Merged Lockerbie bomber alive after 9 months

Is this the same thing as the one we knew about already? I thought that was called The Families of Lockerbie.

I see it's afternoon, but I have some time off due and I'd only need a half-day to see that. I'd really like to know if it's the same play as was mentioned previously though, or if there are two!

Rolfe.
 
I don't think so Rolfe. I remember the other one mentioned, but I was under the impression quite a few of the families, including Dr Swire, were unhappy about that production.

This one Lockerbie: Unfinished Business appears to be based on Dr Swire's book, stiil not published, and looks as though it could be quite interesting.

More details here - http://www.seabrightproductions.co.uk/lockerbie.html
 
It seems there must be two, then! I tried looking the other one up, but I found myself with a huge pdf of the entire fringe programme, with no way to skip to the relevant page, and quit!

Rolfe.
 
I've always been a bit suspicious of Jim Swire's elusive book. If you have a finished book you want to put in front of the public, you don't need a publisher.

First, you can put the material straight on the web, in html or pdf.
Second, if you want to make money from it, you can put it behind a paywall, like Paul Foot's report.
Third, you can send the pdf to an online printer and simply order the number of copies you want. The printer will simply deliver them to your house, for you to sell online, or flog to bookshops or whatever.

I looked into that last one for an opus I edited for a friend, and you can make a modest profit on even a small-ish print run. That way nobody but the authors are liable for any legal consequences, and as they are the ones who want to publish it, they should be prepared to take that risk.

It's possible the book isn't yet finished, but if they have something in publishable form, I can't imagine why they don't simply publish and be damned.

Rolfe.
 
Rolfe said:
I've always been a bit suspicious of Jim Swire's elusive book. If you have a finished book you want to put in front of the public, you don't need a publisher.

First, you can put the material straight on the web, in html or pdf.
Second, if you want to make money from it, you can put it behind a paywall, like Paul Foot's report.
Third, you can send the pdf to an online printer and simply order the number of copies you want. The printer will simply deliver them to your house, for you to sell online, or flog to bookshops or whatever.

I looked into that last one for an opus I edited for a friend, and you can make a modest profit on even a small-ish print run. That way nobody but the authors are liable for any legal consequences, and as they are the ones who want to publish it, they should be prepared to take that risk.

It's possible the book isn't yet finished, but if they have something in publishable form, I can't imagine why they don't simply publish and be damned.

Rolfe.
Click to expand...

Yes, I think he regards it as unfinished. I think Dr Swire has been of the thinking that as long as Megrahi was convicted, then the story of Lockerbie and his own personal undertaking in searching for the truth, remained incomplete. I've heard him say that he feels he's failed those who died on 103, not least his daughter, in not uncovering the truth. Of course, this is wholly untrue, but may provide some reasoning for him not publishing his book as yet.
 
I think I've just heard on the news that the senate hearing has been cancelled. As someone else said, which part of "no" were they failing to understand?

Rolfe.
 
From that news article a quote from Sen. Menendez

"It is a game of diplomatic tennis that is worthy of Wimbledon, but not worthy on behalf of the lives of the families who still have to deal with this terrorist act and the consequences of the loss of loved ones in their lives."

Wow.
 
I imagine that we would agree over here, it's just that we suspect it's the Senator who insisted on starting the game.

The Scottish First Minister and at least one former member of the Westminster government telling him (polititely) to get stuffed probably doesn't help. I wonder what his view would be if the Scottish or UK Governments were to try and insist on US parliamentarians attending our own inquiries?
 
Last edited:
The official stonewalling of the pretty obvious fact that they convicted the wrong guy isn't really worthy on behalf of the lives of the families either, come to think of it.

I don't suppose these senators have the foggiest clue that the CIA and the US Department of Justice actively and knowlingly fitted up Megrahi at Zeist - latterly aided by the Scottish Lord Advocate and a bunch of other spineless yes-men.

Rolfe.
 
Architect said:
I suspect that we would agree over here, it's just that we suspect it's the Senator who insisted on starting the game.
Click to expand...


The runaround he's getting is vastly amusing, I have to say. The real question he wants to ask is probably, did the UK government do anything at all to encourage the Scottish government to release Megrahi, in order to deliver on their agreement with Libya?

The answer is probably yes, but not the sort of thing you can nail them on. First, they kept as quiet as Trappist monks before the decision was announced. Heaven forbid that they should say they were opposed to it, just in case Kenny might take their opinion into account and change his mind. (Then of course they could burst into a frenzy of condemnation the minute the deed was done.) And second they released Ronnie Biggs on 6th August. Who is also still alive by the way.

I very much doubt they'll find any actual documentary evidence that Straw or Brown was actively encouraging Kenny.

Rolfe.
 
To consider in part an excellent post that was buried too early:
Buncrana said:
However, there was also one further proviso to this determination being considered. The PTA agreement had a limit of 90 days from the date of application for it to be effective. This limit had expired on Mr MacAskill's visit to Megrahi.
Click to expand...

I looked into that, and found a few sources supporting that the original deal had a limit of 90 days. However ...
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/scotland/article6804645.ece
Mr MacAskill announced that he intended to consider the two applications together and extended the deadline of the prisoner transfer request, which required a conclusion in 90 days.
Click to expand...
So if the deadline was extended, that would eliminate the 90 days problem, right? It wouldn't affect the other reasons why the PTA could not likely go through, which collectively make one wonder why such a charade was gone through over it.

So I see the Senate hearings have been postponed, and they even admit it's from a lack of interest from their invitees, not the weather. That tennis match quote is just priceless. Senators are so cute when they do that!
 
You know what? I've tried to keep an open mind on this. I've tried to consider the possibility that Megrahi might have been involved somehow, even though the evidence shouldn't have come remotely close to convicting him. I've borne in mind that he was a Libyan security officer in the 1980s, which doesn't entirely imply compete sweetness and light. But it doesn't wash.

If he didn't buy the clothes, which he didn't, there isn't the slightest shred of evidence he had any hand in it at all. The authorities have taken what was probably a decoy clothes purchase in Malta, deliberately intended to track the investigation far away from the real point of introduction of the bomb if it were discovered, plus a coincidental coding anomaly at Frankfurt airport (which was admitted to suffer coding anomalies from time to time), seen Megrahi passing through the airport at the important time, and made 2+2=56.

They shamelessly blackmailed Abdulmajid Giaka with threats of cutting off his retainer and sending him back to Libya if he didn't come up with something to support this idea, and then took the resulting fairy-story to court knowing that Giaka was making it up. The pressed and hinted and bribed Tony Gauci until he hesitatingly agreed that Megrahi "resembled" the clothes purchaser, even though his original description had been of a man nothing like Megrahi in most respects. They tortured the evidence regarding the day of the purchase to try to support the only day Megrahi was on the island and able to visit the shop, even though any reasonable evaluation of the same evidence pointed firmly to an entirely different day and actually excluded the day they were trying to support.

The possibility that the authorities had some killer behind-the-scenes information they couldn't bring to court which made them sure of his guilt just doesn't wash either. What he is said to have done, and the plot that was said to have been carried out, are completely bonkers. There are about ten ways it could easily have gone wrong so that the plane wasn't brought down. There were about five ways the plot could have been exposed even if it was. This clearly wasn't a one-man job, but in over 20 years, nobody has found any other evidence of this operation or any other conspirators.

Maybe Megrahi isn't a nice man. I don't know. Maybe he even did stuff in the 1980s we wouldn't be comfortable with. Again I don't know. This is no justification for railroading a conviction for 270 murders against him in a show trial. The way these US senators are carrying on, when it was the US authorities who started this travesty of justice in the first place, makes me want to vomit.

I just sent this to the Herald, though of course they might not print it.

Has it occurred to the US senators and others who maintain that Abdelbaset al-Megrahi should have remained in prison, that if that had happened, his appeal would not have been withdrawn and would have been decided by now? Any rational examination of the SCCRC findings and the evidence as a whole must concede the overwhelming probability it would have been successful, and Mr. al-Megrahi would now be home by right as a free man. Mr. MacAskill may be prevented from "looking behind the appeal", but the rest of us are under no such constraints, and the conclusion is not difficult to reach.

The notes of Mr. MacAskill’s meeting with Mr. al-Megrahi are now public, and reveal an unpleasant picture of a sick and desperate man being treated like a mushroom (kept in the dark and fed manure) in an attempt to pressurise him into dropping his appeal. The hand-written letter from Mr. al-Megrahi is really quite distressing, when read in the light of the SCCRC report and the striking weakness of the case against him in general. This is not someone who should have escaped on a technicality; this is an innocent man sitting in jail looking at a medical death sentence.

Our criminal justice system and we as a nation are guilty of a far worse crime than taking international relations and trade deals into account when releasing a foreign prisoner. We have convicted a man on evidence that wouldn’t support the issuing of a parking ticket, imprisoned him 1,800 miles from home and family, and turned him into an international hate figure while he is in the terminal stages of aggressive prostate cancer.

If any "wide-ranging inquiry" is appropriate, surely this is the matter that should concern us, rather than silly conspiracy theories linking Mr. al-Megrahi’s release to the Gulf oil spill.
Click to expand...


Rolfe the completely disgusted.
 
For those of you who don't get the Herald, Rolfe's letter has been published - unedited, as far as I can see, apart from the omission of the last line. There are a number of other letters also very critical of the US Senators.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Oh good! My paperboy isn't here yet!

ETA: It's ten o'clock, and the letters page still isn't up on the web site, so I only have Architect's word for it. (Missed the paperboy completely.)

Rolfe.
 
Last edited:
[I just phoned the Herald, so they may get their act together....]

I can feel a follow-up letter coming on, though it would be better to give it a few days.

Last night I started a thread in Conspiracy Theories entitled The US authorities framed al-Megrahi for the destruction of Pan Am 103. I thought it would be a red rag to a bull. It was as provocative as I could make it. As of now, apart from my own exposition, there is one other reply, saying something like, well this is quite plausible.

That forum area tends to stomp all over people who question the Official Version of events involving large airliners full of Americans crashing into buildings. Suggestions that the US authorities colluded in deceiving the justice system don't go down too well either. In particular, right now we're led to believe that the US press is full of articles baying for the blood of this fanatical terrorist responsible for snuffing out 270 innocent lives and so on, so it's not exactly a dead issue. However, the silence from the JREF debunking squad suggests to me that the concept that Megrahi is innocent is becoming accepted in the forum.

This is in marked contrast to the situation a year ago, when Megrahi was first released, when the suggestion that he was actually innocent and maybe people should bear this in mind before they put the boot in was met with anger and hostility. The suggestion that he'd been deliberately framed by the US Department of Justice would have sent half the forum into apoplexy.

I think this is quite encouraging, and possibly emblematic of a shift in opinion that is gradually emerging. It may be that these self-serving senators and their bloody enquiry will keep this in the public view for long enough to keep that momentum going.

My projected follow-up letter is intended to deal with the US role as prime instigator of the frame-up, and the horrible irony of that in the light of current US involvement in the issue. It will have to be very well-referenced and clearly substantiated to get it past the letters editor though.

Rolfe.
 
Rolfe.

I like many other lurkers have come in late to see your, and others great work.
I would however suggest the reason your new thread with the provocative stance has recieved so lttle attention is this, at the momment the subject is so splintered on the forum, with each thread dealing with only one aspect at a time, that the pro debunkers,
the ones who dont care whether your right or wrong, and only care that the american government version is adhered to, along with their useful idiots, are quite happy to let sleeping dogs sleep.

They dont want to centralize the issue in one thread, hence the deafening silence, you should if you have a mind to, post a complete synopsis, even then i think it would be left to die away quickly.

I for one have never believed he was guilty.
 
I think if a thread in CT saying the US authorities were complicit in framing a Muslim convicted of downing a US airliner is being ignored, it's a reasonable conclusion that nobody has any viable counter-arguments, at least.

I've just noticed something very intriguing posted by Patrick Haseldine on Robert Black's blog.

Patrick Haseldine said:
Frank Lautenberg knew exactly what he was doing on 12 July 2010 when he wrote his letter about Lockerbie, Libya and BP to Senators John Kerry, D-Mass, and Richard Lugar, R-Ind, the co-chairmen of the Foreign Relations Committee. [....]

Lest we forget, Senator Lautenberg was a member of the shadowy President's Commission on Aviation Security and Terrorism (PCAST). The PCAST team leader was Ann Korologos, former US Secretary of Labor, and its special adviser was the FBI's Oliver 'Buck' Revell.

When the seven PCAST members met a group of British PA103 relatives at the U.S. embassy in London on 12 February 1990, one of them whispered to Lockerbie relative Martin Cadman: "Your government and ours know exactly what happened. But they're never going to tell."
Click to expand...


If Senator Lautenberg was a member of that group back then, he knows a lot more about this affair than I had realised. He's not blindly stirring something of whose depths he has no knowledge, unaware of the rotting corruption he may bring to the surface.

What is he up to?

Rolfe.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom