Slim Virgin and Lockerbie

[What follows is excerpted from an article by Dr Ludwig de Braeckeleer that was published on the OhmyNews website on this date ten years ago:]

The Salinger Investigation of the Pan Am 103 Bombing

Pierre Salinger was White House press secretary to Presidents John Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson. Salinger also served as US Senator from California and a campaign manager for Robert Kennedy.

But Salinger is also famous for his investigative journalism. Hired by ABC News as its Paris bureau chief in 1978, he became the network's chief European correspondent in 1983.

During his distinguished career, Salinger broke important stories, such as the secret negotiations by the US government with Iran to free American hostages in 1979-80 and the last meeting between US Ambassador April Glaspie and Saddam Hussein in 1990, during which she led the Iraqi president to believe that the U.S. would not react to an invasion of Kuwait.

Salinger, who was based in London, spent a considerable amount of time and energy investigating the bombing of Pan Am 103 over Lockerbie. He and his collaborator, John Cooley, hired a young graduate, Linda Mack, to help in the investigation.

"I know that these two Libyans had nothing to do with it. I know who did it and I know exactly why it was done," Salinger said during his testimony at the Zeist trial, where one of the Libyans was convicted of murdering the 270 victims.

"That's all? You're not letting me tell the truth. Wait a minute; I know exactly who did it. I know how it was done," Salinger replied to the trial judge, Lord Sutherland, who simply asked him to leave the witness box.

"If you wish to make a point you may do so elsewhere, but I'm afraid you may not do so in this court," Lord Sutherland interrupted.

Searching for the True Identity of 'Slim Virgin'

Slim Virgin had been voted the most abusive administrator of Wikipedia. She upset so many editors that some of them decided to team up to research her real life identity.

Attempts to track her through Internet technology failed. This is suspicious in itself as the location of normal Internet users can easily be tracked. According to a team member, Slim Virgin "knows her way around the Internet and covered her tracks with care."

Daniel Brandt of the Wikipedia Review and founder of Wikipedia-Watch.org patiently assembled tiny clues about Slim Virgin and posted them on these Web sites. Eventually, two readers identified her. Slim Virgin was no other than Linda Mack, the young graduate Salinger hired.

John K Cooley, the collaborator of Salinger in the Lockerbie investigation, posted the following letter to Brandt on Wikipedia Review, which has been set up to discuss specific editors and editing patterns and general efforts by editors to influence or direct content in ways that might not be in keeping with Wikipedia policy:

“She claimed to have lost a friend/lover on pan103 and so was anxious to clear up the mystery. ABC News paid for her travel and expenses as well as a salary.

“Once the two Libyan suspects were indicted, she seemed to try to point the investigation in the direction of Qaddafi [Libyan President Col. Muammar al-Qaddafi], although there was plenty of evidence, both before and after the trials of Megrahi and Fhimah in the Netherlands, that others were involved, probably with Iran the commissioning power. [In 2001, Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi was convicted of murder and sentenced to life in prison; Lamin Khalifah Fhimah was acquitted.]

“Salinger came to believe that [first name redacted but known to be Linda] was working for [name of intelligence agency redacted but known to be Britain's MI5] and had been from the beginning; assigned genuinely to investigate Pan Am 103, but also to infiltrate and monitor us.”

Soon after Cooley wrote to Brandt, Linda Mack contacted him and asked him not to help Brandt in his efforts to expose her. All doubts about Slim Virgin's true identity had vanished. Today, Linda Mack is rumored to reside in Alberta, Canada, under the name of Sarah McEwan.

[RB: Three months later I made the following brief reference on this blog to a later article on the subject by Dr De Braeckeleer:]

This is a link [RB: the link is now (2017) broken] to an interesting commentary, based on the researches of Dr Ludwig de Braeckeleer, asserting that Wikipedia articles on Pan Am 103 and Lockerbie have been systematically altered by a Wikipedia editor (pseudonym "SlimVirgin" but allegedly identified as Linda Mack -- a well-known name to Lockerbie buffs, and strongly suspected to be a MI5 asset or plant) in order more closely to reflect the "official" UK and US line on the Lockerbie disaster.

See http://www.wikipedia-watch.org/russmag.html

[RB: What a hornets' nest I had stirred! See the comments following the blogpost.]

The Iranian connection ... continued

On 10 March 2008 on this blog I referred to an article by Dr Ludwig de Braeckeleer regarding the claim by the Iranian intelligence operative, Abolghasem Mesbahi, that Iran alone was responsible for the Lockerbie bombing. "Mesbahi" was always known to be a pseudonym and, in a new article in OhMyNews International, Dr De Braeckeleer identifies him as Abdul Hasan Mephahi, explores his role in the Iran-Contra affair and considers the possible implications of these revelations for those seeking the truth about Lockerbie. Dr De Braeckeleer's article can be read here.

Ludwig de Braeckeleer -v- Richard Marquise

OhMyNews International today features an article by Dr De Braeckeleer entitled “Lockerbie: FBI investigator debates OMNI reporter” which takes the form of a debate between him and Richard A Marquise, who headed the FBI investigation into the destruction of Pan Am 103, about the views expressed by Dr De Braeckeleer in his earlier article “Lockerbie: chronicle of a death foretold” (see http://english.ohmynews.com/articleview/article_view.asp?menu=c10400&no=381652&rel_no=1 and http://lockerbiecase.blogspot.com/2008/02/lockerbie-chronicle-of-death-foretold.html). The article makes fascinating reading, and anyone interested in the Lockerbie case will have to read and absorb it. The full text of the debate is at
http://english.ohmynews.com/ArticleView/article_view.asp?menu=A11100&no=381904&rel_no=1&back_url=.

I make no secret of the fact that, in my view, no matter how pure and thorough the investigation into the Lockerbie tragedy may have been, the evidence presented at the trial simply did not warrant a conviction being returned against Abdelbaset Megrahi. See http://lockerbiecase.blogspot.com/2007/07/lockerbie-satisfactory-process-but.html
I remain convinced that this view will be vindicated in the new appeal that is currently under way.

More from Dr Ludwig de Braeckeleer

The following article appears on the OhmyNews English-language website:

Lockerbie Investigator Disputes Story

Richard Marquise led the U.S. task force that investigated the bombing

Ludwig De Braeckeleer

Published 2007-10-06 17:02 (KST)

"Proper judicial procedure is simply impossible if political interests and intelligence services -- from whichever side -- succeed in interfering in the actual conduct of a court … The purpose of intelligence services -- from whichever side -- lies in secret action and deception, not in the search for truth. Justice and the rule of law can never be achieved without transparency."
--Hans Koechler, U.N. observer at the Zeist trial

On Sept. 6, OhmyNews International published a story related to a sensational document known as the Lumpert affidavit. (See "Key Lockerbie Witness Admits Perjury.)

Ulrich Lumpert was a key witness (No. 550) at the Camp Zeist trial, where a three-Judge panel convicted a Libyan citizen of murdering 270 persons who died in the bombing of Pan Am 103 over Lockerbie.

"I confirm today on July 18, 2007, that I stole the third hand-manufactured MST-13 Timer PC-board consisting of 8 layers of fiberglass from MeBo Ltd. and gave it without permission on June 22, 1989, to a person officially investigating in the Lockerbie case," Lumpert wrote.

On Sept. 7, the agent who led the Lockerbie investigation for the FBI wrote to me and criticized the article on several grounds, but most importantly, he alleged that the Lumpert affidavit was a "total fabrication."

Richard Marquise led the U.S. task force that investigated the Lockerbie bombing. He has authored a book on the subject: Scotbom: Evidence and the Lockerbie Investigation. He wrote to me:

"Lumpert's new statement is a total fabrication. He was interviewed several times, including at a judicial hearing in Switzerland as well as the trial itself and he never wavered in his story. His statement that he gave a 'stolen timer' to a Scottish officer in 1989 does not even fit the timeline since we had no idea about the origins of PT-35 at that time. We identified MeBo in the summer of 1990."

With all due respect, I must state very unambiguously that I remain convinced that the document is authentic and that the story is not a hoax. Moreover, I have obtained a document that strongly suggests that the timeline of the events related to the identification of the MST-13 timer has been fabricated.

Since the publication of the article, a well-informed source has told me that Lumpert has signed four affidavits. The documents were certified by notary Walter Wieland under Nr. 2069 to 2072.

I am now in possession of one of these four documents and I have received confirmation from the proper Swiss authority that Wieland indeed certified these documents on July 18 and that he is competent for doing so.

Although I was initially very skeptical of the Lumpert affidavit, I came to the conclusion that I have no reason to doubt its authenticity or the truthfulness of its content.

Indeed, both the timing of Lumpert's admission of perjury, his motivation for doing so as stated in the affidavit, as well as the content of the document led me to believe that the story is not a fabrication.

Lumpert wrote that he wishes to clear his conscience and that he can no longer "be prosecuted for stealing, delivering and making false statements about the MST-13 Timer PC-board, on grounds of statutory limitation."

Moreover, as I explained at length in the Sept. 6 article, the Lumpert affidavit, in just seven paragraphs, elucidates all of the longstanding mysteries surrounding the infamous MST-13 timer, which allegedly triggered the bomb that exploded Pan Am 103 over Lockerbie on Dec. 21, 1988.

Conspiracy Theory?

I wish to add that I am obviously not the only one who had reached such a conclusion. The possibility that evidence has been fabricated in order to secure the conviction of the Libyans has gained support among many people who could hardly be described as conspiracy theorists.

Jim Swire, Robert Black and Hans Koechler are among the best-informed people about the extremely complex Zeist trial.

Black QC FRSE (Queen's Council and Fellow of the Royal Society of Edinburgh) has been Professor of Scots Law in the University of Edinburgh since January 1981, having previously been in practice at the Scottish Bar. He is now professor emeritus.

For various periods he served as head of the Department of Scots Law (later Private Law). He has been an advocate since 1972 and a QC since 1987. From 1987 to 1996 he was general editor of The Laws of Scotland: Stair Memorial Encyclopedia (25 volumes). From 1981 to 1994 he served as a temporary sheriff (judge).

He has taken a close interest in the Lockerbie affair since 1993, not least because he was born and brought up in the town, and has published a substantial number of articles on the topic in the United Kingdom and overseas. He is often referred to as the architect of the Lockerbie trial at Camp Zeist in the Netherlands.

Black's support for the story is obvious from the fact that he posted my article on his Web site. In a comment posted on OMNI, Black went out of his way to express his agreement with the 18-page analysis of the consequences of the Lumpert affidavit. "A masterly review of the weaknesses in the Lockerbie court's conviction of [Abdelbaset Al] Megrahi," Black wrote.

In April 2000, professor Koechler was appointed by U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan as international observer at the Lockerbie bombing trial that was held at Camp Zeist, Netherlands.

Koechler has also posted the article on his Web site. He wrote this comment on OMNI:

“This is a well-researched analysis which precisely reveals the serious mistakes and omissions by the official Scottish investigators as well as the carelessness and lack of professionalism of the judges in the Lockerbie case. The Scottish judicial authorities are under the obligation to investigate possible criminal misconduct in the investigation and prosecution of the Lockerbie case.On July 4, 2007, Koechler wrote to Scottish First Minister Alex Salmond, reiterating his call for a "full and independent public inquiry of the Lockerbie case."

Dr. Swire, who lost his daughter in the Lockerbie bombing, is a founder and the spokesperson of the U.K. Families 103, which campaigns to seek the truth about the worst act of terror ever committed in the U.K. In a letter addressed to my editor, he wrote that the article was "one of the best informed and most realistic" he had seen.

I promised Richard Marquise that I would make an effort "to see things from the other side." And I will. But for now, we must agree to disagree. I leave him with a comment posted by Iain McKie -- someone who knows all about the consequences of forensic mistakes.

Another Lockerbie mystery is why, given this latest opportunity [Megrahi's second appeal] to uncover the truth about this terrorist outrage that claimed the lives of people from 21 countries (including 189 Americans), and given the U.S. and British high profile "war on terror," is the political silence so deafening?

I find it increasingly difficult to argue with Dr. De Braeckeleer's conclusion: "Shame on those who committed this horrific act of terror. Shame on those who have ordered the cover-up. Shame on those who provided false testimony, and those who suppressed and fabricated the evidence needed to frame Libya. And shame on the media for their accomplice silence."The McKie's know best than most the cost of injustice. Shirley McKie was a successful policewoman until her life was shattered in February 1997 when four experts from the Scottish Criminal Records Office incorrectly identified a thumbprint from a crime scene as hers.

Marquise has made other comments about the article that I will discuss at a later time. However, I wish to point out that Marquise is right to state that the quotes attributed to Michael Scharf, formerly of U.S. State Department's Office of the Legal Adviser for Law Enforcement and Intelligence, although correct do not represent exactly his opinion, as they have been printed out of context by the British media. (Scharf helped draft the sanctions against Libya.)

Scharf wrote to me,

“The text of the quotes is more or less accurate but is out of context, giving the misimpression that I thought that the two Lockerbie defendants were innocent and the U.S. government knew this all along. In fact, I referred to them as "fall guys" because I felt the case should not have focused exclusively on them, but rather should have gone up the chain of command all the way to Khadaffi [Muammar al-Qaddafi], and should also have focused on the possible involvement of third countries.

“It is true, as your quote indicates, that I felt the evidentiary case presented at Camp Zeist was not as strong as the Department of Justice had led the Department of State to believe it would be at the time we were pushing for sanctions against Libya in the U.N., but that is not to say that I thought the defendants were actually innocent of wrong doing, which is the impression left by the quotes.If there is one thing we can all agree on, it is the fact that no one except the judges is satisfied with the Lockerbie trial.”

Meanwhile, new extraordinary revelations have surfaced that support my view that the Lockerbie trial was engineered by Western intelligence services to frame Libya.

'Secret' Lockerbie Report Claim

Crucial information in the possession of the CIA that is related to the timer issue was withheld from the defense. The Heraldof Glasgow revealed on Oct. 2 that "a top secret [CIA] document vital to unearthing the truth about the Lockerbie bombing was obtained by the Crown Office but never shown to the defense team."

"The Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) has uncovered there is a document which was in the possession of the crown and was not disclosed to the defense, which concerns the supply of MST-13 timers. Moreover, the commission has determined the decision to keep the document from the defense may have constituted a miscarriage of justice," the paper reported a source as saying.

The prosecutors have refused to make public the ultra secret document on the basis of national security. Many have been wondering what national security has to do with the Lockerbie bombing. "It is shocking to me that after 19 years of trying to get to the truth about who murdered my daughter national security is being used as an excuse," said Swire.

After having seen the CIA document, the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission team that investigated the conviction of Abdelbaset Al Megrahi decided to grant him a second appeal. The document has not yet been seen by the defense. The document is thought to dispute the pivotal fact that the bomb was triggered by the MST-13 timer that linked the case to Libya.

The non-disclosure agreement was signed by Norman McFadyen, then one of the leading members of the prosecution, on June 1, 2000.

In an exclusive interview earlier this week, Koechler told Gordon Brewer of the BCC's "Newsnight Scotland,"

The withholding of evidence by the investigators and the prosecution from the defense at the Lockerbie court is a serious breach of the fundamental norms of a fair trial. If such action occurs on the basis of a written commitment given to a foreign intelligence service, as has now been revealed concerning crucial evidence related to the timer that allegedly triggered the explosion of Pan Am 103 over Lockerbie, the judicial nature of the entire proceedings is to be put into question.

If a foreign intelligence service is allowed to determine what evidence may be disclosed in court and what not, judicial proceedings before a court of law are perverted into a kind of intelligence operation the purpose of which is not the search for the truth, but the obfuscation of reality.Black has said,

If a foreign intelligence agency says they would be prepared to give the crown access only if they promise to keep the information secret, then it is the responsibility of the crown to say we cannot do that. They have an ethical responsibility not to sign such agreements.

This tends to indicate that the crown has not changed its fundamental stance that says they will decide what the public interest is and what information should or should not be disclosed. That is fundamentally wrong.The source in the Herald's report agrees: "The commission was unable to obtain authority for its disclosure. Without access to this document, the defense is disabled from putting before the court full and comprehensive grounds of appeal as to why the conviction should be quashed."

CIA Offered $2m to Lockerbie Witnesses

It now appears that huge amounts of money were offered by U.S. officials to at least three key witnesses. The defense was never told that the CIA had offered millions of dollars to their star witnesses.

"We understand the commission found new documents which refer to discussions between the U.S. intelligence agency and the Gaucis [Tony and his brother Paul] and that the sum involved was as much as $2m," a source close to the case told The Herald, according to an Oct. 3 report. "Even if they did not receive the money, the fact these discussions took place should have been divulged to the defense." Tony Gauci was an instrumental witness in the case.

On Oct. 5, Edwin Bollier, head of the Zurich-based company MeBo, told Koechler that during a visit to the headquarters of the FBI in Washington, D.C., at the beginning of 1991, he was offered an amount of up to $4 million plus a new identity in the U.S. if he would testify in court that the timer fragment that was allegedly found on the crash site around Lockerbie stemmed from a MST-13 timer that his company had delivered to Libya.

Media Silence

Will the media finally cover this extraordinary affair? Perhaps. In France, Le Figaro has published a couple of stories, one of which was entitled: "And if Libya Was Innocent …" Television channel France 3 reported the story of the Lumpert affidavit.

In the U.K., The Herald has picked up the latest developments in the story. The BBC has published a few lines about it. The London journal Private Eye is rumored to be running the story in its next edition. U.S. media remain amazingly silent.

Quo Vadis?

"In view of all these revelations and serious allegations, Koechler renewed his call for an independent international investigation of the handling of the Lockerbie case by the Scottish and British authorities," wrote Gordon Brewer of the BCC's "Newsnight Scotland."

"It remains to be seen whether the Scottish judicial and political system will live up to the challenge and whether the authorities will allow a full and objective inquiry," Brewer said. I have very little hope that the Scottish judicial and political system will allow an independent international investigation.

For now, I encourage my readers to reflect upon a Persian saying. "Shame on those who committed the deed. Shame on those who allowed the deed to be committed."

Ludwig De Braeckeleer has a Ph.D. in nuclear sciences. He teaches physics and international humanitarian law. He blogs on "The GaiaPost.”

©2007 OhmyNews

http://english.ohmynews.com/ArticleView/article_view.asp?menu=A11100&no=380601&rel_no=1&back_url=

Lockerbie chat on Independence Live

This evening’s Skype chat between David McGowran and me is archived here. It was intended to be a video chat, but the technology let us down and it is audio only.

Dr Ludwig de Braeckeleer contributed a reference to an article published today on the website of The Guardian. I had not in fact seen it, but have now had a chance to read it. Absolutely fascinating: Cooperation between British spies and Gaddafi’s Libya revealed in official papers. 

Dr De Braeckeleer also mentioned the recent death of the Argentinian investigating judge Alberto Nisman. How does that relate to Lockerbie? Here is an excerpt from an article published today on the website of The Christian Science Monitor:

"Mr Nisman had been obsessively on the trail of the perpetrators of the July 1994 bombing of a Jewish community center in Buenos Aires for the past decade. He was tasked with the investigation by Nestor Kirchner, the former president and deceased husband of President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner. Nisman died at home on Sunday night, shortly before he was to expound publicly on a political bombshell he laid on Argentina's public earlier this month, namely that President Kirchner had promised to cover up Iran's involvement in the 1994 terrorist attack, the worst in Argentina's history, in which 85 people died. (...)

"Mr Nisman took over in 2005.

"By 2006, he was claiming that senior Iranian officials were involved in the attack, including the country's former President Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani. His key witness? Abolghasem Mesbahi, an alleged former Iranian intelligence officer, who has made a career of leveling accusations against Iran since his defection in 1996. He claimed that former President Carlos Menem was paid about $10 million to hide Iran's involvement.

"Mr Mesbahi has also insisted that Iran was behind the 1988 bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie in Scotland, instead of Muammar Qaddafi's Libya. A Libyan intelligence agent was ultimately found guilty of murder by a special tribunal; Mr Qaddafi's regime paid substantial reparations over the attack."

For years US eavesdroppers could read encrypted messages without the least difficulty

The indefatigable Ludwig de Braeckeleer has another article on the OhMyNews website. It contends that for decades the US National Security Agency has been reading the most highly sensitive coded messages sent by most foreign governments. This is because it succeeded in subverting the Swiss company that manufactured the encryption machines that most countries use for this purpose, and thus ensured that the individual machines were rigged in such a way that the NSA could decipher any messages sent through them.

As regards the relevance of all this to the Lockerbie case, De Braeckeleer writes:

"After the USS Vincennes shot down an Iranian Airbus over the Persian Gulf on July 3, 1988, 'Iran vowed that the skies would rain with American blood.' A few months later, on Dec. 21, a terrorist bomb brought down Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland.

Once more, NSA intercepted and decoded a communication of Iranian Interior Minister Ali Akbar Mohtashemi linking Iran to the bombing of Pan Am 103.

One intelligence summary, prepared by the US Air Force Intelligence Agency, was requested by lawyers for the bankrupt Pan American Airlines through the Freedom of Information Act.

'Mohtashemi is closely connected with the Al Abas and Abu Nidal terrorist groups. He is actually a long-time friend of Abu Nidal. He has recently paid 10 million dollars in cash and gold to these two organizations to carry out terrorist activities and was the one who paid the same amount to bomb Pan Am Flight 103 in retaliation for the US shoot-down of the Iranian Airbus.'

Moreover, Israeli intelligence intercepted a coded transmission between Mohtashemi in Teheran and the Iranian Embassy in Beirut concerning the transfer of a large sum of money to the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command, headed by Ahmed Jibril, as payment for the downing of Pan Am 103.

The Iranians were now at a loss to explain how Western and Israeli intelligence agencies could so easily defeat the security of their diplomatic traffic. The ease with which the West was reading Iranian coded transactions strongly suggested that some may have possessed the decryption keys."

Later he comments:

"In 1991, the US and the U.K. indicted two Libyans for the bombing of Pan Am 103. To the surprise of many observers, the indictment did not mention those believed to have contracted the act of terror in spite of the fact that their guilt had been established by the interception of official communications by several intelligence agencies.

To many observers, justice was not served at the Lockerbie trial. Could it be that the US and U.K. governments decided to sacrifice the truth in order to preserve the (in)efficiency of their intelligence apparatus?"

For the full text, see http://english.ohmynews.com/articleview/article_view.asp?article_class=3&no=381337&rel_no=1

PT/35(b) — The most expensive forgery in history [Lockerbie]

This is the headline over a long article published yesterday on Dr Ludwig de Braeckeleer’s website Intel Today. It sets out Dr De Braeckeleer’s conclusions about the dodgy timer fragment and the evidence on which these conclusions are based. This is an important article which should be read by anyone with a serious interest in this aspect of the Lockerbie case.

Was Lockerbie Key Evidence Antedated?

[This is the heading over an article, with illustrations, published yesterday on the Canada Free Press website by Dr Ludwig de Braeckeleer. It reads in part:]

Q Well, I understood you to tell us that these were contemporaneous notes that you prepared as you were carrying out your examinations; is that right?
A Yes. But presumably our definitions of “contemporaneous” are different.
—Testimony of Dr Hayes at the Lockerbie trial, Page 2592.

The discovery of a tiny fragment of a Swiss timer played an essential role in the Lockerbie investigation. In fact, according to the FBI agent who led the US part of the investigation, an indictment would have been impossible without that piece of evidence.

We can now reveal with certainty that this piece of evidence was not discovered in May 1989 as officially stated but in fact surfaced in the fall of 1989.

According to the official line, DC Gilchrist and DC McColm found, on 13 January 1989, a piece of charred material which was given the police number PI/995.

The original inscription on the label was “Cloth (charred)”. The word ‘cloth’ has been overwritten by the word ‘debris’. [illustration omitted]

Q Now, when we magnify the photograph of the label, Mr. Gilchrist, we can see, can we not, that it has been altered?
A I can see writing underneath it.

Q Exactly. And if we look carefully at the writing underneath the word ”debris,” we can make out, can we not, the word ”cloth,” with the C being under the D, the L under the E, an O under the B of ”debris,” and a T under the R, and a H under the S?
A It’s possible, yes, sir.

Q It’s more than possible, Mr. Gilchrist. It’s perfectly obvious, isn’t it?
A Yes.

Q Well, why didn’t you mention this alteration during your examination in chief, Mr. Gilchrist, when you read out the label to us?
A I didn’t notice it. It’s the first time it’s been brought to my attention.

The judges concluded that “There was no satisfactory explanation as to why this was done, and DC Gilchrist’s attempts to explain it were at worst evasive and at best confusing."

According to his examinations notes, Dr Hayes examined this item on May 12 1989 and, after dissection of the material described as part of the neckband of a grey shirt, he extracted a fragment of a green colored circuit board. [illustration omitted]

There is something very peculiar about PI/995. In his report, Dr Hayes presents photos 116 and 117 as pictures of PI/995 before and after its dissection that led to the discovery of the MEBO timer. [illustrations and some text omitted]

Therefore it is rather obvious that PI/995 could not have been dissected before October 10 1989. And the key piece of evidence that led the investigation towards Libya could not have surfaced before that date.

The US investigators (FBI) were told about it for the first time on January 10 1989. [RB: Dr De Braeckeleer asks me to say that this is a typo that appears in the original. The correct date is January 10, 1990.]

The consequence is inescapable and indisputable. The key piece of “evidence” surfaced between October 10 1989 and January 10 1990. For some reason, this finding was antedated to May 12 1989.

Why would anyone antedate a genuine piece of evidence?

The dark cloud over justice in Scotland

Dr Ludwig de Braeckeleer has today posted on his Intel Today website a long series of quotes about the Lockerbie case. These demonstrate just how widespread and pervasive is scepticism about the justice of the conviction of Abdelbaset al-Megrahi.

One of the factors that the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission has to consider in relation to the recent application by the Megrahi family is whether it is in the interests of justice that there should be a further appeal. The quotes published by Dr De Braeckeleer starkly illustrate precisely how unimpressed knowledgeable observers are about the performance of the Scottish criminal justice system in the Lockerbie case (and those knowledgeable observers extend far beyond the “usual suspects” like Dr Jim Swire and me). It is manifestly in the interests of justice -- and in the interests of the Scottish justice system -- that our courts should be accorded the opportunity to rescue their tarnished reputation. It is difficult to see how else the dark cloud over the administration of justice in Scotland can ever be lifted.

New blog devoted to dodgy timer fragment PT35(b)

[I am delighted to report the appearance of a new blog by Dr Ludwig de Braeckeleer. It is entitled PT35B and will be devoted to material about the dodgy timer fragment. Dr De Braeckeleer is the author of (amongst other Lockerbie-related pieces) the magisterial 174-part series on OhmyNews entitled Diary of a Vengeance Foretold. The first item on his new blog reads as follows (illustrations and references omitted):]

On 21 December 1988 Pan Am flight 103 fell out of the sky. All 259 passengers and crew members died. Eleven residents of Lockerbie were killed.

A strong westerly wind spread the debris over two trails stretching from the south of Scotland through the north of England and out into the North Sea.

On 28 December 1988, Michael Charles, Inspector of Accidents for the AAIB, announced that traces of high explosive had been found on two pieces of metal. On that date, a criminal investigation was officially launched. The crime scene covered about 845 square miles.

On 13 January 1989, Detective Constables Thomas Gilchrist and Thomas McColm found a fragment of charred clothing in search sector I, near Newcastleton. This piece of charred grey cloth was bagged, labelled “Charred Debris” and given a reference number: PI/995.

On 17 January 1989, it was registered in the Dexstar log.

On 6 February 1989, PI/995 was sent to the Forensic Explosives Laboratory at Fort Halstead in Kent for forensic examination.

On 12 May 1989, Dr Thomas Hayes examined PI/995. Inside the cloth, Dr Hayes found fragments of paper, fragments of black plastic and a tiny piece of circuitry. Dr Hayes gave to these items the reference number PT/35 as well as an alphabetical suffix to each one of them. The fragment of the circuit board was named PT/35(b).

In June 1990, with some help from the FBI, Allen Feraday of the Explosives Laboratory was able to match PT/35 (b) to the board of  a Swiss timer known as a MST-13 timer.

Two MST-13 timers had been seized in Togo in September 1986. BATF agent Richard Sherrow had brought one of these back to the US. Two Libyan citizens were caught in possession of an other MST-13 timer in Senegal in 1988.

An analysis of the Togo timer led the investigators to a small business named MEBO in Zurich. The owners of MEBO told the investigators that these timers had been manufactured to the order of two Libyans: Ezzadin Hinshiri, the director of the Central Security Organisation of the Libyan External Security Organisation and Said Rashid, the head of the Operations Administration of the ESO.

On 14 November 1991, the Lord Advocate and the acting United States Attorney General jointly announced that they had obtained warrants for the arrest of Abdelbasset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi and Al Amin Khalifa Fhimah.

On 27 November 1991, the British and United States Governments issued a joint statement calling on the Libyan government to surrender the two men for trial.

On 21 January 1992, the United Nations Security Council adopted resolution 731 calling on Libya to surrender Megrahi and Fhimah for trial either in the United States or in the United Kingdom.

On 31 March 1992, the Security Council passed resolution 748 imposing mandatory sanctions on Libya for failing to hand over Megrahi and Fhimah. On 11 November 1993, the Security Council passed resolution 883 that imposed further international sanctions on Libya.

On 31 January 2001, a Court found Megrahi guilty and Fhimah not guilty.

On 28 June 2007, the SCCRC announced that Megrahi may have been the victim of a miscarriage of justice. Accordingly, the SCCRC decided to refer the case to the Court of Criminal Appeal.

On 25 July 2009, Megrahi applied to be released from jail on compassionate grounds. On 12 August 2009, Megrahi applied to have his second appeal dropped. Megrahi was granted compassionate release for his terminal prostate cancer. On 20 August 2009, Megrahi was released from prison and returned to Libya.

Today we know that PT/35(b) is a forgery. We also know that at least one witness was well aware that PT/35(b) could not have been part of the MST-13 timers delivered to Libya and that this witness deliberately withheld  this information from the court. At this point, one can reasonably infer that this so-called evidence was planted.

How do we know that PT/35(b) is a forgery? Who could possibly have committed such a crime and for what possible motives? Where, when and by whom was this forgery fabricated? These are some of the questions that this blog intends to discuss and will hopefully answer.

Crown challenged to prove semtex link to Pan Am 103

[This is the headline over an article published today on the website of the Scottish lawyers' magazine The Firm. The following are excerpts.]

[A] campaign initiated by the Lockerbie Justice Group ... challenges the Lord Advocate to openly demonstrate that Pan Am 103 could have been brought down by a semtex bomb, under controlled laboratory conditions.

The group state that fabric and circuit board fragments cannot survive a semtex explosion, and accordingly the entire Crown case against Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi falls. In 2007 Ulrich Lumpert of timer company MEBO released an affidavit stating he had manufactured the circuit board “evidence” relied upon by the Crown at the Zeist trial. Earlier this year a report by Dr Ludwig de Braeckeleer concluded that the Crown’s case was “scientifically implausible”.

“The Crown theory utterly depended upon Judges believing that this white-hot sphere with a temperature of 6,800F, travelling in all available directions at 20,000mph did not scorch, never mind totally annihilate, a printed circuit board and a fabric label, which it was able to wholly detach from the shirt. Our group finds this utterly incredible,” the group said.

“We, as members of the concerned Scottish public, invite the Crown to openly demonstrate their theory under controlled laboratory conditions. Either the circuit board survives with its legible ID and soft solder, or it is annihilated in a white-hot gas. In the event of PCB annihilation, we demand a proper and independent committee of inquiry into ‘What brought this plane down?’ Will you please publicly demonstrate your theory, ... Lord Advocate?”

The challenge has been backed by Dr Hans Koechler, who observed the trial [as a UN-appointed observer] and called for a full public inquiry afterwards.

“It is highly important to address this question to the Scottish prosecutor’s office and I shall add my name to such an initiative,” he said.

“It is equally important that an explosives expert with impeccable academic credentials, ideally a University professor from a European country, endorses this initiative or confirms the basic physical facts in writing. Under this condition I can join the initiative.”

De Braeckeleer and researchers at the Centre of Explosives Technology Research in Socorro, New Mexico estimated that up to thirty pounds of explosive was needed to destroy a Boeing 747, if the explosion had occurred in the hold as the Crown claimed

“As the explosion of one pound of Semtex H inside the luggage container does not generate a blast wave sufficiently powerful to fracture the skin of the fuselage, we have little choice but to conclude that the verdict appears scientifically very implausible,” they said.

The group’s initiative is bolstered by the new testimony of former Ferranti electrical engineer Aitken Brotherston, experienced in testing circuitry for use in military applications.

“Although no doubt there have been some advances in the construction of circuit boards the predominance of boards in current use are the same as those I tested. In most cases the boards would happily catch light with a flame source similar to that of a Swan Vesta (...)

“While we did not test them to the 3000 plus degrees C temperatures of a Semtex explosion bright spot, even as an apprentice electronics engineer with Ferranti, my experience at much lower temperatures would persuade me that nothing of the circuit boards would survive that environment.

“The proposal that fragments of the board, of sufficient size to permit identification, packed with the bomb had survived a temperature environment of more than 3000 degree C in the explosion is to me just not credible.

“What it does demonstrate is the extent to which anyone promulgating that theory believes us out here in the real world to be completely stupid.”

Lockerbie Suitcase Bomb: Scientific Implausibility

This is the title of a scientific paper by Dr Ludwig de Braeckeleer and others which claims to establish that Pan Am 103 could not have been destroyed in the manner claimed by the Crown at the original trial. The paper, with all supporting references, can be read here.

My ignorance of matters technical and scientific is such that any opinion expressed by me on Dr De Braeckeleer's thesis would be worthless. But it is without doubt a serious contribution to knowledge regarding the Lockerbie tragedy.

The Iranian connection

In an article entitled “The truth behind Lockerbie” on the website of Al-Arabiya News Channel (reproduced from the issue of Al-Ahram Weekly for 20 – 26 March) Issaka Souaré reviews the problems about the evidence used to convict Abdelbaset Megrahi in the Scottish Court at Camp Zeist, and highlights retired CIA officer Robert Baer’s view that the true responsibility for the destruction of Pan Am 103 lay with Iran. See
http://www.alarabiya.net/views/2008/03/27/47511.html

Also focusing on Iranian responsibility is the latest article, entitled “Lockerbie: the man who was not there”, by Dr Ludwig de Braeckeleer which appeared on OhMyNews International on 29 March. The author retells the story of the claim by Abolghasem Mesbahi, a high-ranking Iranian intelligence agent, that Iran alone was responsible for the destruction of the aircraft. Dr De Braeckeleer continues his debate with Richard A Marquise, the retired FBI Special Agent who headed that body’s Lockerbie investigation. The full text of this lengthy and informative article can be read here.

Lockerbie, Iran and USS Vincennes

[On this date in 2008, an article by Dr Ludwig de Braeckeleer headed Former Iranian President Blames Tehran for Lockerbie was published by OhmyNews International. The first few paragraphs read as follows:]

In an interview conducted on May 16, Abolhassan Bani-Sadr, the former president of the Islamic Republic of Iran, told me that Tehran, not Libya, had ordered the bombing of Pan Am 103 in revenge for the downing of an Iranian civilian airliner by the USS Vincennes a few months earlier.

On July 3, 1988, the navy cruiser USS Vincennes, also known as "Robocruiser," shot down Iran Air Flight 655 over the Persian Gulf. The civilian airliner was carrying mostly Muslims on their pilgrimage to Mecca -- 290 died, most Iranians.

According to Bani-Sadr, in the immediate aftermath of the Lockerbie tragedy, [Ali Akbar] Mohtashami-Pur, the then minister of the interior, acknowledged in an interview that he had contracted Ahmad Jibril, the leader of a Palestinian organization [PFLP-GC], to bomb an American airliner. The interview was scheduled for publication the following day. Hours before distribution, the newspaper was shutdown.

[The remainder of the long and detailed article consists of the fruits of Dr De Braeckeleer’s search for evidence supporting or rebutting Bani-Sadr’s contention. He found quite a lot of the former and not much of the latter. The article merits close attention.]

More from Dr De Braeckeleer

In his most recent article in OhMyNews International (the latest in a multi-part series on the background to the Lockerbie disaster) Dr Ludwig de Braeckeleer has this to say:

'Just days after the downing [of Pan Am 103], the Iranian charge d'affaires in Beirut, Hussain Niknam, invited [Ahmed] Jibril at the Iranian Embassy. A few days later, several meetings occurred in Tehran. Among the participants, one finds Mohtashemi-Pur, Jibril and several representatives of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards and Hezbollah.

'According to the minutes of one of these meetings obtained by a German magazine, [Quick] Iran ordered the destruction of Pan Am Flight 103 to avenge the shooting down of an Iranian civilian jet by the US Navy in the Persian Gulf. Tehran paid Ahmed Jibril about $1 million in advance to carry out the attack.

'"We had advanced notice. The smoking gun came in July," Former CIA case officer Bob Baer told me earlier this month.

'"We had info that Iranian representatives of the Islamic Revolution Guards have signed an agreement with a Palestinian group to bring down a plane. The investigation data was superb. It couldn't have been better," Baer has said previously.

'Patrick Lang, chief of the US Defense Intelligence Agency's Middle East section at the time, told me that he stands by his statement that "the bombing of the Pan Am flight was conceived, authorized and financed by Ali-Akbar Mohtashemi-Pur, the former Iranian minister of interior."

'According to a DIA memo, "the operation was contracted to Ahmad Jibril for $1 million." The remainder was to be paid after successful completion of the mission. (Jibril's organization did receive $10 million on Dec. 23, two days after the bombing of Pan Am 103.)

'Various media have quoted Lang as saying: "I still agree with that. We felt quite sure that this was a PFLP thing." In a recent e-mail, Lang told me that he meant the PFLP-GC -- that is, the group led by Ahmed Jibril. The PFLP is another group.'

The complete article can be read here.

Why the focus shift from Iran to Libya as culprits?

[Dr Ludwig de Braeckeleer has today posted a fascinating article on his PT35B website. It offers a plausible geopolitical explanation for the shift from Iran to Libya as the preferred culprits in the bombing of Pan Am 103. The following is an excerpt -- the full text should be read:]

Soon after the tragedy of Pan Am 103 on December 21st 1988, the investigators suspected that a Syrian-based terrorist group (the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine – General Command) was responsible. It was assumed by some (known by others?) that Iran had ordered the attack as revenge for the downing of Iran Airbus 655 on July 3rd 1988.

When a joint US/UK indictment finally came in November 1991, Libya – and Libya alone according to President Bush - was the culprit.

How did they get from Iran to Libya? For one thing, the metamorphosis of the “evidence” is quite spectacular. I will provide just one example. The forensic scientists initially “were fully satisfied” that the bomb had been hidden in a white Toshiba radio. In their final report, they were fully satisfied that the item was a black Toshiba radio. Who cares? The white radio pointed to a device assembled by the PFLP-GC in Germany during October 1988. The black Toshiba radio was pointing to Libya as it had been mostly delivered to a Libyan company whose director was a person suspected of terrorism by Western Intelligence agencies.

When did the “switch” occur? Jack Anderson and Dale Van Atta claimed in 1990 that the Lockerbie investigation switched from Iran to Libya following a phone call in March 1989 between George H W Bush and Margaret Thatcher.

Conspiracy Theory

Many observers have suggested that the “switch” was the result of realpolitik. Here is the explanation provided [RB: at letter K] by The Guardian:

“The impending Anglo-American war against Iraq necessitated neutralising Iran and winning the support of Syria. Britain’s diplomatic relations with Syria were duly restored in November 1990 and the Gulf war commenced in 1991. Sure enough, the credibility of intelligence theories about the Lockerbie bombing being masterminded by the Iran- and Syria-backed Palestinian gang was soon dismantled.”

I do not subscribe to this theory. The invasion occurred in August 1990. And even if Saddam had probably made up his mind a few months earlier, the timing simply does not work.

Questions

Is the theory of a “switch” for geopolitical reasons plausible? Is there any evidence it occurred around March 1989? If so, what could possibly be the rationale?

Key Dates of the Forensic Work

Dr Hayes began its work on December 27 1988 when he found evidence of an explosion on the lower frame of a luggage pallet. The work goes on – day after day – until March 1989 when it came to a sudden halt. Then the work resumed on May 12, 1989 with the discovery of PT/35(b) recorded on the infamous page 51. Little happens next. Then in September 1989, the investigation goes to Malta and, from now on, Libya is the new focus. The PFLP-GC is officially history as far as Lockerbie is concerned.

Therefore, I consider that the “Switch Theory” is entirely plausible with a caveat. The calendar seems to point to a “Wait and See Strategy”. It appears that Thatcher recommended to “cool it” until events unfold. The question is: What events did she have in mind?

[RB: Dr De Braeckeleer then explains how political developments in Iran in 1989 rendered it no longer in the interests of the United Kingdom and the United States for Iran to be accused of responsibility for Lockerbie.]

"Insider" confirmation to Dr De Braeckeleer

Dr Ludwig de Braeckeleer reports on OhMyNews International (OMNI) that, only a very short time after the publication of his article identifying the source and contents of the document at the heart of the public interest immunity claim by the UK Government, an "insider" contacted him to confirm that his information was correct. He writes:

"Within hours of the publication by OMNI, an insider, who wishes to remain anonymous for security reasons, contacted me. This source confirmed that OMNI had correctly identified the document and its country of origin. The source also tells me that the nature of an earlier meeting would unambiguously reveal the political nature of the indictments against Libya."

The full article can be read here.