, detection devices, flight times and such. They didnt mind that said bomb could be discovered, pre detonated from accidental dropping or static or EMF from a motor or whatever.

All of those "variables" from "professionals"? If terorists were that stupid and took those kinds of risks- they wouldnt be a problem. They wouldnt blow anything up but themselves.

4) The other components like the radio- When they build IED's- they dont go "buy" traceable stuff- they go dumpster diving or steal it ( unless they want to plant things to throw you off the trail) They wouldnt care if the recorder was new ( they would probably use it themselves)- they want it old and "used looking" to avoid suspicion.

5) The analysis itself- Explosion recreations are like fire investigations. Part science, part experience and part logical deduction ( educated GUESSING). You can say "consistent with" or "appears like" but in the end, all you have is bits of "stuff" that you place in a logical pattern. There are thousands of other equally plausible explanations too and too many variables to say for sure.

My big problems with the states case come from 1&2 obviously. Just the fact they found "anything" supposedly from a device of this nature makes my BS meter redline. Possible- yes but mathmatically anything is possible- from a realistic standpoint- I cant accept it. Its a combination of the CSI effect and Hollywood portrayals of complex artistic "bombmaking terrorists" that sell that theory- not real world experience.

Now for some "anecdotal" experience

My other AO was South America doing things like drug ops and stuff. I have worked in conjunction with spooks, the FBI and DEA. These agencies dont "hate" each other- they "loathe" each other.

The LE view the spooks as "above the law" and who will lie/fabricate at the drop of a hat under the guise of "National Security"- my experience is that said view is 100% correct.

The spooks view LE agencies as handcuffs around getting the job done and for the most part obstacles to be tolerated but worked around. They throw them bones and watch them go chase them to get them out of their way while they go about "business" ( from my experience- equally true)

Just the fact such fragments were found leads me to believe they were agency plants put there so the LE would incorrectly ( but honestly- no trickery on their part) come to the conclusion the agency wanted them to.

Heres the why

Terrorists thrive on anonimity and secrecy ( you see their spokespeople but not the operatives). Anyone who thinks they are easy to find, easy to get at or bring to justice watches too many Chuck Norris or Segal movies.

Since you cant find or identify them most of the time ( forget building a "legal" case against them) and even if you did- there is no Delta team thats going in and bring them to justice so what do you do?

Often its better to identify them and WATCH them because your chances are better at heading off a disaster than preventing it or punishing it after the fact. ( you find yourself taking one operative out if you are lucky but he is immediately replaced with 10 you dont even know about and you are back to square 1 with 10 times the risk)

As to this guys alleged involvement

As I have said before- I seriously doubt he had a hands on role but he probably had an administrative role or operational knowledge. ( either makes him guilty in my view)

He was in close proximity doing "something". Its common practice in military and terrorist tactics to make sure there is some kind of "oversight" from afar.

Just my thoughts
LONGTABBER PE is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st September 2009, 08:26 AM   #100
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,728
OK, good. Look at this. It's Greek to me. (I'm a biochemist, not a physicist.)

Lockerbie suitcase bomb: scientific implausibility

This article suggests that the bomb was placed as close as 10 cm to the skin of the aircraft, that is, not in a suitcase in baggage container AVE4041. Does it make any sense, and if so, where does that leave the rest of the speculation?

ETA: This is the only other source I've seen suggesting that the timer would have been vapourised. Why propaganda trumps truth. It was rejected earlier in the thread on the grounds that the author is a raving 9/11 truther - which is self-evidently true, the article goes on about nano-thermite and other red flags.

Quote:
For example, consider the case of the Lockerbie bomber. One piece of "evidence" that was used to convict Magrahi was a piece of circuit board from a device that allegedly contained the Semtex that exploded the airliner. None of the people, who have very firm beliefs in Magrahi’s and Libya’s guilt and in the offense of the Scottish authorities in releasing Magrahi on allegedly humanitarian grounds, know that circuit boards of those days have very low combustion temperatures and go up in flames easily. Semtex produces very high temperatures. There would be nothing whatsoever left of a device that contained Semtex. It is obvious to an expert that the piece of circuit board was planted after the event.

Nevertheless, even a stopped clock is right twice a day. You reckon?

Rolfe.

PS. Never mind if Megrahi knew about it/was involved/whatever. That's for the Social Events forum discussion. I'm far more interested in who is covering up what, and why. And the timer fragment seems pivotal to figuring that out.
__________________
"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; 21st September 2009 at 08:49 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 21st September 2009, 08:58 AM   #101
LONGTABBER PE
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,528
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
OK, good. Look at this. It's Greek to me. (I'm a biochemist, not a physicist.)

Lockerbie suitcase bomb: scientific implausibility

This article suggests that the bomb was placed as close as 10 cm to the skin of the aircraft, that is, not in a suitcase in baggage container AVE4041. Does it make any sense, and if so, where does that leave the rest of the speculation?

Rolfe.
I'm a Mechanical and Electrical Engineer with a military background LOL ( and play with explosives military and some civilian)

I agree with their theory and it matches up with my personal doubts regarding the alleged device.

Since I dont have access to the information to do the math myself- let me convert what they are saying from engineerspeak into layman's English. ( give me some latitude because technical precision is sacrified to make it an easier read)

An explosion is an incident of physics. Energy is released in a sphere at all points at a constant thru time. Like any other energy- it fills until the container- ruptures and seeks the path of least resistance.

If the explosive was in the middle of a hold or randomly placed- it would fill up and "pop" the area. You would expect to see an almost equal dispersion everywhere with a slight concentration due to distance at the closest point of resistance. Similar to filling up a balloon with water until it bursts.

Now, lets break an explosion down into its components.

All explosives burn from point of ignition outward. So, in any moment of time ( measured in micro seconds or smaller) you have the the "push" ( detonation) at the root- the physical matter acting as a projectile ( being consumed on one side- getting dense on the other side as its moving)

( imagine throwing lit silly putty against a wall)

Then the physical reactions and subsequent reactions from the above depending on what this force encounters over distance.

( we call this "tamping" or directional charges)

What they are saying is that due to available evidence from the hull- theres a greater case that the explosive was physically on the wall ( or right beside it) out of a luggage area.

Then its "lopsided"

In the same moment of time as described above due to the small amount of explosive and observed effect- as the force and burn was expanding ( filling the hold)- the direct force of the "crater" ( imagine a bomb on the ground- 50% of the energy makes the crater) blew out the wall and the force followed it ripping as it went. Thus "tearing" the wall apart versus "blowing it apart".

Based on what I see ( and I'm not going to commit to "internet evidence") just on what little I know of the examination of the evidence- I also think the most probable occurance. It fits the "physics" of an explosive event more than what little evidence there is.

You add that to my doubts about the device proper and all the alleged "chain of events"- I think they are very close if not dead on.
LONGTABBER PE is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st September 2009, 09:05 AM   #102
LONGTABBER PE
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,528
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
ETA: This is the only other source I've seen suggesting that the timer would have been vapourised. Why propaganda trumps truth. It was rejected earlier in the thread on the grounds that the author is a raving 9/11 truther - which is self-evidently true, the article goes on about nano-thermite and other red flags.

Rolfe.

PS. Never mind if Megrahi knew about it/was involved/whatever. That's for the Social Events forum discussion. I'm far more interested in who is covering up what, and why. And the timer fragment seems pivotal to figuring that out.
I'm not a truther or even attempting to "sell" anything- just speaking from knowledge and experience.

Just because information comes from a "truther" or other unreliable source doesnt mean its a lie,false or not correct.

We have a saying back home- "Even a bling hog finds a corn cob every once in a while" so dont throw the baby out with the bathwater because the water is dirty.

Forget the source and agenda- always examine the information.

The strong point is that it fits the KNOWN properties of this type of explosive and material in question, is a known bomb making technique.

When you put it all together- it makes a strong case.

Thats all
LONGTABBER PE is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st September 2009, 09:26 AM   #103
LONGTABBER PE
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,528
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
ETA: This is the only other source I've seen suggesting that the timer would have been vapourised. Why propaganda trumps truth. It was rejected earlier in the thread on the grounds that the author is a raving 9/11 truther - which is self-evidently true, the article goes on about nano-thermite and other red flags.
That was entertaining but as you say, his agenda and bias is obvious- he is correct on several key points. ( the old mixing fact with fantasy game to shore up the fantasy)

Some of them are ( I wont bore you with the BS parts- just the truths)

Quote:
What the sociologists and Hitler are telling us is that by the time facts become clear, people are emotionally wedded to the beliefs planted by the propaganda and find it a wrenching experience to free themselves. It is more comfortable, instead, to denounce the truth-tellers than the liars whom the truth-tellers expose.
He is right on that- thats Psy ops 101

Quote:
The leaders of the movement are highly qualified professionals, such as demolition experts, physicists, structural architects, engineers, pilots, and former high officials in the government. Unlike their critics parroting the government’s line, they know what they are talking about.
True to a point. Some of them are but having credentials isnt a guarantee that intelligence and training will trump error or personal agenda.

I scan the CT 9-11 stuff for entertainment purposes but after reading Mackey and some other engineers tell it like it is- there wasnt anything left for me to contribute. They nailed it.

Quote:
Another problem that the 9/11 Truth Movement faces is that few people have the education to follow the technical and scientific aspects. The side that they believe tells them one thing; the side that they don’t believe tells them another. Most Americans have no basis to judge the relative merits of the arguments.
In the generic sense, thats true also. A lot of people are equally as ignorant as truthers just under the guise of skepticism and critical thinking

Quote:
Semtex produces very high temperatures. There would be nothing whatsoever left of a device that contained Semtex. It is obvious to an expert that the piece of circuit board was planted after the event.
all things being equal- he is correct

you see how they operate- sometimes you have to sift thru everything
LONGTABBER PE is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st September 2009, 10:29 AM   #104
LONGTABBER PE
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,528
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
PS. Never mind if Megrahi knew about it/was involved/whatever. That's for the Social Events forum discussion. I'm far more interested in who is covering up what, and why. And the timer fragment seems pivotal to figuring that out.
Understanding your conditions and taking it all out of the mix

The "who" is probably the intelligence agencies involved. They have access to more and greater things and always think in "the big picture". ( their world requires that mindset)

LE are more localized and event specific and have more of a "justice" mindset.

All things being equal- an operative would see the greater value of greater advantage and be more likely to "adjust stuff" beyond the incident in question whereas the LE would have numerous conflicts of conscience and ethics.

Thats why I believe that if it was "adjusted" that LE on all sides probably had no hand in it or knowledge of it. Its commonly known in the intelligence community that the most secure "mule" or courier is the person who has no clue he is one. Put the evidence there, let them find it ( or make sure they find it) and let nature take its course. It appears thats exactly what happened. I find no fault in the LE methods or conclusions or anything that indicates deception or underhandedness.

Quote:
why
This is as long as it is wide and all are equally plausible ( or not)

They could have made a deal to get bigger fish and avoid greater disasters that since didnt happen- people dont know about.

It could be an intelligence trade off

It COULD be that he was the guy but there was nothing to prove it so they "framed a guilty man" ( that theory comes up in the OJ case)

It could be a red herring to allow the TRUE guilty party to "think" they got away with it to catch them later or to not drive them underground.

This is where you have to be intelligently on guard to differentiate between legitimate possibilities or go off the deep end CT part. Thats not a bright yellow line.
LONGTABBER PE is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st September 2009, 12:23 PM   #105
Caustic Logic
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,494
Originally Posted by Ambrosia View Post
Timer fragment photo comparison:

Photoshoppe to the rescue!
http://img14.imageshack.us/img14/745...ntcompare2.jpg
The solder terminal shaped like a "1" or a "T" doesn't match.

The curve of the board *does*, at least those photos do, and the parallel tracks of solder beneath the "1" and where they bend match as well.
<snip>
(I could do a much better photo compare job, <snip> make your own comparison if you don't take my word for it )
I already did back on page 1. Outline is the model board, and they seem to me to match up internally once the fragment is stretched to the right scale (starts out too small) and rotated about 1 deg CW. The only off spot is the upper left of the "1" pad, sticks out a tiny bit. Possible slight warping.


ETA: My artsy effect might be a gripe - I don't think it alters the proportions any, but I could re-do it with non-treated photos if that helps.
also just noticed, three minor outside he lines points, indicating I should have turned it like 1/2 degree CW.

Other questions are open, but i think further work on this angle is a dead end.

Hi Longtabber:
Quote:
I have applicable skills in several areas ( SF and demolitions dealing with terrorists for decades, Professional Engineer, former LE) and currently in theater and deal with IED's all the time.

I cant say yes or no and wouldnt without actually examining the actual physical remains and reviewing the actual testimony ( and exercising extreme caution regarding ALL information on the internet) but what I see ( which is somewhat consistent) raises extreme doubts in my mind as to the accuracy of the whole bomb theory as it is currently presented.

The basis of my concerns stems from the physics of the type of explosives used, the alleged physical construction of the device, my own forensic experience and a high degree of knowledge and experience on how terrorists work.
<snip>
Wow, thanks for the elaborations, and so cool to have you in the discussion. It was mostly tl;dr right now, as I have to run errands today. I'll look later at what you're saying re: the evidence and what I can grasp... Techincals aside:

Quote:
Forget the source and agenda- always examine the information.
I can dig that, totally. I'd modify to don't forget the source, just don't let the biases it instills in you cloud your vision. The actual info is what counts.

Last edited by Caustic Logic; 21st September 2009 at 12:26 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 21st September 2009, 12:47 PM   #106
LONGTABBER PE
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,528
Originally Posted by Caustic Logic View Post
Hi Longtabber:
Wow, thanks for the elaborations, and so cool to have you in the discussion. It was mostly tl;dr right now, as I have to run errands today. I'll look later at what you're saying re: the evidence and what I can grasp... Techincals aside:
I can dig that, totally. I'd modify to don't forget the source, just don't let the biases it instills in you cloud your vision. The actual info is what counts.
Sure but please understand this beforehand ( rather do it before it happens because it probably will)

I'm not a CT type and in this specific incident- dont know or even care.

I'm NOT trying to sell, convince,justify or validate anyones position. (Rolfe just got me interested in another thread)

I'm not going to google or throw "internet evidence' around- I'm going to answer from experience and not promote or argue a position.

I'm real cautious because I'm not a principle investigator here and dnt have all the facts or the evidence for independant analysis.

I do have an understanding of the legal realm and the counter terrorist realm- those decisions OFTEN conflict but they are 2 separate and UNEQUAL entities.

I'll give you the best and most honest answer I know how but it may be wrong or shown wrong later due to things i dont know about this case.( or right for that matter)

As long as thats understood upfront
LONGTABBER PE is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st September 2009, 01:50 PM   #107
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,728
You keep saying you're "not a CT type". I don't think anyone in this thread has any form in the CT department. My main claim to fame in this forum is participating in the demolition of Malcolm Kirkman, with particular reference to the function of gravity-fed i/v infusion sets.

However, it can't be that there is never such a thing as a "conspiracy". Your own posts, which I accept are perfectly rational and based on practical experience, go further down this particular rabbit hole than I've ventured. If that bomb wasn't in a Toshiba bom-beat radio-cassette player, packed in a brown Samsonite hardshell suitcase along with some assorted clothes bought by a man of middle-eastern appearance from Mary's House in Sliema, and carried in the forward hold of Maid of the Seas near the bottom of luggage container AVE4041, then this conundrum is a lot deeper that I for one had suspected. And yet, that's what you've suggested.

Someone said in another thread that the Truther movement has done investigative reporting a real disservice, especially noticeable in cases like this. "Asking questions", even perfectly sensible and valid questions, can just be dismissed as "conspiracy theory".

I don't know how you define "CT type". If suspecting that there is a cover-up in the official version of some major global event fulfils that description, then nobody can even be the least bit suspicious of anything without being so labelled. Too bad if the suspicions are well founded.

I don't care about labels, and actually I don't care if it turns out that the Official Theory in this case is true. But I want to know what's been going on, and the Official Version doesn't do it for me. So could we just concentrate on the evidence?

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st September 2009, 02:00 PM   #108
Toke
Godless Socialist
 
Toke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Denmark
Posts: 8,170
As far as I read the explosives explanation prints are very unlikely to survive.
And building/scavenging timers is not rocket science, and it would make no sense to pick an unusual one that can be traced back to you. (I have a large collection of timers at work for use in switchboards/control boxes)
The political parts look a bit muddled to me.

I have no idea how to get further, dragging information out of governments is not easy.
__________________
From each according to his ability, to each according to his need. -K. Marx.

Toke is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st September 2009, 02:24 PM   #109
LONGTABBER PE
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,528
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
You keep saying you're "not a CT type". I don't think anyone in this thread has any form in the CT department. My main claim to fame in this forum is participating in the demolition of Malcolm Kirkman, with particular reference to the function of gravity-fed i/v infusion sets.

However, it can't be that there is never such a thing as a "conspiracy". Your own posts, which I accept are perfectly rational and based on practical experience, go further down this particular rabbit hole than I've ventured. If that bomb wasn't in a Toshiba bom-beat radio-cassette player, packed in a brown Samsonite hardshell suitcase along with some assorted clothes bought by a man of middle-eastern appearance from Mary's House in Sliema, and carried in the forward hold of Maid of the Seas near the bottom of luggage container AVE4041, then this conundrum is a lot deeper that I for one had suspected. And yet, that's what you've suggested.

Someone said in another thread that the Truther movement has done investigative reporting a real disservice, especially noticeable in cases like this. "Asking questions", even perfectly sensible and valid questions, can just be dismissed as "conspiracy theory".

I don't know how you define "CT type". If suspecting that there is a cover-up in the official version of some major global event fulfils that description, then nobody can even be the least bit suspicious of anything without being so labelled. Too bad if the suspicions are well founded.

I don't care about labels, and actually I don't care if it turns out that the Official Theory in this case is true. But I want to know what's been going on, and the Official Version doesn't do it for me. So could we just concentrate on the evidence?

Rolfe.
Fair enough
Quote:
You keep saying you're "not a CT type". I don't think anyone in this thread has any form in the CT department. My main claim to fame in this forum is participating in the demolition of Malcolm Kirkman, with particular reference to the function of gravity-fed i/v infusion sets.
That was no reflection on you personally- I just know what the title and claim brings. I'm not one of "them". I dont know what the rest of that even is.

Quote:
However, it can't be that there is never such a thing as a "conspiracy"
They are quite real

Quote:
Your own posts, which I accept are perfectly rational and based on practical experience, go further down this particular rabbit hole than I've ventured.
I'm sorry that happened but i guess theres a true difference between a real conspiracy versus a made up one- altho I dont see a clear line.

Quote:
If that bomb wasn't in a Toshiba bom-beat radio-cassette player, packed in a brown Samsonite hardshell suitcase along with some assorted clothes bought by a man of middle-eastern appearance from Mary's House in Sliema, and carried in the forward hold of Maid of the Seas near the bottom of luggage container AVE4041, then this conundrum is a lot deeper that I for one had suspected. And yet, that's what you've suggested.
Thats the way I see it based on experience and what I know about demolitions and explosives. I really havent examined the evidence testimony because it may be right,wrong or indifferent. I have always started at the physics.

In this case ONLY- the physics dont match the states claim. Thats a fact and I can make a strong case for it.

Quote:
Someone said in another thread that the Truther movement has done investigative reporting a real disservice, especially noticeable in cases like this. "Asking questions", even perfectly sensible and valid questions, can just be dismissed as "conspiracy theory".
Its what they do with the answers is my guess and how they exploit them and for what purpose.

Quote:
I don't know how you define "CT type". If suspecting that there is a cover-up in the official version of some major global event fulfils that description, then nobody can even be the least bit suspicious of anything without being so labelled. Too bad if the suspicions are well founded.
I'll tell you how I personally do. ( for what thats worth)

Evidence is evidence- its a building block to build a theory in the absence of incontrovertiable proof or weight

Theory is theory- just support it with as much as is available

Make the best and most logical assumption you can based on the 2

any promotion beyond the above is CT in my book ( and you cant rule them out- even that blind hog eats)

Quote:
I don't care about labels, and actually I don't care if it turns out that the Official Theory in this case is true. But I want to know what's been going on, and the Official Version doesn't do it for me. So could we just concentrate on the evidence?
Thats what I have tried to do
LONGTABBER PE is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st September 2009, 03:34 PM   #110
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,728
Originally Posted by Toke View Post
As far as I read the explosives explanation prints are very unlikely to survive.
And building/scavenging timers is not rocket science, and it would make no sense to pick an unusual one that can be traced back to you. (I have a large collection of timers at work for use in switchboards/control boxes)

No disrespect to Longtabber, but I'm going to stick with the "it was in the baggage container" for now, until someone gets really heavy on the subject of why it couldn't have been. Because otherwise we have so little information to go on we might as well stop now. I'm open to persuasion though.

Regarding the bigger picture, I note Paul Foot spotted the question of the very early start to the soft-pedalling of the PFLP theory.

Quote:
[....] the outstanding questions: why did the cover-up start so early? Why, in March 1989, long before the invasion of Kuwait, when both the British and the American Governments regarded Saddam as an ally, and were arming the Iraqi dictator to the hilt, did Bush and Thatcher decide to 'cool it' on Lockerbie?

His point, in that essay, is that the Trail of the Octopus story covers that objection. Whether that particular CT is true or not, there's certainly a suspicion that the dogs were called off the PFLP at a pretty early date. If the entire forensics regarding the suitcase and the clothes and the radio-cassette-player were fabricated, then the fabrication must have started almost at once, and one wonders how it might be possible to do that effectively from a standing start.

However, if we concentrate on the timer fragment, then even there we see evidence of at least an intent to have the fragment in there at least by September 1989, which is still quite a while before Desert Storm was on the horizon. So if the fragment was fabricated, and it's crucial, then I think there must have been some imperative in addition to the whole "we can't alienate Iran right now" stuff that came to the fore in the spring of 1990.

By the way, I may not have posted this important link earlier. It's a short Private Eye follow-up from 2007, relating to the second appeal, and the reason the hearing was so delayed. As I said before, this was primarily to do with the UK government refusing to release a certain document the defence thought was important to their case. This is the clearest statement of what everybody inferred was going on, from the rather coded language.

Quote:
Claims that Scottish prosecutors suppressed evidence that could have pointed to the innocence of Libyan Ali Mohmed Al-Megrahi, jailed for life for the murder of 270 people in the 1988 Lockerbie bombing, have prompted demands for an immediate international investigation.

Last week the Glasgow Herald disclosed that the prosecution team had examined a CIA document relating to a tiny fragment of a bomb timer said to have been found in the crash debris and used to implicate to Megrahi. They had failed to disclose it to the defence, even though it apparently cast doubt on both the suggestion that the fragment came from the timer used to blow up the Pan Am flight, and the idea that it was, as claimed, purchased by the Libyan.

The existence of the document, uncovered by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission, formed one of six grounds for concluding last July that there had been a miscarriage of justice. The Commission did not disclose the sensitive document as part of its 800-page report into the affair because it could not obtain authority from the US.

So this crucial document, which could not be disclosed because so doing "would damage the UK's relations with a friendly power" was about the timer fragment, and it was in fact the US that was refusing to allow its disclosure. With threats, possibly.

I'm having trouble believing that this is all about Desert Storm, the timing is all to pot.

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; 21st September 2009 at 03:35 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 21st September 2009, 04:27 PM   #111
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,728
Mmm, I went looking for that Herald article. They've recently updated their web site with a new domain name, and the search function is now horrendous. But I think I found it.

Top Secret Lockerbie report not disclosed by Crown

Originally Posted by Lucy Adams
Using its enhanced powers, the commission compelled the Crown to show it the highly confidential document and decided the contents - still unknown to the defence - were sufficiently disturbing for a court to have believed the conviction could have been a miscarriage of justice.

Proving the MST13 timer found at the site was purchased by the Libyans was pivotal to the conviction at Camp Zeist in the Netherlands. It is thought the document originally came from the CIA and questions the validity of claims the timer was bought by the Libyans.

It is also thought to dispute whether it was the same timer used to detonate the bomb and suggests other countries and terrorist networks would have had access to such a device.

Members of the Crown Office are understood to have signed an agreement with the US security agencies at the time to say that, if they viewed certain confidential documents, they would not disclose the details. The defence team is expected to cite the secret report and the Crown's continued refusal to make it available, as grounds for a special hearing later this month.

A source close to the case said: "The SCCRC has uncovered there is a document which was in the possession of the Crown and was not disclosed to the defence, which concerns the supply of MST13 timers. Moreover, the commission has determined the decision to keep the document from the defence may have constituted a miscarriage of justice.

"The commission was unable to obtain authority for its disclosure. Without access to this document, the defence are disabled from putting before the court full and comprehensive grounds of appeal as to why the conviction should be quashed."

While I was at it, though, I found another couple of articles that look relevant. This one is from the following week as the above.

Appeal team demands secret files

Originally Posted by Brian Horne
The hour-long hearing in Edinburgh followed recent speculation that United States security services were blocking the handover of potentially crucial information about the timer which detonated the bomb on PanAm flight 103.

But today, Scotland's top judge Lord Justice General Lord Hamilton, sitting with Lords Kingarth and Eassie, heard that the Americans were not involved.

"The documents don't come from that government or any of its agencies," said advocate depute Ronald Clancy QC, for the Crown.

He told the court: "The documents in question were passed to the UK Government on the basis that they were regarded as being confidential by the authorities that passed them over.

"That being so, the Crown has always taken the position that, if possible, confidentiality should always be respected."

Mr Clancy added: "The Crown has been actively pursuing the matter but today it remains unresolved."

Requests had been made to allow the Crown to hand over the documents and it was possible this might happen without the appeal judges having to rule on the issue, the court heard.

Mr Swire said if the secret documents did not come from the United States it was "pure speculation" which government they belonged to.

So this one is saying that it isn't a US document at all? Or is this actually talking about something different?

And then there's this article, from the previous June.

Lockerbie: the truth at last?

Originally Posted by John Bynorth
Al-Megrahi's team also found inconsistencies in the evidence surrounding a child's baby-gro, which the prosecution had claimed was wrapped around the Toshiba radio cassette which exploded in mid-air in the hold of the London Heathrow to New York flight.

The charred fragments of the child's clothing were apparently shown to the trial suggesting it was very close to the initial explosion.

However, statements casting doubt on the credibility of the cause of the blast came from two mountain rescuers whose evidence that they found an intact baby-gro was submitted to the SCCRB. The statement read: In the statements noted from these witnesses, they are both adamant that they remembered finding an intact baby-gro.

Other key parts of the defence submission include claims that a radio cassette manual, the trial had heard was found shredded alongside the Toshiba BomBeat radio, was also discovered in one piece. The evidence played a crucial part in al-Megrahi s conviction because it provided the link to a minute piece of the bomb's mechanism which was linked to the Libyan.

A 70-year-old woman from Northumberland had given evidence to the trial that the document was found intact, but police later presented it with charring.

They explained it was crucial evidence because of its closeness to the blast.

Meanwhile, a forensic scientist, Dr Thomas Hayes, who gave evidence to the trial that he had identified the charred remains of the baby-gro in the suitcase which contained the bomb, which from its labels led investigators to Gauci's shop appears to have had a new page added to his records.

The SCCRB were said to have been troubled by the addition of Page 51 to his evidence about the discovery of fragments from a Slalom shirt which had particles of the bomb timer s mechanism.

Al-Megrahi's team claim to have proof from German police files that fragments of the bomb timer were found on the shirt in January 1990. The documents are said to contain photographs showing a piece of the shirt with most of the breast pocket undamaged. However, images of the shirt were presented to the trial in a different state, showing a deep triangle-shaped which continued into the pocket.

The shirt's manufacturers were enlisted by the defence and pointed out the shirt was a boy's size, rather than an adult's by virtue of the fact the breast pocket was 2cm narrower than on the adult-sized shirt. The report to the SCCRB is scathing about this evidence stating it is the culmination of a co-ordinated effort to mislead the court.

This is the first time I've seen the stuff about the anomalies on the shirt outside de Braekeleer's articles. So, the shirt seems to have been tampered with. The babygro seems to have been tampered with. The Toshiba manual seems to have been tampered with. All things that were supposed to have been damaged by being in close proximity to the explosion. All things members of the public report having found intact, which were subsequently exhibited damaged.

And then there are de Braekeleer's reports that Gauci did not in fact sell either the slalom shirt or the babygro. Maybe he should be taken more seriously after all.

Longtabber, you're starting to persuade me....

Rolfe.

PS. I would regard being a "CTer" as stubbornly pursuing a conspiracy theory which has been credibly and comprehensively shown to be untrue. Like thermite in the WTC and the flyover at the Pentagon and the moon landing hoax and crop circles being the work of aliens.

If someone can credibly and comprehensively put the doubts about PA103 to bed, then I would see no reason to pursue it. What say we give it a run until that happens?
__________________
"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; 21st September 2009 at 04:30 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 21st September 2009, 11:32 PM   #112
Caustic Logic
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,494
Quickly before I fully catch up, I suggest we hold where the bomb was discussions until/if a new thread is created. I'd be curious to look at the container damage, hull damage, as much info as is available, and all the science stuff related to it.

ETA: In fact, given Long's listed knowledge and assertion of an opinion here, I really want to see that. But it's too far off from the timer issue for a worthy expansion inside this thread, fer sure.

I had a thought directly related to the OP "was the fragment planted in the wreckage?" It's a good title for the thread but the simply answer's probably "no." Since it wasn't "discovered" until some time around the time people started cutting up prototype boards (allegedly), I'm guessing it was planted in the 103 evidence locker.

Also for the record I consider myself the type of paranoid-leaning person one could call a "CTist." I've just hung out here long enough to go native. It's a good formula I think for figuring out mysterious stuff (or pondering it at least).

Last edited by Caustic Logic; 21st September 2009 at 11:35 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 22nd September 2009, 12:16 AM   #113
Caustic Logic
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 4,494
Originally Posted by LONGTABBER PE View Post
I'll show you some of the "red flags" I see and why I believe them questionable.
<snip>

1) the fragments themselves- <snip>
The construction and proximity alone means they should have been vaporized and incinerated. ( one of the reasons professional bomb makers put them in contact is for that exact effect and it works)
Sounds like an endorsement of the same kind of idea PC Roberts found evident, that the fragment should not exist given the nature of the explosives. You also mention "more than enough time to vaporize thin plastic." I think we covered the material somewhere, and the De Braeckeleer piece cited brown 8-ply board and green 9-ply board as the alleged styles of the supplied prototype and found fragment. I know it's been covered, but I forget what the layers are of, but mostly plastic, I think. Now if it were coming apart but not completely vaporizing, would a pice look simply fragmented or partly vaporized, with melty thinned edges and such? Because this piece we're presented with looks just cut up and run over in the driveway. Would a simple shirt collar shield it enough once leaving the bomb shell on its way out the suitcase? That does seem possible, perhaps why they picked that swatch to hide it in.

Quote:
2) The alleged timer itself. A timer is a timer is a timer and nothing more. 1st year engineering students make them. The focus on a specific timer ( especially one that is manufactured and possibly COULD be traced if components were found) for a professional or even experienced bomb maker is absurd.
I tended to think so too. It's one of those clues that makes me suspect more of a psyops set-up, before or after the fact. Glad to see some expert agreement.

Quote:
Just the fact such fragments were found leads me to believe they were agency plants put there so the LE would incorrectly ( but honestly- no trickery on their part) come to the conclusion the agency wanted them to.
Just to quote it I guess.

Quote:
As to this guys alleged involvement

As I have said before- I seriously doubt he had a hands on role but he probably had an administrative role or operational knowledge. ( either makes him guilty in my view)
Honestly I don't see any evidence for that fact except that he was convicted for pretty much the whole thing, all apparently the wrong parts he didn't do, and based on planted/bought evidence. But that's just my opinion, not knowing what you're basing on, and better to not get back-n-forth over. In this thread anyway.
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 22nd September 2009, 05:13 AM   #114
Ambrosia
Good of the Fods
 
Ambrosia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,483
Just stumbled across a recent interview on ABC radio (Australian Broadcating Corp) from last month interviewing Robert Baer.

He talks about lots of evidence that was withheld at trial that pointed to Iran and the PFLP-GC.

He does have a new book out about Iran though.
Ambrosia is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd September 2009, 05:16 AM   #115
LONGTABBER PE
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,528
Originally Posted by Caustic Logic View Post
Sounds like an endorsement of the same kind of idea PC Roberts found evident, that the fragment should not exist given the nature of the explosives. You also mention "more than enough time to vaporize thin plastic." I think we covered the material somewhere, and the De Braeckeleer piece cited brown 8-ply board and green 9-ply board as the alleged styles of the supplied prototype and found fragment. I know it's been covered, but I forget what the layers are of, but mostly plastic, I think. Now if it were coming apart but not completely vaporizing, would a pice look simply fragmented or partly vaporized, with melty thinned edges and such? Because this piece we're presented with looks just cut up and run over in the driveway. Would a simple shirt collar shield it enough once leaving the bomb shell on its way out the suitcase? That does seem possible, perhaps why they picked that swatch to hide it in.



I tended to think so too. It's one of those clues that makes me suspect more of a psyops set-up, before or after the fact. Glad to see some expert agreement.



Just to quote it I guess.



Honestly I don't see any evidence for that fact except that he was convicted for pretty much the whole thing, all apparently the wrong parts he didn't do, and based on planted/bought evidence. But that's just my opinion, not knowing what you're basing on, and better to not get back-n-forth over. In this thread anyway.
Well, this is all theoretical anyway so I'll expound on the theory

Quote:
Sounds like an endorsement of the same kind of idea PC Roberts found evident, that the fragment should not exist given the nature of the explosives. You also mention "more than enough time to vaporize thin plastic." I think we covered the material somewhere, and the De Braeckeleer piece cited brown 8-ply board and green 9-ply board as the alleged styles of the supplied prototype and found fragment. I know it's been covered, but I forget what the layers are of, but mostly plastic, I think. Now if it were coming apart but not completely vaporizing, would a pice look simply fragmented or partly vaporized, with melty thinned edges and such?
First, explosions are weird animals- anything can ( or cannot) happen. I've seen pens driven thru walls from rockets. So, the short answer is "anything" can happen- you have to make the best determination based on realistic probability considering ALL factors- even then, its still a SWAG under the best of circumstances.

Plus, no one knows for certain how the Semtex was placed in relation to the alleged board. Was it insulated from it, wrapped over it, pressed on it or totally separated from it.

All of those play a part.

But going on the general theory they were both inside the alleged radio

Its impossible in my mind and experience for anything short of metal to have survived immediate incineration.

You are talking in micro seconds going from ambient to white hot and then add motion creates the blowtorch effect.

Also ( still measuring in micro seconds) the board caught the full brunt BEFORE the case went. ( like an oven for about a milli fraction of a micro second) Then engulfment.

Then consider the thermal properties of the components themselves relative to their dimensions. ( a match will ignite a toothpick but not enough energy to do a 2X4)

So, they say there was a "brownish" one too? There was a "hole" in the blast?

If part of it was incinerated, charred or whatever- it all should have been.

I find it suspicious all things being equal, "just enough" was found to make some sort of an ID but no more.

Doesnt add up with the overall knowns regarding that type of explosive

Quote:
Now if it were coming apart but not completely vaporizing, would a pice look simply fragmented or partly vaporized, with melty thinned edges and such?
If in a garden variety fire maybe but not with this kind of temp. The heat would have hit it all at once then cooked it a bit inside the radio then as the part was "overtaken" in the expanding blast- cooked some more

It couldnt have "outrun" the violent energy release- it would be engulfed by it.

Then theres secondary ignition

Then theres the blow out caused by the vacuum created

Thats a lot of "what if's" and "maybes" for an item made of plastic ( basically) that was in direct contact with the charge.

Quote:
Because this piece we're presented with looks just cut up and run over in the driveway. Would a simple shirt collar shield it enough once leaving the bomb shell on its way out the suitcase?
As long as the laws of physics apply in this universe- no way in hell

Quote:
I tended to think so too. It's one of those clues that makes me suspect more of a psyops set-up, before or after the fact. Glad to see some expert agreement.
when you look at the whole thing- thats what it looks like

Quote:
Honestly I don't see any evidence for that fact except that he was convicted for pretty much the whole thing, all apparently the wrong parts he didn't do, and based on planted/bought evidence. But that's just my opinion, not knowing what you're basing on, and better to not get back-n-forth over. In this thread anyway
Went into that in a different thread
LONGTABBER PE is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd September 2009, 07:52 AM   #116
LONGTABBER PE
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,528
Rolfe ( from multiple posts)

Quote:
No disrespect to Longtabber, but I'm going to stick with the "it was in the baggage container" for now, until someone gets really heavy on the subject of why it couldn't have been. Because otherwise we have so little information to go on we might as well stop now. I'm open to persuasion though.
The only way to get past that ( or confirm it) is to have access to the actual investigative reports in detail. Do you know if they are available? ( I would almost bet not for obvious reasons)

Quote:
Proving the MST13 timer found at the site was purchased by the Libyans was pivotal to the conviction at Camp Zeist in the Netherlands. It is thought the document originally came from the CIA and questions the validity of claims the timer was bought by the Libyans.
Just curious- did anyone ever check to see the accountability of all these timers? What was their order purpose? What and where did each end up?

Quote:
Members of the Crown Office are understood to have signed an agreement with the US security agencies at the time to say that, if they viewed certain confidential documents, they would not disclose the details. The defence team is expected to cite the secret report and the Crown's continued refusal to make it available, as grounds for a special hearing later this month.
This one right here leads me to believe its the planted red herring. Its probably DISinformation marked "secret" just to make a diversion.


Quote:
This is the first time I've seen the stuff about the anomalies on the shirt outside de Braekeleer's articles. So, the shirt seems to have been tampered with. The babygro seems to have been tampered with. The Toshiba manual seems to have been tampered with. All things that were supposed to have been damaged by being in close proximity to the explosion. All things members of the public report having found intact, which were subsequently exhibited damaged.
A lot of inconsistencies for objects that in reality should have been incinerated and completely shredded. Were there any ( to anyones knowledge) wipe tests or chemical analysis done?
LONGTABBER PE is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd September 2009, 08:08 AM   #117
Ambrosia
Good of the Fods
 
Ambrosia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,483
LongTabber:

How large an explosion will 450g or so of Semtex produce?

As far as physics goes, the explosive is detonated by a trigger charge, what hapens next? Does the explosion produce a blast shockwave and the friction from the air being squashed create the heat? Or does the explosive produce lots of heat that expands the air that produces the shockwave?
Ambrosia is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd September 2009, 08:20 AM   #118
Ambrosia
Good of the Fods
 
Ambrosia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,483
Originally Posted by LONGTABBER PE View Post
Were there any ( to anyones knowledge) wipe tests or chemical analysis done?
Dr John Rouse testifying at the Camp Zeist trial states:

Quote:
But Douse confirmed that his agency[Defense Evaluation and Research Agency (DERA)] had not been able to test fragments of an electronic timer and the tape recorder thought to have hidden the bomb, citing cost savings at the laboratory.

"I would have given my right arm to examine them all," he said.
[ source ]

Clothing was tested, the suitcase fragments were tested The radio fragments, and definitely the MST-13 fragment were not tested.

Another excuse for this non testing was that the fragment[MST-13] was "too small"
Ambrosia is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd September 2009, 09:55 AM   #119
LONGTABBER PE
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,528
Originally Posted by Ambrosia View Post
LongTabber:

How large an explosion will 450g or so of Semtex produce?

As far as physics goes, the explosive is detonated by a trigger charge, what hapens next? Does the explosion produce a blast shockwave and the friction from the air being squashed create the heat? Or does the explosive produce lots of heat that expands the air that produces the shockwave?
I'm going to have to borrow a copy of FM 5-525, from memory tho ( which I may have to correct later)

Thats a 1 lb stick ( std unit of issue)

Its force is about 1.4 ish of TNT which is about 25,000fps burn

"large" isnt how explosives are measured but 1 stick will take out construction steel girders, about 6" of reinforced concrete, about 2" of packed asphalt. In the open, safe distance is about 800' ( from memory- would have to see the tables for precision)

The anatomy of an explosion ( concerning mallables- ie plastics) depends a good bit on how the charge is expanded or "shaped" and where the actual detonator is but for this purpose thats not too critical since thats for steel cutting mainly.

( Imagine an atom bomb movie- all explosions do basically the same thing- just bigger- you can actually see it with a A bomb and relate) All of this happens in about .02-.03 seconds.

In essence from point of ignition- you create the bubble ( white hot violence)

That bubble expands creating a pressure wave in front of it ( the static air being compressed until its dense) then the bubble is becoming the fireball ( as it breathes)

"White" explosives generally "blow fires out" because they are so hot they pre burn and the heat actually burns the air out before most combustables can ignite ( talking about things normally solid)- they dont make too many fires in the conventional sense- they literally incinerate.

So, at full expansion with a 1lb stick- you are looking at about a 20ft area thats "flashed" at white hot ( these charges vaporize STEEL- thats why they are so popular in demolitions- they dont actually "blow up" like TNT) ( assuming in the wide open- everything it hits and individual circumstances make that a true infinite answer depending on any number of variables) then rapidly cooling. ( we used to fire one on reinforced pads to illustrate this by the circle)

( this has a lot to do with the density of the molecules for non liquid explosives- the denser it is, the more it burns and the faster it hits with force- like the difference between an axe sticking in a tree versus a machete slicing thru one)

This is what I meant by the PROPERTIES of this particular explosive make me discount the entire state theory and existance of this "evidence" totally and completely.

If they said conventional dynamite, TNT, Ammonium Nitrate or something like that- that would be a completely different story.

Thats why I asked for residue tests and wipes for trace to factually confirm that SEMTEX and nothing else was used or is that an assumption. That makes or breaks the states official line in my opinion.

These are used BECAUSE they are the fastest burning and hottest of explosives.

Theres more ( a lot)- lets talk about tamping

We dont know whether this one lone suitcase was on top, under,beside others. We also dont know how close it was to the wall.

For discussion purposes, I'm going to assume it was in the middle. ( just for talking purposes)

All those bags around it, the decking under it and maybe on it is just like tamping ( sandbagging) so now you have additional "soak time" before the bubble reaches full expansion ( contact with open air) That adds the additional back pressure ( as the wave goes thru each object) thus making "ground zero" ( the suitcase it was supposedly in) that much HOTTER and LONGER ( still talking in milli seconds here)

Now, with all of that- the state wants me to believe some "fragments" survived and "some" clothing was unburned? ( that was actually in the bubble at detonation) ( using Semtex or C3 or C4 or any in that family)

This is simple CLOTH and plastic a few mils thick.

I'm sorry but my mind simply cannot accept that as even possible.

Theres more

At some point ( this too is critical) there was skin rupture and violent decompression ( planes pressure was greater than outside)

Whatever was happening at whatever stage then got "blown out" ( path of least resistance)

We know that happened but dont know exactly "when" in the chain of explosion it did.

So, if you believe the fragments and clothing /whatever ARE physically in the plane and were "discovered" then the only answer I can accept to allow it possible is that they were at the front of the wave and NOT in a container with it ( progressive damage) That would support the bomb being somewhere else.
LONGTABBER PE is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd September 2009, 10:19 AM   #120
LONGTABBER PE
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,528
Originally Posted by Ambrosia View Post
Dr John Rouse testifying at the Camp Zeist trial states:



[ source ]

Clothing was tested, the suitcase fragments were tested The radio fragments, and definitely the MST-13 fragment were not tested.

Another excuse for this non testing was that the fragment[MST-13] was "too small"
From the article

Quote:
It suggested Monday that two key fragments of wreckage had been contaminated with several kinds of explosive residue during British laboratory tests and not just by one kind from a bomb in the plane's hold.

Defense lawyer Richard Keen questioned former Defense Evaluation and Research Agency (DERA) forensic scientist John Douse on possible sources of contamination, including storage procedures and equipment used to prepare samples.

Douse dismissed Keen's arguments.

"That is unscientific. ... I have conclusive proof which I believe can refute this," he said from beside the reconstructed remains of the shattered aircraft luggage container said to have been torn apart by the bomb.

But Douse confirmed that his agency had not been able to test fragments of an electronic timer and the tape recorder thought to have hidden the bomb, citing cost savings at the laboratory.

"I would have given my right arm to examine them all," he said.

Former DERA forensic explosives director Thomas Hayes, testifying Monday after Douse, told the court he was certain a bomb in a brown Samsonite case had destroyed the jet.
"It was established without any doubt that this item had been subjected to a large internal explosion and therefore had originally contained an explosive device," he said.

Hayes said the nature of the damage indicated the suitcase had been either on the floor of the baggage container or on top of another case, corroborating blast pattern evidence from previous witnesses.[/quote]

Tell you what I think

Somebody took a suitcase packed with stuff with a stick of TNT and blew it up on a pad- instant evidence with conflicting residues- very sloppy
LONGTABBER PE is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:38 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

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.