Lockerbie: London Origin Theory

Rolfe said:
I think Gareth Pierce is simply compiling from the same sources we are using, so I wouldn't give her article any special credibility. Remember, she's an English solicitor who only came into the frame very recently, and this case was Scottish. And I wouldn't trust Bollier to tell me the time of day. However, the proximity of the airlines does seem to have reasonably wide currency among fairly credible commentators, and not to have been contradicted.

Rolfe.
Click to expand...

Mmm, not sure I agree it's well-illustrated, but I don't think it's a point to get hung up on. It's not closeness doesn't matter as much as access and will. Iranian agents acting via the airline could have put those cases in container 4041. Or Abu Elias, depending just where he got to after Frankfurt.

Or it could be some slightly different person, or just Mr. Kamboj, either off the conveyor or from the cash-laden stranger. But innocent hands, of baggage workers or of a duped mule, seem unlikely to have done this placement, because it shows such probable intent to rupture the plane.

I'll have to confess a weakness of the London intro theory is the lack of gathered and shared evidence on just who could have and might have operated in London/at Heathrow at the time. But when clues line up like this, it seems that SOMEONE must have slipped the bomb on in London. Can't be Megrahi. Can't be Jaafar.

Can we have a new investigation yet?
 
New investigation? Almost certainly not going to happen. And even if it did, it was over 20 years ago and it would be hard to find new evidence.

I want to know what I think, if that doesn't sound too silly. I think the bomb went on at Heathrow. I think it was either Jibril's group or people very closely related to Jibril's group. I think the 38-minute detonation was due a Khreesat-style barometric device.

I don't know why the authorities announced so early in the proceedings that the bomb wasn't loaded at Heathrow. (For a start, it obviously was loaded at Heathrow in the most technical sense of the word, even if it was transferred from the Frankfurt flight.) This is worth further scrutiny.

I strongly suspect some sort of manipulation of the evidence, most markedly as regards the Horton paper fragment, also the MST-13 fragment. However I'm not 100% sure about this, and it's possible the MST-13 timer was also involved in the device in addition to the barometric timer.

There are an awful lot of barnacles accruing to the case, some of which may indeed be real complications, but it's hard to tell which. All the stuff about McKee and his suitcase. The allegations of a missing body and victimisation of Dr. Fieldhouse. Jafaar and the drug-smuggling ring. Even Carlsson and the South Africans (not to mention Ian Spiro).

As I said, some of that may even be real. I wouldn't be surprised if the CIA were keen to get hold of McKee's luggage before anyone else got their hands on it. It's not impossible the South Africans heard a credible warning about that flight and decided to try to get Carlsson on board (though Baz's details, such as they are, cast some doubt on that theory). But even so, these things seem to be coincidental. (Unless of course the real bombers knew about the drug smuggling ring and decided to target the flight for the possible obfuscation that might introduce.) Interesting topics in their own right, but probably not related to the core question of who bombed the plane and how.

There are two remaining puzzles for me. Megrahi was known to have been at Luqa that morning, checking in for his flight at the adjacent desk to the check-in for KM180. The Erac printout surfaces in extremely peculiar circumstances, apparently pointing to an unidentified item of luggage joining PA103A from KM180. I don't think that was the bomb bag and I don't think it had anything to do with Megrahi, but it's a coincidence too far for me. This all relates to the disapperance of the Frankfurt baggage records and the surprising absence of any explanation or recriminations relating to that disappearance. I'd like to understand that a bit better.

The other puzzle is Gauci and the mystery shopper. I may have to believe that shopper was indeed one of the terrorist gang, but it's all extraordinarily peculiar and I'm still not convinced. I'm not convinced Gauci ever sold the clothes that were found on the ground.

These are they mysteries that are still giving me a headache.

Rolfe.
 
Could someone shed some light on the person named Jia in this document?

www.gla.ac.uk/media/media_78568_en.doc

I quote the relevant passage below;

"Mr Davidson suggested to Mr Berwick that 40 thousand airside passes had been issued to airport staff. During his cross examination Mr Taylor, for the first accused, suggested the real figure was more like 50 thousand. Both alleged that many passes were unaccounted for. Mr Taylor asked questions relating to the presence of the witness in Lockerbie following the disaster. He confirmed that he had helped law enforcement agencies from the UK and USA, namely the Scottish Police and FBI. He said that he was not aware of having met anyone from the CIA. Mr Taylor asked about a police statement Mr Berwick gave on 8 February 1990 where in response to a police enquiry he reported on the movement of Ali Nassur Jia. He stated that this man flew from Tehran via Frankfurt, London and Washington to Los Angeles and returned by the same route. On 21 December 1988 as part of his outward flight he flew from London to Washington on PA 107 which departed from Gate 17 in Terminal 3. The aircraft from Frankfurt arrived in London at 11.42 am and the Washington flight departed at 13.31. He confirmed that police officers had asked him to enquire into this man's travels but did not remember it apart from the record of the police interview which recorded what he had discovered. He said he could not remember if he knew that Jia was wanted in connection with a hijacking.

Here is the first paragraph of the article, to reference;

"Heathrow Baggage Procedures Scrutinised
Clare Connelly
24/08/2000
The evidence heard in court today concentrated in the main on baggage handling procedures at Heathrow Airport and in particular the content of AVE Container 4041 which is believed to have held the suitcase containing the bomb that caused the Lockerbie disaster."
 
Last edited:
Rolfe said:
I don't think I'd seen that, thanks.

Rolfe.
Click to expand...

Cool. It may offer something of use.

Regarding Ali Nassur Jia, I've been drawing blanks from everywhere. I'd just like to learn a tad more about him.
 
Last edited:
Rolfe said:
...snip... This all relates to the disapperance of the Frankfurt baggage records and the surprising absence of any explanation or recriminations relating to that disappearance. I'd like to understand that a bit better.
..snip..
Rolfe.
Click to expand...

Can I assume this relates to Bogomira Erac, the computer programmer in baggage handling at Frankfurt airport?
Her story begins at the 4:55 mark of this program;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J55ryLvGEE4&feature=related

She provided investigators with the Malta bag link, because she saved the baggage printout for that day.
 
On the Erac printout story, there's a whole thread I started here mostly about it: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=155657
Personally I think that paper was faked, in late January 89 or perhaps later if BKA records were backdated.

On the London aspect of Megrahi's appeal, I've at least skimmed the judgment denying the appeal (I think that's what you've got linked). Haven't read the actual appeal's approach. Megrahi's counsel was able to include Mr. Manly's report of a break-in, which allowed it to gel into a more coherent point than it did before. I wrote a piece on the appeal dismissal of the Heathrow evidence:
http://lockerbiedivide.blogspot.com/2010/02/appeal-court-dismissal-of-heathrow.html
I thought it was pretty a weak explanation, but clearly necessary.

On this guy I don't think I've heard of before, I still haven't looked. Will do so in a few and report back later. Thanks again, SW.
 
Okay, I thought "Clare Connelly" looked familiar. This is from the LTBU daily reports page, for August 28. Apologies for being so omnipotent, but I've got a downloadable PDF of all these in one searchable file.
http://www.4shared.com/document/ca4nWeci/LTBU_Daily_Reports.html

Better yet, I've got the full transcripts for that and all days of what was actuall said, but don't feel I should share them. Downside is it's a pain to read through it, so I'll have to come back to it.

Just from this report, it says:
Mr Taylor asked about a police statement Mr Berwick gave on 8 February 1990 where in response to a police enquiry he reported on the movement of Ali Nassur Jia. [...] He said he could not remember if he knew that Jia was wanted in connection with a hijacking.
Click to expand...
Okay, in Feb 1990 he's being looked at for - I presume - a hijacking, perhaps recent and post Lockerbie (?) He's Iranian, an airplane terrorist, given as passing by air the same route of the alleged bomb (replacing Malta with Tripoli) on the day of the bombing and just hours before - Frankfurt-London-New York.

But to be honest, I'm not seeing the connection. He'd need to get off the plane in London and do something airside before leaving for the states. the time frame, 1140-1330 gives enough time, but it's too late for the break-in at terminal 3 (around 0030) and too early for the Bedford bags (placed around 1600-1630). I'll see if the transcripts give any clue to the alleged relevance, but it might be a red herring coincidence thing.

Another interesting point in that LTBU report I hadn't yet looked at is Mr. Walker's testimony and contradictions with his first police reports, as alluded. Don't get the significance yet, but that's interesting, considering how much conflict there is between what his underling John Bedford and Mr Kamboj said at different times. There has to be something going on here.
 
SnidelyW said:
Have either of you two read the transcript of the first Megrahi appeal?

The section entitled "The Heathrow evidence" begins at para. #178, and continues to para. 245

http://www.terrorismcentral.com/Library/Legal/HCJ/Lockerbie/Lockerbieappealjudgement.html

Enjoy.
Click to expand...


I haven't read the appeal as carefully as the original evidence. You're right, there could be more there of interest, since a Heathrow introduction was specifically what the appeal was about.

It seems to me that the appeal was wrongly formulated in law, and was in effect dismissed on a technicality - since the original court case had "proved" the bomb was introduced at Malta, all this Heathrow stuff is irrelevant (I simplify, but that seems to have been about it).

Rolfe.
 
SnidelyW said:
Can I assume this relates to Bogomira Erac, the computer programmer in baggage handling at Frankfurt airport?
Her story begins at the 4:55 mark of this program;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J55ryLvGEE4&feature=related

She provided investigators with the Malta bag link, because she saved the baggage printout for that day.
Click to expand...


If we're going to discuss the Erac printout again, maybe we should move that over to the appropriate thread. We've been over who she is and what she did in quite a lot of detail. I'm not as convinced as Caustic Logic that the printout was manufactured or tampered with - her story hangs together quite well.

However, there are huge warning signs all over that aspect. The bulk of the baggage records from Frankfurt disappeared under extremely mysterious circumstances, despite the knowlege even from the first hours of the incident that Frankfurt was possibly/probably implicated, and despite the existing alert for PFLP-GC bombs. The mystery isn't just that the records vanished, but the amazingly laid-back attitude of all concerned to this. It's never explained, it's just "oh dear what a pity never mind".

Also, although Bogomira handed over her printout in late January, and it appears the Frankfurt police made enquiries at Luqa shortly after receiving it, they then sat on the thing until August and didn't pass it on to the Scottish police who were the main investigating body. Taken at face value, this could be said to have delayed the identification of Gauci as a possible witness for six months - from 3 months after his enounter with the mystery shopper, to 9 months after.

I very much wish I knew what happened to the Frankfurt baggage records - who was responsible for purging them from the computer and destroying all the printouts and backups, and when and why, and of course why nobody seems to care and nobody's head was ever on a platter with full explanations.

However genuine Bogomira appears to be, the fact remains that her printout is probably the single most crucial piece of evidence that fingered Megrahi. It provided the trail of an unidentified piece of luggage apparently coming off KM180 and going towards PA103A. I'm not sure when it was discovered that Megrahi was right there when that plane was checking in, but even before the bombing Giaka was telling the CIA that he was in Luqa on 7th December (the day he was alleged to have bought the clothes from Gauci).

It's hideously tempting to suspect that Megrahi's known presence when KM180 was checking in was used to fabricate evidence to show that aircraft was the feeder flight that carried the bomb. However, I can't substantiate that at present.

Rolfe.
 
Excellent summation of the context I didn't ave the 'breath' for. The main thing is the absence of records in the first weeks after the attack. The central computer file that allows one to have any clue what moved through was just nada, it seems. And it was 8 months for the actual investigators. That's a big hole for fakery to fester in, if it chose to do so. The apparent acceptance of that as a casual mystery is also telling - elephant in the living room kind of stuff.

Snidely, considering what I said about Jia, do you feel that he's a sidetrack or worth looking at closer? I'm thinking it's a coincidence, unless a luggage-based transfer with a pause at heathrow and ground help to delay its last leg could be shown to make sense. It's physically possible, but procedurally? I don't know these things well enough to say...

And it couldn't be a Khreesat bomb of the one-takeoff type we know of. Big minus in my book, kills the 38 minutes clue.
 
Unless a second timer was used to stop the thing detonating on an earlier leg, enter the MST-13. I'm not saying this is a perfect scenario, but it can't be completely discounted.

Rolfe.
 
Caustic Logic said:
Excellent summation of the context I didn't ave the 'breath' for. The main thing is the absence of records in the first weeks after the attack. The central computer file that allows one to have any clue what moved through was just nada, it seems. And it was 8 months for the actual investigators. That's a big hole for fakery to fester in, if it chose to do so. The apparent acceptance of that as a casual mystery is also telling - elephant in the living room kind of stuff.

Snidely, considering what I said about Jia, do you feel that he's a sidetrack or worth looking at closer? I'm thinking it's a coincidence, unless a luggage-based transfer with a pause at heathrow and ground help to delay its last leg could be shown to make sense. It's physically possible, but procedurally? I don't know these things well enough to say...

And it couldn't be a Khreesat bomb of the one-takeoff type we know of. Big minus in my book, kills the 38 minutes clue.
Click to expand...

Caustic, it wasn't my intent to re-examine Erac and her role in all this, other than to emphasize what it all meant in the great scheme, regarding the link to Malta.

As for Jia, the break-in, and a possible arming of the device at Heathrow - IF we allow ourselves the fanciful jump (and I emphasize fanciful!) to the introduction of the bomb at Heathrow, or possibly the arming of the bomb there, then Jia could work into the puzzle. Perhaps the break-in could have introduced the device into the luggage system, and Jia was tasked with arming it.

I think I need to create a flow chart with timing etc regarding possible movements to see if this might be possible, and then re-examine things.

I have a legal star assisting me in examining the appeal transcripts, so when that is sorted, I'll be in a better position to offer more.
 
Last edited:
Regarding arming the bomb... this little snippet implies arming a bomb for the next 'leg' of a journey, doesn't it?

"Through Khreesat and the GID, the Germans learned that the cell was surveying a number of targets, including Iberia Flight 888 from Madrid to Tel Aviv via Barcelona, chosen because the bomb-courier could disembark without baggage at Barcelona leaving the barometric trigger to activate the IED on the next leg of the journey. The date chosen, Khreesat reportedly told his handlers, was October 30, 1988. He also told them that two members of the cell had been to Frankfurt airport to pick up Pan Am timetables."

from this web page
http://www.martinfrost.ws/htmlfiles/locherbie2.html

Does anyone have a link to the original German source material? I am assuming it was a Khreesat device which was actually used.
 
Last edited:
Here is just a tad more speculation, and I'm tossing this out there to swing in the wind.

Let's assume the Iranians were behind it, as Baer from the CIA confirmed that two days after the December 21 1988 bombing the PFLP-GC received U.S. $11million (£7.6m), paid into a Swiss bank account by Iran.1
So, Talb gets the clothes, two bags are procured, and the rest is done through the Iranian Air Heathrow connection.

Perhaps the break-in was to 'deliver' the bags to the interline area by the PFLP-GC rep, for placement at the appropriate time?

Can we construct a possible scenario which coalesces available information with a bit of speculative thinking regarding a Heathrow introduction of the bags?
 
I'm going to be brief and skim a little time off Lockerbe to look at the Cheonan sinking story tonight.

On the Jia thing, you seem to have some worthwhile ideas, though I'm still leaning to coincidence. Introducing a whole other person who'd have to disembark to arm it seems silly if it's already there. If the break-in is coincidence, maybe he brought the bomb(s) in and set them up somehow, but someone else would have to get them in the container.

As far as a timetable, my site has a chronology of the Beford story, though all you need to know is he says the bags appeared there before 4:40 pm, but after app. 4:00.

I'll come back to the transcripts later and check if there's anything interesting/useful on the Jia angle and post it here.

Regarding arming the bomb... this little snippet implies arming a bomb for the next 'leg' of a journey, doesn't it?

"Through Khreesat and the GID, the Germans learned that the cell was surveying a number of targets, including Iberia Flight 888 from Madrid to Tel Aviv via Barcelona, chosen because the bomb-courier could disembark without baggage at Barcelona leaving the barometric trigger to activate the IED on the next leg of the journey. The date chosen, Khreesat reportedly told his handlers, was October 30, 1988. He also told them that two members of the cell had been to Frankfurt airport to pick up Pan Am timetables."

from this web page
http://www.martinfrost.ws/htmlfiles/locherbie2.html

Does anyone have a link to the original German source material? I am assuming it was a Khreesat device which was actually used.
Click to expand...

Interesting. I'm hazy on the details of their other planned attacks (seen allusions to this and another plane besides 103, plus a nightclub and some trains). But if this were checked luggage, it would indeed require a modification to prevent the first triggering. If it were carry-on, he could push in the headphone jack, etc. to arm it, and then just wander off and forget it.

Which German material did you want? I've got none in original, but some might be read in court or some clues in testimony (translated and transcribed real time). There are some good insights on Khreesat's bombs, from the maker, in this PDF:
http://www.4shared.com/document/RnGRNz5v/Khreesat_Advises__Marshman_FBI.html

Can we construct a possible scenario which coalesces available information with a bit of speculative thinking regarding a Heathrow introduction of the bags?
Click to expand...

Yes we could, and what you outlined sounds about like what I expect. We have about zero specifics, and that alone makes it feel real to me, unlike Juval Aviv's cartoon version.

Keep it up. :)
 
If you remember, I ran a speculation where the bomb suitcase arrived at Heathrow as ordinary accompanied luggage on a much earlier flight, with the MST-13 wired in to prevent detonation of the barometric device on that leg. The passenger who checked that bag in then simply walked off without claiming it, while at the same time an airside accomplice, who had gained entry to the airport by way of the midnight break-in, intercepted the case and in due course introduced it into AVE 4041 just after 4pm.

While it would obviously have been possible for the airside accomplice to arm the bomb by pushing in the jack plug, that would of course require opening the case, which is rather suspicious behaviour on the part of someone dressed as a baggage handler. Thus the speculation that the MST-13 was rigged up to substitute for this exercise. Maybe the "improvements" Khreesat reported making to the mixture?

I'm not massively wedded to this, but I thought it had a chance of flying.

Rolfe.

ETA: Snidely - why do you think the idea of the bomb being introduced at Heathrow is "fanciful"? I think it's the least fanciful of all the possible scenarios.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom