Pan Am 103: Unaccompanied bag from Malta: Evidence?

[Rolfe]

Here's the link to details of the original PanAm case detailing admissions which were denied to PanAm by the court - http://openjurist.org/37/f3d/804

We need a list of important documents, with links, in the wiki.
The AAIB report and appendices
This lot (and is there anything from the original case as well - this is the appeal)
The Camp Zeist judgement
Kochler's reports
The documents Megrahi has recently put online

And stuff like Trail of the Octopus and the documentaries.

I just started to read that link. I knew families had already got milloins from that process, before the later awards from Libya. Some people must have been made enormously rich from their losses. Maybe I start to see why some families are adamant that there has been no mistake....

But one thing sickened me.

No award for survival damages--sought by plaintiffs--was made because the jury found the passengers had suffered no conscious pain and suffering before their deaths. Pan Am and Alert appeal challenging the finding of liability and the damage awards.

Not that I'm saying relatives should get money for their loved ones' pain and suffering, but to deny it like that? Realising that your aeroplane had just broken up around you at 31,000 feet isn't "conscious suffering", even before you black out because your lungs have quadrupled in size? And what about the evidence that some passengers regained consciousness on the way down?

Meh. I feel quite ill now.

Rolfe.

 

[Rolfe]

That German documentary. It's questioning whether the bombing was really Libya's revenge for the death of Gadaffi's daughter, or something else. I think Manfred Klink just repeated that an unaccompanied bag came from Malta. However, the document shown on screen says something else.

In den gesamten Ermittlungen zum Gepack PA103A ergaben sich keine Beweise, dass mit dem Gepack der Bombenkoffer von oder uber Frankfurt/Main nach London Befordert wurde.

My best shot.

In the entire investigation into the luggage of PA103A, no evidence was found to support the bomb suitcase coming from or via Frankfurt/Main to London.

Slightly dynamite-ish, possibly.

But then Bollier is saying that the red-circle picture is a polaroid, and there is an M on the timer, and it's a prototype. Oh yeah. And Marquise offered him $4 million and a new identity if he said that timer could only have been sold to Libya (Marquise denies this).

Rolfe.

 

[Caustic Logic]

That German documentary. It's questioning whether the bombing was really Libya's revenge for the death of Gadaffi's daughter, or something else. I think Manfred Klink just repeated that an unaccompanied bag came from Malta.

It does sound like it from the words I can half-make out and from the fact this is BBC-affiliated, Guy Smith managed, he's prob just a talking head explaining the official version as well as the narrator could.

However, the document shown on screen says something else.

In den gesamten Ermittlungen zum Gepack PA103A ergaben sich keine Beweise, dass mit dem Gepack der Bombenkoffer von oder uber Frankfurt/Main nach London Befordert wurde.
My best shot.

In the entire investigation into the luggage of PA103A, no evidence was found to support the bomb suitcase coming from or via Frankfurt/Main to London.

Yeah I think that's about it. "von oder uber" app. equals "from or over" and it's saying Frankfurt. I tried just the line "ergaben sich keine Beweise" last night and it gave me "no proofs resulted." No evidence is obviously not quite right, as there were some clues via forensics etc. evidencing but far from proving Frankfurt origin. It is a BKA report from 1990, so it would seem one of those contrary view reports like the Scots and FBI produced after visitng Frankfurt's tarmac.

On the video, I'm not going to bother getting quotes translated. I am curious about its gist. Found this at BBC Germany, auto-translated:

The documentation also reveals a horror scenario that has been silent about twenty years ago: A few minutes flight from the Lockerbie crash site was in 1988, the plutonium forging of the British Royal Air Force. Was it the actual bombing?

The what now? No matter where they do this stuff, they gotta find something weird to spend half the video debunking. What exactly is this saying? The Brits nuked it?

I do intend to do a review of what issues are covered next to what, music, graphics, etc. to decide what it's saying in the "gestalt" sense, words aside. I'll be back with that.

ETA: Rolfe, you're on a roll here! I do also hope to see some new things at the wiki by you, or anyone aside from me and Dan

 

[Rolfe]

I was in bed when I typed that last post, and nowhere near a dictionary, but I have the little one now that I use at work.

Beweis: proof, evidence. ("Beweise" is the plural form.)
Evidence: (proof) Beweis; (testimony) Zeugnis.

It's hair-splitting. It's obviously the form of words that the cops would use if they wanted to say "we found no evidence of", so that's how I'd translate it. (It's passive voice though - "no evidence was found." I don't think the language differentiates between "evidence" and "proof" in the way English might.

Now I have the dictionary, and I'm actually awake, I can read the sentence as a whole.

In the entire investigation into the luggage of PA103A, no evidence was found that the bomb suitcase was forwarded with the luggage either from or via Frankfurt/Main to London.

I think that's fair comment. The suitcase was in container AVE4041, but so were a number of suitcases that were loaded at Heathrow. Luggage tray 8849 appears to have been coded at station 206 at the same time as luggage from KA180 was coded, but there is no evidence that whatever was in that tray was the bomb suitcase.

The documentation also reveals a horror scenario that has been silent about twenty years ago: A few minutes flight from the Lockerbie crash site was in 1988, the plutonium forging of the British Royal Air Force. Was it the actual bombing?

I've tried to dredge up some sense from that, because even though I live here it's ringing precisely zero bells.

Chapelcross Nuclear Power Station

I think that must be what they're on about. Anyway, recall that we discussed the impossibility of targeting Lockerbie itself by setting a timer to blow up an airliner at a particular point in flight? You don't know how late the plane is going to be, you don't know which route it's going to take, and you can't predict to the nearest few metres where any particular bit (actually, the engines is the only bit that matters) will fall.

ETA: I see from that article I linked to that there is a no-fly zone around Chapelcross anyway!

In 2003, an RAF Hercules aircraft breached the No-Fly Zone around Chapelcross. [....] As the plants were not designed specifically to withstand aircraft crashes, following the events of September 11, 2001, the British Government doubled the No-Fly zone to two nautical miles.

So a passenger jet would not be routed over the power station. I do wish people would stick to what's reasonable or even faintly likely, rather than throwing out wild fantasies like this.

Rolfe.

 

[Dan O.]

In case it hasn't been settled yet, We can calibrate the times at Frankfurt from the flight log of KM180 presented as Production 930, Image 16 as read into the transcripts of the trial at Canp Zeist on day 33:

Flight log relating to the aircraft which performed flight KM 180 on 21st December 1988
Boeing 737 Registration number 9HABA
Crew members are listed captains Al Wahabi and Lahoud (one a cadet)
Times given in Zulu time (GMT)
In December local time in Malta an hour ahead of Greenwich mean time. GMT plus one.
Doors were closed at 08.38
Departed off blocks at 08.40. airborne at 08.52
Into Frankfurt at 11.42 and was on blocks at 11.50 GMT.
​

 

[Caustic Logic]

In case it hasn't been settled yet, We can calibrate the times at Frankfurt from the flight log of KM180 presented as Production 930, Image 16 as read into the transcripts of the trial at Canp Zeist on day 33:

Flight log relating to the aircraft which performed flight KM 180 on 21st December 1988
Boeing 737 Registration number 9HABA
Crew members are listed captains Al Wahabi and Lahoud (one a cadet)
Times given in Zulu time (GMT)
In December local time in Malta an hour ahead of Greenwich mean time. GMT plus one.
Doors were closed at 08.38
Departed off blocks at 08.40. airborne at 08.52
Into Frankfurt at 11.42 and was on blocks at 11.50 GMT.
​

Hey... Production 1068: The court’s point [29] denotes this for “the evidence of Joachim Koscha, who was one of the managers of the baggage system at Frankfurt in 1988” It was his evidence that established KM180’s arrival and unloading time, 12:48-13:00.

Obviously local. Presumably other times would be as well when the court's talking. Alright then.

Oh and I'm working up a page for resources. I was thinking category, but a page that appears in the alphabetical list as well as a more prominent link up top seems a better way.

 

[Caustic Logic]

So, apologies then for getting hung up on the time zones thing. It was only an academic quibble at first, and then got more so, but I just wanted to be the smart one who was right all along.

Moving on, in that German video, Wilhelm Dietl is interesting. Former Secret Service, his web page (translatd) says "This web portal is used to put dangerous falsehoods with facts and evidence back into the right-Lot." Sounds like a debunker person? [ETA: Seems he's mostly debunking slanderous allegations against himself.] I don't know what he's said about Lockerbie, but he's big into Erika Chambers, which ties back in with the munich massacre, Libya, Germany, and something, I think this:
http://lockerbiecase.blogspot.com/2008/07/one-of-most-dangerous-men-in-world.html
led me back to Uwi Barschel and I guess a little off course and I'm not usually fond of the high-intrigue joyrides of linkage. But that last page features A. Kilgore, of WRMEA, who has recently run a 'meh' article on Lockerbie, here as there hinting at Isreali orchestration.

Okay, and the cool new thing found by Buncrana, at a resources site from American Radio Work ("Shadow over Lockerbie"):

Mike Jones Diary Entry
On December 29, 1988 Pan Am security manager Mike Jones noted in his diary a phone call from the British Customs official: "Call from Phil Connolly H.M. [Her Majesty's] Customs/Excise re FRA bag switch due to large amount of Turkish workers."

Hmmmm....

 

[Dan O.]

You do know that Mike Jones worked at Heathrow London


Testimony of Mr. Berwick Day 43 (condensed and paraphrased)

*Production 1224 -- statement given by you (Mr. Berwick) on the 8th of February 1990, concerning Pan American flight PA 107 on 21st December 1988, London to Washington (read into transcript)

"coupon was presented for carriage on flight PA 107, 21st December 1988. London to Washington by passenger with the name of Mr. Ali Nassr Zia."
"it was purchased for travel commencing in Tehran, Iran, and for a routing from there to London, Washington, Los Angeles, Washington, London, and return to Tehran."
"revalidation sticker shows that the passenger was booked on Pan American flight PA 107 on 21st December 1988, London to Washington."
"the document was issued in conjunction with another Iran Air ticket"
"was originally issued in Tehran on the 14th of June 1988"
"I now produce a copy of the flight manifest for flight PA 107 on 21st December 1988"
"passenger Zia, initial N, listed under sequential number 203, was checked in and travelled on the flight occupying seat 41B"
"Coincidentally, there was another passenger Zia, initial P, listed under sequential number 204 who checked in and travelled on seat 41A."
"Issued by Student Travel in London"

"flight PA 107, on 21st December 1988, ... was scheduled to arrive at London at 11.40 a.m. In fact, it arrived at 11.42 a.m. It was positioned on stand Kilo 17."
"While at Heathrow and should have departed at 13.30. In fact, it took off at 13.31. The aircraft began its journey in Frankfurt and continued on to Washington."
​

Ali Nassr Zia was wanted by police in connection with the "ACHILLE LAURO" hijacking ... his real name was Armad Jusiff Sao Ad Jusif

on the 21st of December of 1988. ... Airport security staff employed at Heathrow in this section ... only Mr. Jones and myself. Mike Jones.

Alert Security provided an additional 81 persons. (raised to 251 after the events of the 21st of December)

This line of investigation may have been considering that the bomb suitcase followed Nassr to Frankfurt and somehow got switched while he took a different flight to London then on to Washington. Where was Nassr at the time the bomb went off?

 

[Caustic Logic]

You do know that Mike Jones worked at Heathrow London

Oh yeah, we've been talking about him and his visit to Frankfurt of course. Heathrow would require no visit, as he was there, but when he jetted across the channel to check something, 103A's loading files were abnormally gone without a trace. So he says, and so no other evidence contradicts.

Now we have him, just under a month before this visit, a week after the bombing, saying people at customs are calling him about a bag switch because of Turks? That just sounds odd. Who's initiated this re: dialogue? How would they know or suspect this, etc? I have heard it theorized somewhere that Turks were responsible for the switch. I forget if that's Coleman's line or whose.

On Mr. ANZ, I'm not sure what to make of that. Belongs on our people list obviously. His flight seems a little early, and there's a lot of questions around this apparently new theory. I dunno, if it seems worthwhile to someone else I'll think about it some more.

Sorry, I just have a lot else going on. I'll be back.

 

[Dan O.]

On Mr. ANZ, I'm not sure what to make of that. Belongs on our people list obviously. His flight seems a little early, and there's a lot of questions around this apparently new theory. I dunno, if it seems worthwhile to someone else I'll think about it some more.

I can't pick up any trace on the name (either the alias, the presumed real name or the misspelling in time's report on the trial). If this were really a terrorist I would expect to find more about him. I also don't see the tie-in during the trial between this evidence and PA103. It's almost like the prosecutor is trying to make it look like the whole thing was Pan Am's fault because they were letting known terrorists fly and didn't have enough armed security guards.


The flight time isn't too early. By my calculation, it's about 2.5 hours outside of Washington over the Atlantic (right where Rolfe says it should have been). It's bucking the jet stream so there is no chance to have landed before the timer expires and at least 5 hours leeway for delays.

 

[Caustic Logic]

Just an FYI - I took a summary of the findings of this thread, and other evidence of the Malta-based plotting, against counter-claims by Maltese themselves - grand geopolitical sarcasm in hyper-obnoxious mode, what the hell am I thinking? It's going somewhere though.
HOW MALTA LET LOCKERBIE HAPPEN
http://12-7-9-11.blogspot.com/2009/12/while-malta-slept.html
Once I get going I know it's way too much but just don't know what to cut.

 

[Caustic Logic]

grand geopolitical sarcasm in hyper-obnoxious mode, what the hell am I thinking? It's going somewhere though.

And this is where it was going, even worse.
http://12-7-9-11.blogspot.com/2009/12/another-call-on-malta.html
Some official story supporters out there should be askin themselves why they AREN'T up in arms about outlandish statements like these from prominent Maltese authorities:

“Tony Gauci is an area where we have to investigate more thoroughly and we are preparing for this. There was never enough proof, to be frank, on the circumstances of his evidence and there is pressure coming from many quarters on Malta to move to resolve the issue."
- Unnamed Justice Department official, 31 Oct 2009

"[since 1988, the Maltese government has] always maintained the bomb which downed Pan Am flight 103 had not departed from Malta and ample proof of this was produced.”
- Justice Department Statement, 1 Nov 2009

"Our position was always that Malta had nothing to do with the terrorist attack and it has never changed."
- Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi, 1 Nov 2009

"We have no proof that these two Libyan suspects were involved in anything illegal in Malta regarding this case, particularly the placing of this bomb on Air Malta Flight ... 180.”
- Then Justice and Home Affairs Secretary Tonio Borg, in 2000

What the hell is wrong with those people? No proof?

ETA: 3 comments already! I guess vinegar does catch more dumb bees that think it's honey for some reason; none seems to have understood the absurdity of the content, and I was TRYING to make it obvious. Favorite comment so far, following two pans of it as dreadful (yah, ya noticed?):
This is hardly dreadful, it is a welcome change from the bilge we have to read from the Libya shills. They have no shame and cannot be embarrassed by the facts. Thank you for your efforts to publish the truth, you are like a breath of fresh air.
Frank Duggan, President
Victims of Pan Am 103, Inc

My response:
Frank, you truly get it and you are awesome.

 

[Caustic Logic]

I don't know if anyone else finds this very interesting, but I think I've found that Granada TV docudrama that Air Malta sued over. It's got Ned Beatty and was re-released by HBO in America as "Tragedy Of Flight 103: The Inside Story." It doesn't ring any bells here. Here's a trailer for it.
http://www.videodetective.com/titledetails.aspx?PublishedID=18490
There are some clips on Youtube, some info at IMDB and in Paul Foot's booklet. Apparently the alleged Malta link revolves around a bakery there, with PFLPGC people, one of whom is shown inserting the bomb at Luqa airport. Mostly though it's about Pan Am's and Frankfurt airport's culture of greed and security failure, I think. No Libyans are mentioned I know of. US Release date December 9 1990. Previously (?) released in UK under the title Why Lockerbie?

That's closely synched with when Marquise finally announced (to the Maltese police's chagrin) that the investigation was indeed officially following the Malta lead. (early December 1990, see SCOTBOM, p 73). FWIW. Almost a year before the indictment, a year after first learning of a Maltese bag and first talking to the Gaucis. It's an interesting movie to me.

 

[Caustic Logic]

No, it really is interesting. I've now blogged about it, behold:
http://12-7-9-11.blogspot.com/2010/01/on-granada-docu-drama.html

An interesting aspect, in bringing malta around -who here know what time frame were Maltese officials freezing the Brits and Yanks out over tensions, or wiretapping, etc? Was it mid-late 1990? Marquise's book hints at it (last quote here)

The movie, Why Lockerbie?/The Tragedy of Flight 103, was aired Nov 26 and Dec 9 1990 in UK and US, respectively. Jointly produced by UK, US, and German companies. Blames Pan Am security laxness, to save money, etc. at Frankfurt for the Maltese bomb getting through. Repeats David Leppard's year-old synthesis of Khreesat/Talb/etc. and Malta origin bomb. The timer was just becoming public, making that kinda work... Air Malta sues. Maltese investigators however...

In his 2006 memoir, Marquise writes of an early December 1990 conference (apparently on the 6th?) of investigators in Sweden, bringing Swiss police in for the first time.
“The night before the formal conference, Henderson and I convened the other police officials in a private room above the main dining area. The Swiss were introduced and the new direction of the investigation was discussed. Because the formal agenda had been drawn up in advance, much of it was devoted to the PFLP-GC cell in Germany. However, we had always said evidence would drive the investigation, not speculation. Now the evidence had pointed away from Dalkamouni and his PFLP-GC cell. Everything we saw pointed directly at Libya.” [Marquise, p 73]
The Germans were “relieved,” Marquise recalled, but the Maltese, who were on bad terms with the investigation at the time, “were not as ready to accept the new scenario,” and “adopted the same philosophy which the Germans had employed for a time.” Presented with evidence that “the bomb bag … had originated in Malta,” that was a year old already, “had not yet been proven to the satisfaction of Maltese officials.” But the next day’s conference went smoothly enough, and “not one word of what was discussed at the meeting was ever leaked to the media, proving that this group of law enforcement officials was trustworthy."

Three days later, however, HBO would re-air half of that new direction, the bag that Maltese authorities still couldn't see even after the first UK airing of Why Lockerbie? just days before the conference. Air Malta would of course take the issue to court as we started out, but Maltese investigators just acquiesced; on December 10, the day after the American re-broadcast as The Tragedy of Flight 103 in case that matters, "Henderson reported the Maltese were ready to let us back in to work, possibly as soon as December 17." [Marquise, p 73]

 

[Rolfe]

I'm bumping this to draw attention to the fact that Edwin Bollier is now dementing on about the Fankfurt baggage tray. I don't have much of an idea what he's trying to say, but it starts with this post.

http://lockerbiecase.blogspot.com/2...howComment=1265374091038#c7754239444231734468

Important: for example: A luggage item from air Malta would have been inter-line.

Through the wrong statement, Gunther Kasteleiner, the court had accepted, the bag came from AirMalta, KM-180!

Thus witness Gunther Kasteleiner (sworn) traffic assistant FAG, is responsible for this fatal error, inter-line, instead of correctly on-line, solely the bag B-8849 could be assigned to AirMalta flight KM-180 !!!

It has been confirmed that the alleged bombbag no. B-8849 which had been coded over the counter V3-206 at 13.07 hour with code S-0009+Z1307, was forwarded on the moving floor (track in the main area HS33+Z1514) and singled out at 15.23 hour (code HS33+Z1514) to F1042/PA-103/A:

Tray: B 8849 F1042 S0009+Z1307--TO--HS33+Z1517--BO44+Z1523 V3

There was no inter-line bomb suitcase (B-8849) coming from Air Malta flight KM-180!
B-8849 was arriving on-line from Berlin /PA-643, W. Wagenführ and was not loaded from Airplane PA-643, direct to Airplane PA-103/B, but via the inter-line counter V3-206.

He seems to be pushing a particular theory about where tray 8849 actually came from and where it was going to. Considering that a bunch of experts couldn't seem to determine this from the very limited information available, I seriously doubt if Edwin is on to anything.

Rolfe.

 

[Caustic Logic]

Just another note to add, as I'm wrapping up The Lockerbie Divide take on the missing computer data:
http://lockerbiedivide.blogspot.com/2010/01/primary-evidence-frankfurt-airports.html

We've seen how the souvenir printout wound up becoming THE evidence for PA103A's loading, turned in by Erac to her supervisor Berg in mid-late January. Yet this isn't mentioned in David Leppard's 1991 book. In fact, he's got a different origin, and it's from the BKA's 2 February reports.

For these, the BKA had interviewed Gunther Kasteleiner, in charge of baggage flow at Terminal B. His interviewer wrote into the report “by a coincidence, the record of baggage transported […] for flight PA103 on 21.12.88 is still stored in the computer.” This report then is in stark contrast to the story we now have that it was all wiped well before then and the souvenir saved the day. Leppard does however say “the BKA had obtained a print-out of this record from Kurt Berg.” This, we now know, was Bogomira’s supervisor, to whom she handed the printout and by whom it was taken to the BKA at the end of January. But investigators were saying that Berg had gotten this off the computer itself, a month after the police couldn’t find it there. That is very interesting.

Also, the book agrees with Coleman on the date of handover for the printout and its attached reports - given to a Scottish liaison team in Germany Aug 16, received by SIO John Orr back home the next day.

Peace out.

 

[Rolfe]

Could just be someone making a false assumption, not knowing where it really came from....

Rolfe.

 

[Caustic Logic]

Could just be someone making a false assumption, not knowing where it really came from....

Rolfe.

Absolutely true. If a guy was handed a print-up of the computer data in late January, he might just presume it had just been printed. It is a silly presumption, given thhat it should've been already gotten or gone. I'd guess a wrongly-archived paper copy just found.

It could also be a clue, and I don't mean to push it, just float it solidly, that they were presenting it differently at the time. Or perhaps it was differently - Bogomira's speciality wasn't printing, but programming, right?

Yeah, it's okay to get a couple steps ahead of oneself. Leap to a speculation, leap right back... we is nimble like dat.

 

[Rolfe]

The thing is, people make assumptions, or get the wrong end of the stick, and write something that's wrong as a result. They may realise their mistake later, but the original statement remains.

We do the same thing even in these threads. I couldn't count the wrong assumptions I've made, that could be dragged out of the archives.

I think the writer knew the data had been obtained as a printout from Berg, and just assumed he'd got it from the computer. It's a reasonable assumption, if you don't know different. It was actually Bogomira's souvenir, but who would have guessed that?

Rolfe.

 

[Caustic Logic]

Yeah, you're probably right. It's a noteworthy little discrepancy, possibly a clue of something else, but probably just a small goof.

In general tho, I still think the printout we've seen is most likely altered (re-programmed and re-printed elsewhere), but Bogimira may well not know it. She probably sees herself as like a whistle-blower, being alarmed by the evidence having slipped away. By luck (or was it her woman's intuition? etc. with the internal mythology) she had made a copy to help. Sort of a hero, really.

But once it was in the hands of the BKA, something weird may have happened. (that is, it's weird because it happened under the BKA, not the FBI). She might be like the Hortons here with the intact Toshiba manual page that morphed into evidence against Libya - a convenient spot to seed in bogus evidence where there had been good, and give it a human (pref. female) face.

Nebulous thoughts here, too.