PT/35(b): Altered but Not Swapped

Adam Larson / Caustic Logic
First posted October 21 2009
Edited and re-posted March 8 2010


I turn my attention to false or dubious claims pushed by MEBO co-founder Edwin Bollier about the timer fragment PT/35(b) being changed or swapped-out after its discovery. His claims on the board being different colors at different times are too convoluted to fully explore here, but Bollier has been swearing lately that a brown prototype handed to Swiss authorities had been used as the evidence, somehow clearly visible in the first known photograph from 1989 (left), while the later photo (mid-1990, right) of an altered PT35(b) are of a replacement green board.

The MTS-13’s designer at Mebo, Ulrich Lumpert (alt Uelli Lumpart), apparently spawned this with his 2007 affidavit, by which he handed the brown board over to Swiss investigators who in turn gave it to SCOTBOM, who used it as evidence. The official story is of course that it’s always been the same green fragment they found in the wreckage of 103.

It is true that green here seems to mean blue, and the later photo is more blue than the first. However, this (as I found it online) shows clear signs of photo-tinting (blue ink on blue paper?) and once corrected, the color matches up quite well with the original – dark muted green-gray, like a green/blue board that had been burnt. It does seem possible some of the carbonized surface material has been cleaned off in the latter view, but otherwise there is no hint of brown I can see in either of these photos, and no color-based sign of meaningful alteration or replacement.

Considering comparison photos of PT/35(b) alongside an intact model board (links above), There are allegations of the curved edge not matching or the “1” touchpad and its relation to the “true edge” differing. But when the outlines are superimposed to scale (right), we find a perfect fit presuming the fragment is missing a sliver off the top. And here we can see a difference with the first photos and later ones – the top is present at first, giving it the right curve of an intact board. Later, it’s gone. Two prominent cuts at right angles also appear, apparently part of forensic examination carried out so controversially in Munich, to check the board’s layering style. This apparently severed a corner piece, put back in place and displayed as separate evidence item DP/31. But the removed top is not so displayed. It’s reasonable to surmise this tiny section – app. 1cm by 1/8cm – was simply ground off to get a profile, but mysteries remain... It's not clear how many layers were really found, but as it appears a green machine-made board, I'm guessing nine.

Among Mebo the clown’s most enthusiastic claims of proven forgery is how “the letter "M" was carved into” the original “brown” item sideways next to the touch pad, while “in the duplicate no. PT/35(b) (fake) it can be clearly seen that no letter “M” was carved into it!” Lumpert mentioned but disowned this in his affidavit: “I had nothing to do with the letter "M" (possibly an abbreviation of Muster 'sample'), which appears." To true scale (at left), this tiny M seems strangely small to use as a marking, nestled in next to the “1.” In reality, as JREF forum member Ambrosia showed with the enhancement below, the M casts a faint but visible shadow, and would seem to be a 3-D object, a tiny ziggy fiber of presumably shirt stitching.

Beneath this alleged etching are three small light patches bracketing the solder lines, visible above. Of these Lumpert said “I clearly recognize the scratched remnants of the soldering tracts on this enlarged digital police photograph.” A poster available online shows a blowup with German text, perhaps based on something, labeling these as “Kratzstellen von Ing Lumpert,” scratches by Lumpert. That any villains would have chosen to cut out and display as evidence just the small corner that Lumpert had marked with random micro-abrasions and could identify raises some questions.

What exactly these really are is a minor mystery – perhaps more fibers of a different kind snagged on the solder. Whatever they are they’re as gone later as the M – either the political engineers sanded these off or painted them over, or replaced the board down to he tiniest details except for these scratches, as alleged by recent Mebo pages, or they were some inconsequential surface debris since removed.

And for a preview of what lies at the bottom of this rabbit hole, realize Bollier's claiming a green replacement for a brown original fake of an alleged green Libyan timer; A 'technical report' commissioned on actual graph paper suggests for no reason I can fathom the final PT/35(b) photo is of the green replacement except the corner DP/31, which is actually a matching corner from the original Lumpert-supplied brown fake! And they didn't even use the corner with the irreplaceable "M!" (lower right corner of right view below - the part that's the same blue/green as the rest).


So to summarize, as the graphic above pretty well does, the verifiable changes were the removal of surface debris, perhaps removal of some of the charred layer, loss of a small bit of solder, an apparent flake of damaged plastic (tan under-layer?), minor changes to the touch pad surface, and the obvious cuts and/or grinding to the board consistent with cross-section analysis. Nothing else about it changed, and there’s no evidence that anything misleading was done with this after its initial fraudulent insertion into the evidence chain.

Did everyone catch that? Don’t get distracted, then, is the main point here. There are still intelligent questions to ask.

12 comments:

Edwin Bollier said...

This is only a computer "Babylon" translation, german/english

1. The reale illustration PT/35, on the left side of (Caustic Logic):

The real fragment, photo ref. PP'8932-PI/995) on Dr. Hayes examination side no. 51, under column b): PT/35, was black carbonized (ex "brown" in color with the letter "M" on it !
After the visit by Fa. Siemens on 17th April, 1990 (forensic tests), the original MST/13 Fragment (PT/35) was separated in two parts:
part no. 353= PT/35(a) and part no.419= DP/31(a). Both parts were consisting of a standard PC material of 8 fibre-glass-lay.

Between May and 10th September 1990, part no.353= PT/35(a) was swapped with a duplicate PT/35(b) "green in color", with 9 fibre-glas-lay!

See also the Label no. DP/137, with the date 10th Sept. 1990, chanched to 15th Sept. 1989, for the Memorandum between Feraday and Williamson, about the find of PT/35, with the fake date 15th Sept. 1989,
As a Witness I have seen in Kamp van Zeist the evidence PT/35(b), convincing it was a green in colored duplicate without the "M" on it.
Not corresponded with the real illustration on ref. PP' 8932-PI/995 and photo 334!

The 20 pieces of MST-13 timer supplied to Libya two years before the PanAm 103 crash, were equipped only with "green in color" circuit board. (type Thüring, 9 fibre-glas-lay).

Reason for the fraud: Libya could be entangled with the Lockerbie tragedy
only with a "green colored" MST-13 timer fragment (PT/35(b).
The PT/35 (b) evidence part can be examined officially with court archives at Scotland for the truth facts.

2. The illustration "patchwork", PT/35(b) /DP/31(a) of the right side of
(Caustic Logic):
These pictures are computer designed and have not a proof validity!

by Edwin and Mahnaz Bollier, MEBO Ltd., Switzerland

Caustic Logic said...

"The PT/35 (b) evidence part can be examined officially with court archives at Scotland for the truth facts."

Yes, one might go there and look and find it matched the orders you sold to Libya. This would strongly contrast with what? Your belief that it had been brown with 8 layers? How could we verify that when the "old fragment" is surely gone now, and the photo of it (PP8932) shows a blue-green color beneath the soot?

Forget it dude. If they faked this, they did it so well, down to every detail (except the M!) so you can't tell the difference without making things up. I will say someone messed with the colors on the photos, adding blue, and probably planted the chunk to begin with. But it's all the same chunk as far as I can tell.

Hey, I tried a color correction on another photo, of DP/347(a). How does this color look re: MST-13?
image

Thanks for your recent comments. I disagree with you in almost every way, but I do value your input on this issue. Send my regards to Mahnaz.

Edwin Bollier, MEBO Ltd said...

Attn: Caustic Logic
Es ist offensichtlich, dass Sie mit falschen Fakts versuchen, die Wahrheit über das massgebende Fragment b) > PT/35, verdeckt zuhalten!
Auf die "logischen" Hintergründe für dieses vorsätzliche Handeln komme ich später zurück.

Fakts: Alle Farben auf den Labor-Fotos von RARDE, FBI, und den "Master Photographic Artwork-Photos", entsprechen nicht den realen Farben! Betroffen sind Abbildungen von:
b) > PT/35; No. 333; 334; 335; 336; DP/31(a); PT/35(a); PT/35(b); DP/347; Ref. PP'8932; PI/995 etc. (Gerichts Beweisbilder, Kamp van Zeist).
Es ist laienhaft, wenn Sie sich als Fachmann ? auf Farben von Photos und Bilder "forensisch" abstützen. Die Farben können nur durch technische Merkmale rück-bestimmt werden!

Sie wollen mit Ihrer Photomontage beweisen, dass nach entfernen (remove) des schwarzen "carbonize" der Buchstabe "M" auf dem grünen Lötstoplack sichtbar wurde, "this is a big BLUFF" !

Reason: Expert Feraday have registered: "the MST-13, (PT/35) fragment photo no. 334, is of the single solder mask type" !
MEBO: The solder mask was not on the side with the letter "M", of the two parallel lines just below the soldering point, figure "1", (RARDE report page 130, evidence witness Feraday).

Es war eine falsche Behauptung von Feraday, dass es sich um ein "grünes" "circuit board" handelte. Tests zeigen, wenn es auf der Gegenseite grünen Lötstoplack gehabt hätte, wäre dieser bis auf die erste Fiberglas Lage verbrannt geworden.
Vom Original, b)< PT/35 Fragment, wurde mir in Dumfries nur das, bei Siemens abgetrennte zweite Teil, No.419= DP/31(a) zur Begutachtung übergeben... Dieses stammte zweifelsfrei von einem ehemaligen standard PC-board mit 8 Fiberglas Lagen ab (Prototype)!!!
Das mir am Gericht gezeigte erste Teil-Fragment PT/35(b), war ein "duplicate with solder mask, green in color without the letter "M" on it...
by Edwin Bollier, MEBO Ltd., Switzerland

Edwin Bollier, MEBO Ltd. Switzerland said...

Attn: Caustic Logic:
A new interesting question is located in the area; in excerpts from Caustic Logic: Of these Lumpert said “I clearly recognize the scratched remnants of the soldering tracts on this enlarged digital police photograph.” A poster available online shows a blowup with German text, perhaps based on something, labeling these as “Kratzstellen von Ing Lumpert,” scratches by Lumpert. That any villains would have chosen to cut out and display as evidence just the small corner that Lumpert had marked with random micro-abrasions and could identify raises some questions.

Today the question must be asked: Wurde Ing. U. Lumpert beim Erstellen des PT/35, (MST-13) Timer-Fragments von offizieller Stelle als Berater beigezogen?
Lumpert wurde ohne Wissen von MEBO, mindestens zweimal verdeckt nach USA eingeladen.
Begründung: Ing. U. Lumpert bestätigt im Affidavit vom 18th July 2007, (Seite 3, Absatz No.5 tatsächlich, dass er selbst die "Kratzstellen" auf dem MST-13 Fragment gemacht hatte ! Somit steht eindeutig fest, dass zu diesem Zeitpunkt das PT/35 Fragment bereits schwarz "carbonisiert" gewesen sein musste !!!
Am Gericht in Kamp van Zeist waren Lumpert's USA Besuche kein Thema...

>>> This is only a computer "Babylon" translation, german/english:

Was Eng. U. Lumpert when creating the PT/35 (MST-13) Timer fragments an official body as a consultant asked to participate?
Lumpert was without the knowledge of MEBO, at least twice obscured at USA invited.
The reason: Eng. U. Lumpert confirms on the Affidavit of 18th July 2007, (page 3, paragraph No. 5 actually, that he himself the "Kratzstellen" (scratches) on the MST-13 Fragment had made !
It is therefore absolute clear that at this moment the PT/35 Fragment already was black carbonized !!!
At the court in Kamp van Zeist were Lumpert's USA visits no topic...

by Edwin Bollier, MEBO Ltd. Switzerland

Edwin and Mahnaz Bollier, MEBO Ltd. Switzerland said...

Mission Lockerbie: PT/35 Altered and Swapped !

Provably free of doubts, the original MST-13 timer fragment under column b) as PT/35---part PT/35(a) was first manipulated deliberately. After that, PT/35(a) was exchanched by a duplicate PT/35(b) green in color, to bring Libya in connection with the Lockerbie tragedy...

by Edwin and Mahnaz Bollier, MEBO Ltd. Switzerland

Caustic Logic said...

"Lumpert was without the knowledge of MEBO, at least twice obscured at USA invited.
The reason: Eng. U. Lumpert confirms on the Affidavit of 18th July 2007, (page 3, paragraph No. 5 actually, that he himself the "Kratzstellen" (scratches) on the MST-13 Fragment had made !
It is therefore absolute clear that at this moment the PT/35 Fragment already was black carbonized !!!"


My own translation you can use if it's accurate:
Lumpert was invited twice to secret meeting in the USA, without Mebo's knowledge.
The reason: Eng. U. Lumpert confirms in his Affidavit of 18 July 2007, (page 3, paragraph No. 5) that he himself had made the scratches on the MST-13 timer fragment!


Last paragraph is fine. So he made the scratches in the black carbonized surface? Do you suppose they cut out the marked corner, or did he hand them only the fragment? Why didn't he mention that the "brown prototype" he handed over was burnt?

"Provably free of doubts, the original MST-13 timer fragment under column b) as PT/35---part PT/35(a) was first manipulated deliberately. After that, PT/35(a) was exchanched by a duplicate PT/35(b) green in color, to bring Libya in connection with the Lockerbie tragedy..."

PT/35(a) was given in Hayes' notes as "several fragments of black plastics sheet" (with "sheet" struck out).

Your continued new discoveries are a tad amusing, and I'm glad you found a new source of exclamation marks (!!!) so you don't have to keep budgeting with them.

sfm said...

A fine piece of work, CL. Impressed about your energy to deal with these absurdities. Also in doubt whether you should waste your time on it.

The "scratched-M" claim is incredibly silly. What a way to mark anything. Couldn't they afford "permanent"-pens in MEBO, or small glued labels, the way all other printboard people make marks?

What is it supposed to be scratched with, BTW? Did Lumpert carry a sewing needle around for this purpose? Or did he put it in a bag with other electronics and shaked the bag? This would in fact easily make such scratches.

Nonsense(!!!!)

Caustic Logic said...

Thanks, SFM. Good to have a comment from you here. You think this looks tiring, I did a series of posts leading up to this. I wouldn't repeat it.

Actually, Lumpert says he DIDn'T cratch the "M," the police did. Perhaps for Muster (sample). And then whoever cut out that portion and used it, but it was brown (meaning blue/green), so they had to replace with an exact duplicate from a separate green MST-13. All the same, even the color, except they forgot to scratch the "M!"

According to Bollier, this is the only way we can know the evidence is fake. He rejects the well-founded claim that PT/35(b) is physically implausible - it's normal for 1/2" square bits of CB survive 1.5" from a pat of 500g Semtex-H.

And that THIS is how Mebo claims to pursues a $200 million prize after they force the PA103 relatives to pay Libya back.

These people can claim to have "perjured" themselves and lodge depositions all they want, but we should give them no credence.

Caustic Logic said...

carried over rebuttal from comments here.

IF the first photos really show a brown board (under the black I see blue-green), Lumpert's story might mean something, IF we also accept your story of selling two brown prototype MST-13s to the Stasi. But the later fragment is exactly the same, except for being blue-green, machine made. So Did the Stasi manufactur copies based on the protos? Why not the CIA from the ones stolen in Africa? It leaves us nowhere.

A fake is a fake, and you reject the best evidence that it is.

Cindy said...

What kind of floors can be sanded and polished? Click www.gofastek.com for more information.

Cindy
www.gofastek.com

Lee Shin said...

spot on with this write-up, i like the way you discuss the things. i'm impressed, i must say. i'll probably be back again to read more. thanks for sharing this with us.

Lee Shin
www.trendone.net

sarah lee said...

I really enjoyed reading your article. I found this as an informative and interesting post, so i think it is very useful and knowledgeable. I would like to thank you for the effort you have made in writing this article.


farra
edupdf.org