[This is the headline over an article by John Forsyth in today's edition of The Scotsman. It focusses on Frank Duggan, President of the US relatives' organisation, Victims of Pan Am Flight 103 Inc. Mr Duggan is not himself a relative of anyone killed in the disaster. The article reads in part:]
Victims of Pan Am Flight 103 has tended to win arguments in the US. Mr Duggan is proud to record that it has probably been the most effective congressional lobbying group of the last 20 years.
He says: "There are about 500 members of the group. Most are family members, now into the third generation – grandchildren of people who were killed. Security service and investigators keep in touch. This is the most important case in their professional careers and they don't want to lose touch."
Mr Duggan's connection with the families started when he was appointed "Liaison to the Families" on the 1989 President's Commission on Aviation Security and Terrorism. (...)
Mr Duggan was appointed president of the group last year: "I could not say no to them. I told them I didn't think there was much more to do. Legally and politically the battle was over. Libya was recognised and compensation had been paid. Then they released Al Megrahi and a 20-year-old story was back on the front pages again."
Today's memorial service [at Arlington National Cemetery] will be addressed by John Brennan, currently assistant to the president for homeland security and counter-terrorism in the Obama administration. (...)
The spectre at the ceremony, of course, will be Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi, convicted of the murder of the passengers and crew on the flight and of 11 men, women and children killed on the ground in Dumfries-shire by the wreckage falling out of the sky.
Al Megrahi was released on compassionate grounds because of his terminal illness in August. He remains the focus of the outrage expressed by the Victims of Pan Am 103 group and of the present US administration that he was shown compassion when he offered none to his victims.
But Al Megrahi is equally the focus of outrage on the part of campaigners in Scotland and elsewhere in the UK that he was wrongfully convicted in the first place. Christine Grahame MSP says she has moved from an initial disinterested lawyer's perception that the prosecution had not proven its case against him to a conviction that he is in fact innocent. She says: "I don't have the support of the First Minister or the Justice Secretary in this but this miscarriage of justice is a serious matter for Scotland and the Scottish legal system."
She does have the support of Jim Swire, whose daughter Flora was killed that night, as well as Professor Robert Black, whose early diplomacy prepared the way for the trial of two accused, Al Megrahi and Al Amin Khalifa Fhimah, in a Scottish criminal trial in 2000 relocated to Holland. Fhimah was acquitted.
The two sides – Mr Duggan and the campaigners in Scotland – have become bitter adversaries.
It is not uncommon for opponents in a long-running and infinitely complex dispute to develop something of a relationship. A connection can begin to develop through their common history of opposition in radio or TV discussions. Not in this case. They have never actually met face to face and neither side can think of a single instance in which they thought. "actually, that's a good point" made by the other and amended their position accordingly.
Ms Grahame and Prof Black refuse to comment at all on Mr Duggan, preferring general statements of regret that the manifest anger in the US following the release of Al Megrahi is rooted in a false narrative of events.
Mr Duggan tends to be less circumspect. He calls them "deniers" and can't understand why they continue to pick at a case that had as good a trial as Scotland could muster and had the conviction upheld on appeal. He is unimpressed by the issues raised by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission.
"Al Megrahi had the opportunity to clear up some of the questions but chose not to testify and then dropped his next appeal when he got sent home," he contends. (...)
"We still have friends in Congress who keep in touch with us. I was asked whether the families want a congressional committee to take hearings on the Scottish compassionate release. I would love to say this case is over, and it is over in court, but the bombing of Pan Am 103 will be fodder for lots of stories and theories. There doesn't seem much we can do about that, but I for one am through trying to reason with Prof Black or MSP Grahame," he says.
[For the record, Mr Duggan has made no attempt whatsoever to "reason" with me. What he does is to make bald, largely unsubstantiated, assertions and to flounce off in a fit of pique when those assertions are not immediately and uncritically accepted.
Many of today's Scottish and UK newspapers contain follow-up articles to the stories that broke yesterday about Abdelbaset Megrahi's bank account and his deteriorating health. The most interesting of these articles is to be found in The Herald. It ends with an abbreviated version of the address to be delivered later today at Arlington National Cemetery by Canon Pat Keegans, who was parish priest of Lockerbie at the time of the disaster. The full text of this address will be published on this blog after the ceremony has taken place.]
How much I agree with Professor Black.
ReplyDeleteHaving written a highly cogent explanation of Lockerbie, which claims it was the result of a deal between the US Government and Iran to allow the latter country its 'one and one only' revenge for the downing of IR-655 by the Vincennes, and sent it to Mr Duggan he accused me of being like a Holocaust denier.
I immediately replied that there was rather more proof of the Holocaust than the three pathetic and fabricated clues produced against Mr Megrahi.
He will not reply, nor engage in rational debate. He cannot. He is a rather unintelligent placeman put into VPAF103 to keep it on message and I have not been able to find any connection he has with Lockerbie.
VPAF103, of course, contains no victims: they died on the winter hills and little town of Lockerbie, so Mr Duggan appears to be a victim at two removes. What I call a sham.
I am the relative of someone who died on UT-772, and I would never describe myself as a victim of anyone. My brother was though.
Taking into account all the actions of the US and UK government, I think there is some substance in what you say regarding a deal between the US Government and Iran though I think it possible the US's part in it was to covertly assist the bombers with the help of the UK intelligence services rather than a 'formal deal'
ReplyDeleteAs for Mr Duggan, it seems to me his job is to guide the US relatives away from the awful truth and the job of the Libyan money paid to the relatives is to stop any delving into the truth which could lead the relatives to realise that the money they have been given they have no right to.
Did you know that the name Duggan derives from the Celtic for 'DARK'? I wonder what this might imply about him? Just a passing thought.
ReplyDeleteDid you know this blog's host has the name Black, which in English itself is darker than dark? :D
ReplyDeleteOn the "allowing revenge" thing, I thnk there's something to it as well, not in allowing the attack at all, bu in allowing the guilt and retribution to slide elsewhere. That Iran was not responsible for PA103 is one of the few points Tehran and Washington officially agree on wile both knowing better.
The reason the US wants to keep Iran and PA103 apart is to keep 103 and IA655 apart.
As for Mr. Duggan, I got him to sign an informal petition calling on Malta to “Admit it! You're Tripoli's little pet and happy about it!” He seems to agree that Malta allowed the Lockerbie attack in concert with their Libyan overlords, and that a call for England to consider re-conquering the Island is in order.
http://12-7-9-11.blogspot.com/2009/12/another-call-on-malta.html
Oh and I finally read the article fully. I quite liked its approach. Both side were heard, and I think the overall impression is both fair and leaning towards "the campaigners in Scotland" in the sense that, to paraphrase someone else about someone else, "the truth has an anti-Duggan bias."
ReplyDeleteCharles - you should publish your cogent explanation. Did you send Mr Duggan your entire book? I am baffled as to why he was not immediately convinced.
ReplyDeleteCompared with earlier similar groups, for example, the National League of Families, Frank Duggan is right that Victims of Flight PA103, were a very effective lobby group, but it is of course much easier to push against an open door. Mr Duggan has always supported the official line and part of the genius of the "Libyan solution" was that it left the families of the victims (including that of Matthew Gannon, son-in-law of the CIA's DD Ops) very well provided for.
Of course this was all dependent on the conviction of Mr Megrahi and as I recall many of the US families were bitterly opposed to "Camp Zeist" which didn't quite turn out as expected by the various protagonists.
Many (or some?) were also very critical of the lack of vigour with which Libya was pursued in the period between the Indictment and the trial and indeed with the whole concept of dealing with the issue purportedly as a Criminal and Civil matter. (I thought it of interest that while Dan Cohen for example excoriated "the politicians" he thought the CIA were telling him the truth.)
Nobody denies the crime occurred so it would be wrong to describe Ms Peirce and Ms Grahame as "deniers". However I was very surprised that an experienced lawyer such as Ms Peirce would make claims in her article "The Framing of Al-Megrahi" that were the inventions of fabricators or that Ms Grahame would abuse parliamentary priviledge to "name" a US resident as the (likely fictitious) "Abu Elias" a man who supposedly placed the bomb in the suitcase of Khalid Jafaar. She is also a lawyer - doesn't she know what constitutes evidence either?
(Next time she should name the right US resident as mastermind of the Lockerbie bombing!)
Baz said: it is of course much easier to push against an open door.
ReplyDeleteWell put. He's not lying, but showing the truth in a different way. Why are some doors locked and others not?
Dear Caustic,
ReplyDeleteHa, ha, ha! Yes indeed, I love that. The way things are going right now, think I'll just pop down to the bookmakers and place a Christmas flutter on 'Professor Darker than Dark' to win by several lengths.
A Merry Yule to yourself and the entire brigade of contributors to the debate.
Quincey.
A connection has been made between Mr Duggan and the Scots Gaelic for dark. Someone interested in the US political scene may care to search for the name Mr Richard Lawless.
ReplyDeleteThis issue has a habit of producung very dark humour, if only you seek it out.
Might I draw attention to the fact that there was a Toshiba radio-cassette model called a Bombeat; that the FBI's investigation was without irony called Scotbom; and to Mr Baer's copy-editing error in See No Evil.