Police chief- Lockerbie evidence was faked

MARCELLO MEGA

A FORMER Scottish police chief has given lawyers a signed statement claiming that key evidence in the Lockerbie bombing trial was fabricated.

The retired officer - of assistant chief constable rank or higher - has testified that the CIA planted the tiny fragment of circuit board crucial in convicting a Libyan for the 1989 mass murder of 270 people.

You could have knocked me over with a feather…OUR government corrupt?

Could that be the reason they don't like us?

The questions before you:

(a) Should the case against the Lybians be overturned?

( Do they hate us because of our blue eyes , blond hair and our "freedoms"?

Other than the word of just one policeman in a very large investigation- what corrobarating evidence is there. What reputable, non-partisan or at least somewhat balanced and objective investigation magazines have published expose's on it- because, make no mistake- this is big news if corrobarated.

But I would like more than one person's word in a tabloid,mmmkay?

I agree. I sincerely doubt that even if it is true that some Scottish cop would be able to uncover a plot by arguably the world's most powerful intelligence agency.

I think this is in the vain of my idea that JFK was actually eaten by a tiger.

No
No

Should the case against the Lybians be overturned?
Based on the word of one man, no. If the investigation leads anywhere, perhaps re-tried though. This would be devastating if true. It would also make me wonder why we wouldn't have acknowledged the Iranian backing, especially since we seem to soft-pedal their involvement in Iraq, Lebanon, Syria, etc. It seems that they have been at low-level war with us since 1979, yet we don't want to publicly acknowledge it for some reason.

Do they hate us because of our blue eyes , blond hair and our "freedoms"?
Who? The Libyans? Iranians? Syrians? Scots? The article you linked does not contain any comments about eye or hair color, nor does it contain the word "freedom." Who are you quoting here?

Well the plot thickens:

(1) Swiss engineer Ulrich Lumpert, has confessed that he lied about the origins of a crucial 'timer' - evidence that helped tie the man convicted of the bombing to the crime;
(2) The Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission ruled in June that there was enough evidence to suggest a miscarriage of justice.

Vital Lockerbie evidence 'was tampered with'

Doesn't seemt that credible. Did you read this?

It seems to me that a man who had his business ruined is seeking revenge. I'm not sure really that this is particularly credible yet. It's no on the AP, Reuters, CNN, etc.

Like they said- your going to have to have a better source than the Guardian UK and one ruined businessman and a retired police officer.

You have sources with an independent investigation somewhere perhaps?

Should the case against the Lybians be overturned?

On the word of one or two men? No.

At best this is additional evidence that could be submitted in a possible inquest or retrial, but as far as I can see it doesn't even warrant that by itself.


Do they hate us because of our blue eyes , blond hair and our "freedoms"?

Yes and no. 'They' hate 'us' because we live in a rich and successful society where everything they cling to as meaningful can be openly mocked and because they live in a monotonous backward society where one man's word commands the national assets and religion is still the people's opiate.

I'm sure Libyans can be just as racist as Europeans but whether or not they hate my green eyes and (now some what dark) blonde hair, I don't know. I'm sure some of them will just as surely as some of them will find it rather fetching.

Should the case against the Libyans be overturned?

Not on this evidence, no.

Though at the time of the Lockerbie trial, there were significant suggestions (extenvie coverage in Private Eye magainze, which isn't infallible but often breaks stories that take years to surface in the mainstream) that there was indeed a conspiracy involving US security services.

The tale went (as far as I recall) that Ghaddafi of Libya was desperate for Western trade for his oil, which had been blocked since his country had made a habit of killing Westerners, Americans especially. He was quite prepared to offer up a sacrificial lamb, especially since the trial would take place in Scotland and not the USA (so the "fall guy" would not face the death penalty), and denounce his prior support for international terrorism (including the IRA, who were already beginning to distance themselves from terrorism) in order to get some much-needed capital.

At the same time, the "real" culprits were Syrians, who had become diplomatically useful to the USA in the ten years (or so) between the bombing and the trial. Something to do with a settlement in Lebanon at the time that required Syrian withdrawal, their price for which was not pursuing the real Lockerbie bombers.

So, the story goes, the evidence was fabricated to frame the Libyan suspects, with the collusion of the Libyans, Syrians, and with the (at least) acquiescence if not outright cooperation of MI5. Crucial to the conspiracy was that the Scottish police, lawyers and courts were completely in the dark, so that the integrity of the criminal investigation and trial would be beyond question.

Jim Swire (mentioned in the article, and father of one of the British victims of the bomb on Pan Am flight 103) has been advancing this theory more or less ever since the arrest of the Libyan suspect.

I have to say I found this theory plausible, but didn't think about it much beyond that. It's just the usual sort of realpolitik that's been going on since nation states were invented. But then the British are generally more cynical than many other nationalities, and I'd put myself forward as a more than usually extreme example.

Do they hate us because of our blue eyes , blond hair and our "freedoms"?

No more than "we" hate "them" for their brown eyes, black hair and "religious certainty". By which I mean some of "them" (and some of "us") probably do hate "us" (or "them), but that's a gross oversimplification stemming from wilful ignorance. Most of the hatred on both sides arises for much more complex reasons, and most people on both "sides" aren't on a side, and don't hate anybody.

Besides, nobody involved in this conspiracy, even if it is true, is now an active participant in the War on Terror. Ghadaffi's Libya has been careful to stay on-side since its global reentry into trade, and especially since he saw what happened to his some time ally among "non-aligned countries", Saddam Hussein, and his fellow sponsor of international terrorism Osama bin Laden, since 9-11. Both are powerful incentives for him to keep on the international straight and narrow.

Syria has walked the line officially, though has made enough wobbly noises to be worthy of suspicion, but (if the conspiracy theory holds water) the USA cannot possibly pursue them for Lockerbie now without doing themselves a great deal of damage and rewinding the last 30 years of Middle Eastern diplomacy.

Either way, the "they" who planted the bomb on flight 103 is not the same "they" that's trying to shoot, blow up and generally kill or injure "us" now in Iraq, in Afghanistan, and in superficially normal urban and suburban family homes among us. Today's "they" is not the same "they" as it was 20 years ago, nor will it be the same "they" in 20 years time.