last edits 17 September
Contrasting an excellent analysis recently published on Time's website, a crappy little article just appeared on the Christian Science Monitor's site. The author, Dan Murphy, reads to me like an old-time pro on the Lockerbie misinformation circuit, dusted off and put to work to counter the spreading "conspiracy theories." Here I will attempt to address every error I find in the piece, while trying not to pick a fight with Marquise and Chonyak's vapid, self-serving comments. I'm looking for Mr. Murphy's errors (aside from numerous grammatical ones).
Last week Abdelbasat al-Megrahi, the convicted murderer of 280 people in the 1988 bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie Scotland, celebrated the first anniversary of his release on "compassionate" grounds by the Scottish government at his lavish home near Tripoli.270, not 280. Celebrations were muted to nonexistent, depending on your source. Compassion shouldn't have quotes here; that is the legal basis of the rule. I thought a Christian might understand.
The fact that the former Libyan intelligence agent has now lived nine months longer than doctors predicted has rekindled conspiracy theories of Megrahi's innocence. The thinking goes that "compassion" for Megrahi was merely a pretext to release a man secretly known to be innocent without having to make embarrassing admissions of error.Well, "error" might not be the right word for what might've been exposed with no intervention; that's part of the thinking. The other part left out, that strongly suggests that interpretation, is Megrahi's 12 August decision to abandon his appeal, following on actions by MacAskill and his advisers that all but necessitated that outcome, and apparently being the deciding factor in his release.
Another Libyan agent tried along with Megrahi was acquitted. Megrahi was found guilty of planting the explosive device in a suitcase that was placed on an Air Malta flight...And the placing on the plane was allegedly done by accomplice Fhimah, with his airside pass. Fhimah was never found to have any links that would class him as an "agent" of Libya - at trial the prosecution even refrained from stating it as fact. There was also never any evidence found Fhimah was at the airport that day, and it's certain that they looked for any. This part is necessary to the alleged plot, and also pure speculation. Nearly all the evidence against Fhimah in general was from "star witness" Giaka, and dismissed after the judges decided Giaka was a liar after nothing but US "Justice" money and a new life there.
So the necessary accomplice was found absolutely not guilty, leaving one wondering who did help Megrahi get the bomb onto that flight while he was busy boarding another one. It must've happened somehow is the best the judges could muster.
Libya later said it was responsible for the bombing ... Recently, Libyan strongman Muammar Qaddafi said that the country accepted guilt to get out from under UN sanctions, and had not been truthful when it said it was responsible.Wrong. There's no disconnect. As Saif Gaddafi confessed, they "played with the words" to get out from under UN sanctions. They accepted, in 2003, "responsibility" for the "actions" of their citizens, without specifying - then or ever - that the bombing was one of those actions. No one in Libya has "admitted" their involvement. That's all American wishful thinking.
... there's no evidence to support any of a myriad of alternative theories about his guilt.Wrong. Is it really so hard to say "proof" instead of "evidence?" There is very much evidence - all fitting together nicely into a suppressed body of clues suggesting a PFLP-GC bomb originating in London. Iran did get its revenge for IA655 after all.
The Herald writes that the "Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) is understood to have uncovered new evidence that strengthens the case against Talb" without actually explaining how this is "understood" or what additional evidence, if any, exists to tie him to the murders.
Wrong. It's not 100% convincing, but the Herald specified:
The SCCRC report refers to the recovery of official records from various organisations in Italy. These are thought to relate to Talb, who travelled between Cyprus, Rome, Malta, and Frankfurt in the run-up to the bombing.Next.
While Megrahi was proven to have traveled to Malta on a false passport (which he had originally lied about), and to ahve [sic] been there on the date that the explosive was placed on the plane, Talb was in Sweden at the time.
And the bomb was in London. Neither once-official suspect was involved.
The key piece of evidence against Megrahi was a fragment of the timer used for the bomb at Lockerbie
That's not evidence against Megrahi, but it does strongly suggest Libyan authorship. It was also obviously planted.
Another theory floating about is that the British government squashed possibly exculpatory evidence about Megrahi at the time of his trial and has been hiding it ever since.
Not theory. Fact. In 2008 David Miliband ordered sealed a document the defense wanted, under the vague Public Interest Immunity exemption. (Explained by him here)
Again, it isn't clear who believes this or how they could possibly know such the contents of a "secret" document.
Its contents are indeed unkown, as it remains supressed. So why the qoutes on "secret"? Personally I suspect the rumors of its contents are based on a credible report to begin with, from someone who's seen it, and it does deal with the timer. But I for one admit I don't know what's in it and I doubt we'll ever be allowed to see. In fact, no one has openly claimed to know what's in it. They've heard and suspect what they say, and Mr.Murphy has nothing better to counter it.
... the Libyan abandoned his appeal because of his terminal cancer.
Mr. Murphy would be hard-pressed to explain how cancer leads to a dropped appeal all on its own. There probably is a valid link between the two, but one he'd rather not explore. The innocent convict was bullied into surrendering his appeal, and cheap, given his going-out-of-life clearance sale. Looks like he might've even been bamboozled into selling out a bit early.
12 comments:
That Mr Fhimah was acquitted by the Zeist court was highly problematical for the Crown. For they had to extinguish the original libel (charge) that both men were guilty and replace it with one solely relating to Mr Megrahi.
But that removed the vital mechanism (that Mr Fhimah had access to baggage tags, and an airside pass at Luqa Airport)
Oh what falsehoods Mr Marquise weaves, when one he sinks to deceive.
And as his pre-retirement job, Mr Marquise was sent to Oklahoma, dare I say to sort out the bombing attributed to Mr McVeigh.
Does he not feel the long hand of the law sometimes feeling the collar of his jacket?
Oh, he is the law.
Mr. McVeigh was actually killed. I've never been compelled to re-think that case, partly because he's a right-winger, because the Iraqi alternative sounds wrong to me, and the third alternative is too scary.
But you say Marquise was involved? And we know spec agent Thurman was involved.In fact, his proven manipulation of the explosives evidence is, IIRC, what got him "retired" from the agency.
Sadly, this too is worthy or re-examination.
---
Marquise after his arm's fallen asleep: "Gaaack! The icy hand of the long arm of the law upon my shoulder! Oh, that's me."
Mission Lockerbie:
Mr. Richard Marquise refuses all examining of new Facts of evidence in the Lockerbie-Affair. This shows that he must keep up at its instructions of the manipulated evidences!
in german language:
Da sich Mr. Richard Marquise mit keinen neuen Tatsachen in der Lockerbie-Affäre befassen will zeigt, dass er bei seinen Vorgaben und den manipulierten Beweisen bleiben muss !
by Edwin Bollier, MeBo Ltd.
Just a point of pedantry: the Iran Air flight which was blown out of the sky by the Godblessed USS Vincennes was IR655 not IA. IA is, or was, Iraqui Airways, at that time presumably just about the last airline the Americans would have wanted to attack.
If the PFLP GC loaded the bomb in London, why has no accusation ever been made about any such PFLP GC operative in London?
In my opinion the CIA intended very early on to blame the PPSF or PFLP GC but found in the light of the run up to the first Gulf War that these were inconvenient targets, protected by Syria,
And Johnston confirms that the CIA were at Lockerbie very quickly after the crash and I have inferred some of the nefarious activities they got up to, not forgetting that they blew up a second device on the plane 24 seconds and 3,1 km after the first. Have a look at the debris trail map in the AAIB report, if you do not believe me.
If the PFLP GC loaded the bomb in London, why has no accusation ever been made about any such PFLP GC operative in London?
Accusation by whom? I accuse that. But we have no specifics. "Facts" on the ground were not filled in for us here, as attention was drawn further afield.
I'll discuss your second explosion evidence at the JREF thread as time allows, but not here.
Obviously, by whoever is developing a theory that the PFLP GC carried out the bombing.
You cannot theorise either draw conclusions from what appear to be the facts on the ground, for especially in the Lockerbie case, many of these appear to be highly suspicious as to their origin. And really, if you've begun to dismantle the Crown's case by concluding say, the Newcastleton chip evidence has been fraudulently manufactured to maintain a particular thesis, you've got to do that to to the Horton manual, the Maltese sourced clothes, the Toshiba cassette recorder and finally the Sansomite suitcase. And when you've done all that and you've decided to reject all this evidence as fraudulent, faked or misrepresented, you have to start from a theoretical other case, starting from cui bono? or motivation.
And there really is no motive for a PFLP GC bombing unless you say Iran is behind the PFLP GC, which is unlikely as the Iranians are Persian shias and the PFLP GC Arab sunnis. I know that sort of difference does not matter to the cognoscenti as they are all "terrorist ragheads", but actually it helps to understands the possible motivations of each party. I do not trust evidence produced by the CA of transfers of say $10M from Iran to the PFLP GC, for payments of that size would have transformed the lives of relatively impecunious so-called terrorists. And their lives seem not to have been made immeasurably richer. So on the face of it, that accusation made by the CIA is false. And then the other silly claim put forward once by Vinvent Cannistraro that the PFLP GC finding they had bitten off a job too big, sub-contacted to Libya?
Pull the other leg. For a different view of Lockerbie see adifferentviewonlockerbie.blogspot.com
Charles: Obviously, by whoever is developing a theory that the PFLP GC carried out the bombing.
Okay, so that's about everyone and anyone is 1988. If, as I propose, the bomb went on in London, and the truth was to be covered up, the first thing they'd do is keep the best explanation (most likely one, true one) from coming together. Gives them time to decide on an alternte. Remember in my version the Western plot doesn't start til at least 7pm GMT on Dec 21 1988.
In your version, they'd have the frameup planned right into the planned bombing, if they were smart. They'd have their London clues and then friggin accept them, as they did NOT do. Or they'd have their malta clues, as they did, but only later in 1989 it seems.
But it wasn't like that. Sure, maybe something unspecified went wrong and changed their plans ...
Look, I don't have the time for this.
Aku said...
Just a point of pedantry: the Iran Air flight which was blown out of the sky by the Godblessed USS Vincennes was IR655 not IA. IA is, or was, Iraqui Airways, at that time presumably just about the last airline the Americans would have wanted to attack.
Thanks! Good to have the Akubackin themix
In fact at Charles' tantrum thread at JREF, we all insisted it should be IA, and Charles was right. I may or may not update the many, many instances... no, I won't. Close enough. :)
BTW to explain- Aku's comment from a few days ago was misrouted as "spam," in truly backwards decision by some filter, and I somehow missed it until just now.
In my version, versions of the cover up were prepared from the start.
The Toshiba warning (repeated three times) was obviously an attempt to develop a PFLP GC provenance. I don't think BND liked that at all, and it would probably have involved a plot based at Frankfurt Airport and they were as relectant at MI5 to have Heathrow's security made an issue. That's why the plot developed the Maltese angle. Malta is a weak country with an "obviously" unsafe and leaky security system. Lord Fraser reminds us in the Gideon Levi film that Cairo and Cyprus were both suggested.
The cover-up had to be developed in line with the plot. The fact that Iran and the US co-operated to down an American plane was something that could NEVER be admitted to, which is why it is impossible to alter even the conspiracy theories page for Pan Am 103 in the wikipedia.
But if we all keep blogging away, some more clues may well eneter the public domain, and eventually D&G police will coming knocking on the door of the CIA.
In my version, versions of the cover up were prepared from the start.
The Toshiba warning (repeated three times) was obviously an attempt to develop a PFLP GC provenance. I don't think BND liked that at all, and it would probably have involved a plot based at Frankfurt Airport and they were as relectant at MI5 to have Heathrow's security made an issue. That's why the plot developed the Maltese angle. Malta is a weak country with an "obviously" unsafe and leaky security system. Lord Fraser reminds us in the Gideon Levi film that Cairo and Cyprus were both suggested.
The cover-up had to be developed in line with the plot. The fact that Iran and the US co-operated to down an American plane was something that could NEVER be admitted to, which is why it is impossible to alter even the conspiracy theories page for Pan Am 103 in the wikipedia.
But if we all keep blogging away, some more clues may well eneter the public domain, and eventually D&G police will coming knocking on the door of the CIA.
Post a Comment