Yesterday a unique article appeared at a news site I’m unfamiliar with – The Daily Beast – with the story of Brian Flynn’s educated rage that “the Lockerbie bomber” was set free by a corrupt Scottish system and then "recovered." Mr. Flynn’s brother, John Patrick, was killed on PA103. I’ve observed a moment’s silence to reflect on that, and realizing it’s futile to even try and grasp the loss and moving on, I’d like to address to Mr. Flynn directly.
Mr. Flynn, you mention your early work helping your mother with research, and that she "served on both presidential commissions that investigated the causes of the bombing and improved airline security." And with your help, she “lobbied Congress to enact the Iran Libya Sanctions Act, which ultimately put enough pressure on Libya to hand over the indicted Libyan agents...” I can admire this channeling of grief into action, and I’m sure you all did so in good faith and with the best intentions, based on what you knew, to ensure John did not die in vain.
As you may know, the sanctions placed on Libya did hurt and sent a message – some sources say 20,000 or more died from these, but I’m sure it was more than 270 anyway. You might realize that the original American demand – a trial in the US – was never met and could never be. It was only reluctantly that Washington agreed to the only trial that could happen – a compromise one, in a third country, under Scots law.
What was your position during that debate? Did you side with those trying for any trial that could work, or with those demanding full Libyan compliance even at the cost of no trial? The sanctions were not lifted until after the surrender of the suspects, after nearly a decade in place. Even some official sources acknowledge the US government did not actually desire a trial at all - just a reason for sanctions against Libya.
“Eventually, Abdel Baset al Megrahi was convicted and sentenced to life in prison. And although he would be the only man to pay for the atrocity, we felt in a small way that some justice had been served. [...] When Megrahi was released ... this blatant act of betrayal robbed us of that one shred of justice.”I can understand why it’s upsetting if one believes in Megrahi’s guilt, or even just in the integrity of court decisions, to have a convicted murderer go free. But the Scottish system does that, irrespective of guilt. And I really am sorry to have to say this, but I believe you were badly misled on the guilt part.
I gather you desire to have no doubts about this at all, and that is your right. But you say you’ve done the research, while I and many, many others remain less than convinced, even after some study. Maybe we’re just not looking deep enough? What do you think accounts for the difference?
“Like many of our Irish ancestors,” you point out, “we Flynns like a fight.” I see you have stepped into the ring again with some pretty bold words. You even took the time to address a critical comment beneath your article. As your compatriot Bunntamas points out elsewhere (comments), you're highly evolved in the facts domain, studying in-depth for decades, whereas I've just been skimming fringe info for a year. So you should easily wipe the floor with me and score a victory for truth and against the “conspiracy theorists.” Or you could take some cop-out reason to turn down the offer - something about “waste of time” is standard.
We could debate here via comments, at the anti-Conspiracy Theory JREF forum (forums.randi,org) or wherever else you feel more comfortable, like e-mails. I would like to publish the results of course as I don't want to be accused of hushing up any loss I may suffer. Whether you agree or not, I’ll start off in the comments, springing off of points made in your article and one detailed response. Feel free to pick any points to respond to.
Thanks for any consideration
- Adam Larson
aka Caustic Logic
to whom you owe nothing
but shouldn't ignore anyway
(commenting tips in sidebar - if you show an interest I'll turn off comment moderation to speed it up.)
10 comments:
Megrahi's Release
Flynn points in italics, mine not.
“How could they not know that Megrahi would receive a hero's welcome in Libya?"
True, this was inevitable, as the people of a country often celebrate when an innocent political prisoner is returned to them.
"How could they not suspect that he might miraculously be cured and live for years?"
Why should they suspect something so stupid? The tone makes it sound like Mr.Flynn believes Megrahi has "recovered" and will live for years, or rather that his cancer was fake, which is quite a conspiracy theory. Is your source for "years" Karol Sikora's "10 or even 20 years" statement? Did you happen to miss where he explains that's not an actual prognosis?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jul/16/release-abdelbaset-al-megrahi-mistake
As we have now learned, the Scots did it for the least surprising reason: money.
You learned that, did ye? Which Scots were paid, how much, when, and by whom?
Since Megrahi’s release, we have demanded to see proof that he was to die in three months.
You won’t find it. One doctor said that was a "reasonable" possibility, at least a week but less than a month after a wider panel decided something like 8 months was likely. Obviously the short prognosis was off by at least a bit, even given normal variance in these things. And even the long one that’s harder to dismiss has been eclipsed by now, but not by much. Continuing to hammer this point right now would be unwise, as Megrahi will most likely be dead within weeks.
"...not ONE cancer specialist consulted would give the three-month death sentence required for compassionate release."
Required? My source says for requirements:
"death is likely to occur soon. There are no fixed time limits but life expectancy of less than three months may be considered an appropriate period."
Need we go into what MAY BE means?
And required or not, at least one of them did say three months atone point (name redacted). Dr. Fraser's 10 August report:
image, new window
And it seems this person was NOT Karol Sikora, as I and so many others had been led to believe,
Several doctors had found eight months lifespan likely just before this. And the rules on compassionate release have no specific lifespan requirements. Three months is only a guideline, so getting too hung up on that exact prognosis will only get one so far. At least, as far as I understand it.
debate launch points continue, next post... pick one or run in fear.
The Evidence
In February 1991, the shopkeeper identified Megrahi as the man who purchased the clothes from his shop (clothes that were in the suitcase with the bomb).
Deemed to be in that case, and I'll call that likely enough. The clothes do trace their quite neatly to Mary's House - most notably the Yorkie trousers, with only a tiny run, all going there.
And the man – Tony Gauci - proved very compliant, but less than relevant. Can you cite whatGauci said in identifying Megrahi? Closest thing you can find to “that is the man.” I haven't seen anything convincig yet. 'similar ... same chin ... 6 feet or more ... if ten years younger ... a little bit like exactly ...'
“Investigators knew he had been there on the date the clothing was purchased... Megrahi traveled to Malta on December 7, 1988 and purchased clothing and other items from a shop which ended up at Lockerbie.”
First, they knew he was NOT there on November 23, which is quite obviously the date Gauci described. He didn’t name the day like in a calendar, but described it – light rainfall, his brother watching a football game around 7pm, Christmas decorations not up, mid-week (Wednesday). ALL of these descriptors fit Nov 23 to a T, and none (save being a Wednesday) fit with the official date of sale, December 7, when Megrahi was on Maltta.
Have you ever seen an old source citing November 23 as the date of sale Where did they get that from? Some error? So, researcher, where did they get December 7 from if not Gauci’s own story?
When the men were surrendered for trial, Scottish police officers developed evidence in Libya which proved Abdusamad was Megrahi and that Megrahi was an intelligence officer.
I’m not sure, but didn’t they develop this by reading Megrahi’s own admission that he was Abdusamad? I admit I'm hazy on this part, maybe you can set me straight.
Megrahi and Fhimah gave an interview to a reporter in 1991. Fhimah gave no excuse for having the notation in his diary to obtain luggage "taggs" from Air Malta in his diary the week of the bombing.
Yes, Pierre Salinger, and he's goofy. Fhimah gave no excuse, really? Because he had a darn good one, argued once by Ed Bradley of 60 Minutes. Covered here.
continued, and it's not too late to run off and ignore "the troll"
Megrahi denied being a member of the Libyan Intelligence Service; he did not know Abdusamad; and he did not know MEBO (the swiss company that made the timers). All were proven at trial to be lies. However, his biggest lie was his claim that on December 20-21 he had not been in Malta-"I was here in Tripoli with my family...believe me."
Denying movement under a false passport does seem to be a clue of something. What makes you so sure it was a bombing? He claims he was illegally circumventing sanctions, buying supplies on the black and gray markets of Europe. Why did you decide that was nonsense? It makes sense to me.
Why should anyone believe any of his claims today after his lies in 1991?
Because by NOW, his flimsy cover has been blown long ago. Back then it hadn’t been. Why can’t you cite any more lies from this liar? Why must you dig back two decades to prove the man a total liar who can't be trusted when he pleads that he's innocent?
Libya had the motivation to carry out the attack due to the US raid on Tripoli in 1986.
Sure, that could conceivably do the trick - half the world has some grienvance with this behemoth of a nation. But honestly – you know this stacks up poorly against the grievance Iran had over 290 killed on a plane less than six months before the bombing, compared to 50-ish in a bombing/missile raid 2 1/2 years prior. One of these two acts was NOT avenged on your brother and others. What do you think of Iran's amazing restraint compared to Libya's overblown and delayed reaction?
"Libya took responsibilities for the actions of its agents."
And they've continued to insist, with plenty of reason, that bombing PA103 is NOT one of those actions. Ignoring that half of their stance puts a dishonest twist to make it seem like they've admitted to bombing PA 103, to put at the end of your list, like the cherry on the sundae.
What say you to that, Mr.Flynn?
Oh, and one other point for now. Recently the question came up at Professor Black's blog - what we would do or wish if we believed Megrahi was guilty. My answer was something like this:
If I was aware of even one fourth the questions about Megrahi's guilt that I'm aware of, and yet I still somehow believed he was guilty, I'd want him to die at home in peace. Because even one fourth would be too many questions for me. I wouldn't want even a 10% chance of an innocent man suffering like that.
How do you feel about that mindset? Would you be more upset about a 10% chance of an innocent man rotting in prison, or a 10% chance of a guilty man going free? Do you find in your studies, and the SCCRC's findings, etc., any possibility that Megrahi might not be guilty?
It's complexstuff, and you've had more time and reason to think about it in detail, so I'm truly curious what you think.
Thanks.
MISSION LOCKERBIE:
Attn. Caustic Logic
Yes, Mr. Abdelbaset al-Megrahi denied being a member of the Libyan Intelligence Service; he did not know Abdusamad; and he did not know MEBO (the swiss company that made the timers). All were proven at trial to be lies.
However, his biggest lie was his claim that on December 20-21 he had not been in Malta-"I was here in Tripoli with my family...believe me."
Denying movement under a false passport does seem to be a clue of something. He claims he was illegally circumventing sanctions, buying supplies on the black and gray markets of Europe.
Why should anyone believe any of his claims today after his lies
in 1991?
It must be accepted that all lies served for a concealing of an SECRET CRUCIAL FAKT (SCF) of kind, which with the infiltration of a "Bomb Bag" on AirMalta, flight KM-180, nothing to do has!
Which true facts to favour al-Megrahi's relieve Al-Megrahi ?:
1) The fact agrees with the date, Wedensday, 23th November 1988, confirms:
The sale to a unknown buyer in Gauci's "Mary's House" was on Wedensday 23th November 1988 before 19 hour.
The other date, 7 of December is, no doubt's, wrong and thus Megrahi cannot be the cloths buyers !
NB: Mr. Abdelbaset al Megrahi, was not in Malta on 23th November 1988.
2) The alleged "Bomb bag" B-8849 was not from AirMalta flight KM-180, it was a normal on-line bag from Berlin, wrongly coded as inter-line bag:
Tray B-8849 came from Berlin with flight PA-643 and belonged to passenger no. 131, Misses W. Wagenführ; coded in Frankfurt via counter V3-206, code S-0009+Z1307); (Prod. 1089, PTM-telex from PanAm company, after offbloc PA-643, 11:26 hour in Berlin, text: from flight PA-643 > to PA 103B/21-LHRO/0/1/ B1 > (1 passenger+1 bag > B1) police reference DW 125;
No doubt's it is wrong al-Megrahi cannot dispatched a bag on AirMalta KM-180, on 21 Dec.1988 !
3) Denying movement under a false passport does seem to be a clue of something. He claims he was illegally circumventing sanctions, buying supplies on the black and gray markets of Europe.
If for it the necessary proofs are present (truth) can the statement in favor of Al-Megrahi be. .
4) SECRET CRUCIAL FAKT (SCF)
by Edwin Bollier, MEBO Ltd., Switzerland
Thank you, Edwin.
Whatever the origin of B8849 it's suspect for NOT turning up when German police investigated the airport.
And November 23 is clearly the date Gauci describes. If there was such a purchase it was on that day.
I was hoping to hear from Mr. Flynn by now, but it's not long enough I call avoidance. He's probably busy consulting or some such.
MISSION LOCKERBIE:
No luggage transfer from air Malta flight KM-180 onto PanAm-103:
sorry, only in german language:
Das angebliche "Bomb-Bag", Tray No. B-8849 wurde nicht von AirMalta Flug KM-180 auf PanAm, Flug PA-103/B via Frankfurt nach London-Heathrow transferiert !
Beweis:
Bei einem Dokument aus der Sammlung ST- 0685507 / 88, des Deutschen Bundeskriminalamtes (BKA) vom 08.02. 1989, handelt es sich u.a. um einen X- Ray Report der Sicherheitsfirma ALERT vom Flughafen Frankfurt. (Police Referenz: DW 26). Camp Zeist Prod. No. 1076)
Darin bestätigt Sicherheits-Angestellter Kurt Maier, dass er am 21. 12. 1988, zwischen 16.25- 16.30 Uhr am X-Ray-Gerät bei Gate
B-46, total 13 inter-line Gepäckstücke überprüft habe.
(Maier Duty Report, Camp Zeist Prod. No. 1076).
Bei einem weitern Dokument des BKA vom 02.02. 1988, Zeist Production No. 1790 handelt es sich um einen Ausdruck der Gepäck- Beförderungsanlage des Stellenleiter und Zeugen Kurt Berg.
Hiernach wurden am 21.12. 1988 über die Beförderungsanlage total 25 Inter-liner Gepäckstücke für Flug PA-103/B befördert.
Auch Zeuge No. 799, Gunther Karsteleiner machte am Gericht dieselbe falsche Aussage.
Er zählte 12 on-liner Gepäckstücke, welche gezwungener Massen falsch als inter-liner Gepäckstücke codiert wurden, mit den 13 korrekt codierten inter-liner Bag's zusammen und kam dadurch auf die Anzahl 25 Inter-liner Bag's.
MEBO Erklärung:
Die Anzahl der inter-liner Gepäckstücke ist nachweislich falsch ! Von den angeblichen 25 inter-line Gepäckstücken waren davon 12 Bag's On-liner von PanAm Flügen aus Berlin (TXL), PA-107;
PA-637; PA-639; PA-643.
11 On-liner Bag's kamen von (TXL) PA-107; PA-637; und PA-639 und wurden über die inter-line Baggage Halle Mitte "HM", am Counter HM-4 zwangsläufig falsch als inter-liner Bag's codiert und mit den Tray No. B-xxxx + Zeit und dem Attribut "BP" (By Pass) in den Hausspeicher "HS", und später auf Flug PA-103/B befördert.
1 on-liner Bag kam von (TXL) Flug PA-643 und wurde über das inter-line Baggage Vorfeld "V3" am Counter No.206 zwangsläufig falsch als inter-liner Bag programmiert, Tray No. B-8849 --S-0009+ Z1307, mit dem Atribut "TO" (to) Hausspeicher HS und später auf PA-103/B befördert.
Auf der Ladeliste TADD, 881221, für PanAm, Flug PA-103/B wurden total 6 Gepäckstücke nach der Tray Nummer B---- und des S-Codes, mit dem Attribut "TO" (to) -- HS-33 + Zeit bezeichnet.
Durch das Attribut "TO" = to *HS-33 +Zeit *(Ziel Hausspeicher) kann zugeordnet werden, dass die 6 Gepäckstücke im inter-line Baggage Vorfeld "V-3", an einem der Counter No. 203; 204; 206 codiert wurden.
Da für das Bag, Tray No. B-8849, S-0009+Z13:07 mit dem Attribut "TO" HS-33, für einem Transfer von AirMalta KM-180 auf PA-103/B, nur der Counter No.206 infrage kommen würde steht beweisbar fest, dass das Bag Tray B-8849 nicht von AirMalta sondern von PanAm Zubringerflug aus Berlin, PA-643 transferiert wurde !
Continuation down >>>
continuation >>>
No luggage transfer from AirMalta flight KM-180 onto PanAm-103:
Nur weil das on-liner Bag, Tray No. B-8849 aus abwicklungs-technischen Gründen falsch als inter-liner Bag eingestuft wurde und gleichzeitig, zwischen 13:04 und 13:16 Uhr, um 13:07 Uhr, am gleichen Counter No. 206, zwischen Gepäckstücken von AirMalta KM-180 codiert wurde, konnte behauptet werden, dass das Bag B-8849 von AirMalta auf PA-103/B transferiert wurde.
Die restlichen 24 Gepäckstücke können Fluggesellschaften oder Passagieren zugeordnet werden und kommen für einen Transfer von AirMalta KM-180 auf PA-103/B nicht infrage.
NB: Das "Baggage Conveyancing System" im Frankfurt Airport war mit einem Betriebs Computerprogramm ausgerüstet, welches on-liner Gepäckstücke bei der X-Ray Kontrollstelle am Gate B-46 nicht ausschleuste, da solche Bag's bereits in Berlin X-Ray überprüft wurden.
Da zahlmässig feststeht (12 on-line Bag's) dass das Bag
B-8849 nicht x-Ray überprüft wurde, bestätigt das Bag war on-line.
Durch diese Fakts kann ein Transfer von AirMalta KM-180 auf PA-103/B, absolut ausgeschlossen werden.
The alleged "Bomb bag" B-8849 was not from AirMalta flight KM-180, it was a normal on-line bag from Berlin, wrongly coded as inter-line bag:
Tray B-8849 came from Berlin with flight PA-643 and belonged to passenger no. 131, Misses W. Wagenführ; coded in Frankfurt via counter V3-206, code S-0009+Z1307); (Prod. 1089, PTM-telex from PanAm company, after offbloc PA-643, 11:26 hour in Berlin, text: from flight PA-643 > to PA 103B/21-LHRO/0/1/ B1 > (1 passenger+1 bag > B1) police reference DW 125;
No doubt's it is wrong al-Megrahi cannot dispatched a bag on AirMalta KM-180, on 21 Dec.1988 !
by Edwin and Mahnaz Bollier, MEBO Ltd. Switzerland
URL: www.lockerbie.ch
There is an interesting article in today's issue of the newspaper 'The Herald', http://www.heraldscotland.com, 'Why was terrorist Talb cleared over Lockerbie?'. The article includes the following -
'In May 1989 Talb was arrested in connection with the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103.'
There is also the post at 'THE LOCKERBIE CASE' blog of October 19, 2009 - 'Pan Am incriminee Talb freed' -
http://lockerbiecase.blogspot.com/2009/10/pan-am-incriminee-talb-freed.html.
I saw that, and will have to read it closer.
I'm not atall sure Talb was involved, but he's definitely an interesting thread. Without him and those unusual clothes found at Lockerbie, investigators would have had to snap down to Malta to "stumble upon" Megrahi without any evidence to lead them there. Now that would have been awkward...
Post a Comment