Sunday, 10 October 2010

Maltese urged to sign Lockerbie petition

[This is the headline over an article in today's edition of the Maltese newspaper The Sunday Times. It reads as follows:]

The organisers of a petition seeking to overturn a verdict against the man convicted of the Lockerbie bombing have appealed to the Maltese to support a bid to prove his innocence and clear Malta’s link to the disaster.

The petition calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish government to open an inde-pendent inquiry into the 2001 conviction of Abdelbaset Al-Megrahi for the bombing of a Pan Am aircraft in December 1988.

The petition is steered by Justice For Megrahi (JFM), an organisation which includes a number of British victims’ relatives, and individuals like world-renowned philosopher Noam Chomsky and South African Archbishop Desmond Tutu.

Mr Al-Megrahi’s decision to drop his appeal in order to return to Libya after he was released on compassionate grounds in August 2009 means there is currently no means in Scotland by which the verdict may be re-examined.

JFM believes it could convince the authorities to re-examine what it calls one of the biggest miscarriages of justice to associate Libya with one of the worst terrorist attacks. The Pan Am 747 was bound for New York when it exploded over Lockerbie in Scotland, killing all 259 people on board and 11 on the ground.

Mr Al-Megrahi was convicted after Maltese shopkeeper Tony Gauci claimed the Libyan had bought the clothes used to conceal the bomb.

The Libyan was then accused of managing to elude security at Luqa airport by loading the suitcase containing a bomb unaccom panied on an Air Malta flight to Frankfurt, whereupon it was transferred, again unaccom panied, to a further flight to London. At Heathrow, it was finally loaded on to the target aircraft.

Jim Swire, whose daughter Flora was killed in the bombing, appealed to the Maltese to support the call for an independent inquiry.

“There are serious doubts about the verdict and there are very serious doubts on the evidence given by Tony Gauci, who we now know was rewarded for his testimony,” he told The Sunday Times.

Those who studied the evidence know the atrocity was not caused by some device which originated from Malta and there is clear evidence that Mr Al-Megrahi never bought the clothing from the (Sliema) shop, Dr Swire said.

JFM representative Robert Forrester insisted that in the hope that Mr Gauci could identify the purchaser of the clothing from his shop, investigators had repeatedly shown him spreads of pictures of Mr Al-Megrahi.

Mr Forrester said evidence which emerged later showed that Mr Gauci and his brother were given money through the US Rewards for Justice Programme arrangement.

“Mr Al-Megrahi’s case should be referred back to the Court of Appeal, on no fewer than six grounds, in part due to the testimony of Mr Gauci.”

Furthermore, there is also the issue of the respective security regimes at Luqa, Frankfurt and Heathrow. Before the trial, the regimes of all three airports were expertly assessed – with Luqa coming out on top.

In addition, 18 hours before the Pam Am aircraft’s departure, someone broke into Heathrow airside giving access to the area in the vicinity of the Pan Am shed.

This information was known to the UK authorities well in advance of the trial but was not made public until after the verdict was announced.

While the JFM campaign acts to see Mr Al-Megrahi’s name cleared of the crime, it is also committed to seeing both the reputation of the Scottish criminal justice system and the good name of Malta restored, Mr Forrester said.

“Both Malta and Scotland are victims of what is tantamount to a criminal injustice by this verdict. This is an issue that goes beyond our obvious sympathy for Mr Al-Megrahi.

“The Maltese people won the George Cross for their extraordinary bravery during adversity of the Second World War, only to see their name tainted by what occurred at Camp Zeist – this is a gross and unconscionable insult.

“Ask yourself this. What would you do if you wanted to place a bomb on a plane departing from Heathrow? Place it, unaccompanied, on a flight leaving Malta for Frankfurt to eventually be transferred to London in the hope that it would evade the security at three airports, or would you opt for the more obvious and more likely to succeed choice of simply singling out Heathrow?

“The three judges, who were also the jury, clearly preferred the more fantastical solution.”

The petition (available on http://epetitions.scottish.parliament.uk/list_petitions.asp) will run until October 28.

9 comments:

  1. continuation >>>

    7.) Weil die 12 on-line Gepäckstücke von PanAm Flügen bereits in Berlin x-ray überprüft wurden, sind diese nicht ein zweitesmal in (FRA) mit x-ray untersucht worden.

    8.) Die Annahme das inter-line Bag (angebliches "Bomb-Bag") Tray No.B-8849 sei von AirMalta, KM-180 auf PanAm, PA-103/B transferiert worden, beruht auf einem vermutlich beabsichtigten "Zufall"...?

    9.) Erklärung: Ein on-line Bag von Passagier No.167, (Wagenführ) von PanAm Flug PA-643 aus Berlin, wurde zusammen mit dem inter-line Gepäck von AirMalta, KM-180, auf dem gleichen Transport-Wagen um 13:01 Uhr am Counter No.206, (V3) angeliefert.
    Zwischen 13:04 Uhr bis 13:10 wurde das inter-line Baggage von AirMalta und 1 Stück on-line Bag von PA-643, um 13:07 Uhr als Tray No. B-8849, am gleichen Counter codiert.

    10.) Wichtig: Das damalige Baggage Conveyancing System in Frankfurt war zu dieser Zeit das modernste Computer gesteuerte System der Welt. Gepäckstücke inter-line und on-line von verschiedenen Fluggesellschaften konnten an einem der 7 Counter
    von V3 durcheinander programmiert werden und wurden dadurch je nach Status über die X-Ray Anlage geleitet und zum jeweiligen Weiterflug Ladegate befördert.

    Wenn es möglich war, wurde jeweils on-line Gepäck direkt von PanAm Flugzeug zu PanAm Flugzeug ausserhalb der Tarmac umgeladen.
    Wenn on-line Gepäckstücke über das FRA Baggage conveyancing System durchgecheckt wurden bekamen sie den gleichen Code wie inter-line Gepäckstücke; nur die codier Zeit war different.

    11.) Das massgebende on-line "Bag" Tray B-8849 musste wie bekannt aus betriebstechnischen Gründen (Flugzeug war nicht anwesend) mit dem gleichen Counter-Code wie die inter-line Bags von AirMalta codiert werden; nur der Zeitpunkt 13:07 Uhr war different.

    12.) Am Gericht in Kamp van Zeist konnten die Richter, durch diese "verwirrenden" Umstände, falsch überzeugt werden, dass das Bag
    B-8849 ein inter-line Bag war und von AirMalta KM-180 auf PanAm, PA-103/B transferiert wurde !

    Nachweislich wurde das on-line Bag B-8849 von PanAm PA-643 befördert. Somit kann der Transport eines angeblichen "Bomb-Bag" mit AirMalta KM-180 definitiv ausgeschlossen werden und die Beschuldigung Mr. Al-Megrahi habe ein "Bomb-Bag" auf AirMalta, KM-180 eingeschleust muss endlich offiziell zurückgezogen werden.

    13.) In der Buchführung des gesammten Gepäck-Umschlages von Total 136 Gepäckstücken auf PanAm 103/B in Frankfurt, gab es keine Unregelmässigkeiten, d.h. alle Gepäckstücke können Passagieren oder Fluggesellschaften zweifelsfrei zugeordnet werden.

    14.) Today it is well-known, that doubtful German experts with limited knowledge in the Baggage system range, partially as a witness of Defence team Duff & Taylor beige-pulled became and therefore at this fatal false acceptance with the AirMalta Bag, are jointly responsible!

    by Edwin Bollier, MEBO Ltd., Switzerland
    URL: www.lockerbie.ch

    ReplyDelete
  2. MISSION LOCKERBIE, Document no. 873.rtf.

    Once more: Air Malta flight KM-180, under "radar" control.

    Facts why after today's knowledge information a transport of an unaccompanied "Bomb-Bag" with AirMalta flight KM-180, on *21st of December 1988 absolutely can be excluded:

    1) There is no proof that on this *date an unaccompanied Bag (alleged "Bomb Bag") by Mr Abdelbaset Al Megrahi or Mr Khalifa Fhimah has "smuggled in" on AirMalta, flight KM-180.
    Thus exist only the wrong accusation of Scottish officials !

    2) Witness no. 708, Wilfred Borg was division coordinator for Air Malta at Luqa Airport. Supported on the Production 930 at image 4; this shows that load plan of Flight KM-180 on 21st December 1988. 55 pieces of baggage were loaded on Boeing 737, as counted and signed for by the head loader. Departure flight KM-180 at 09:38 local Malta. (onbloc on 12:48 time local Frankfurt)
    Witness 708, Wilfred Borg (sworn) confirmed that no unaccompanied Bag was transported and all passengers have received their luggage items from flight KM-180, confirmed by police report.

    3.) PanAm company Frankfurt TXL FRAOOPA; FRAKPPA and the PanAm UK office in London-Heathrow (LHR) have not received from Air Malta division a "Passenger Transfer Message"-telex (PTM) about 1 piece unaccompanied inter-line luggage item for a transfer
    KM-180 to PanAm PA-103/B in Frankfurt.
    A 'PTM' would have been absolute required for a solo bag transfer from flight KM-180 to flight PA-103/B and later to PA-103 in London-Heathrow and later to JFK !

    According to regulation at that time a PTM copy as well as shipping papers had to be conveyed for the further Bag transport from FRA to LHR.
    From air Malta division a PTM was not conveyed and the unaccompanied "Bag" was in the computer operating system not been seized…
    The computer steered conveyancing baggage system in FRA would not have reforwarded the bag via the X-ray station to PA-103/B without a 'PTM' ok !

    +++
    Apology, the following text to complicates for me for a translation from German in English language.
    +++

    4.) Von den 25 Transfer Gepäckstücken, welche über Halle Mitte und Vorfeld V3, im Airport Frankfurt auf PanAm 103/B registriert (codiert) und geladen wurden, waren davon 12 on-line Gepäckstücke von PanAm zubringer Flügen PA-107; PA-637; PA-639; PA-643 aus Berlin und 13 inter-line Gepäckstücke von anderen Fluggesellschaften.
    continuation down >>>

    ReplyDelete
  3. continuation >>>

    5.) Die 13 inter-line Gepäckstücke mussten vor der Beladung auf PanAm 103/B von einem Sachbearbeiter (Kurt Maier) der Firma Alert Management, durch eine X-ray Anlage auf Inhalte wie RadioRecorder, Sprengstoff etc. überprüft werden.
    Kurt Maier war ein zuverlässiger Sachbearbeiter und es war ihm bekannt, dass speziell auf RadioRecorder und Sprengstoff geachtet werden musste.
    Alle 13 inter-line Gepäckstücke können Passagieren oder Fluggesellschaften zugeordnet werden. AirMalta war nicht dabei, somit kann der Transport eines einzelnen "Bag" auf AirMalta, Flug KM-180 ausgeschlossen werden.

    6.) Kurt Maier proves by its entries in the officially 'Duty Report' from 21st of December 1988, (Prod.10769) that the x-ray machine started 16:25 hours with: 10 Suitcases, 2 Travel bags and 1 box were sent through the X-ray System into PA-103/B.
    No RadioRecorder or unusual features were seen on the monitor!

    7.) Weil die 12 on-line Gepäckstücke von PanAm Flügen bereits in Berlin x-ray überprüft wurden, sind diese nicht ein zweitesmal in (FRA) mit x-ray untersucht worden.

    8.) Die Annahme das inter-line Bag (angebliches "Bomb-Bag") Tray No.B-8849 sei von AirMalta, KM-180 auf PanAm, PA-103/B transferiert worden, beruht auf einem vermutlich beabsichtigten "Zufall"...?

    9.) Erklärung: Ein on-line Bag von Passagier No.167, (Wagenführ) von PanAm Flug PA-643 aus Berlin, wurde zusammen mit dem inter-line Gepäck von AirMalta, KM-180, auf dem gleichen Transport-Wagen um 13:01 Uhr am Counter No.206, (V3) angeliefert.
    Zwischen 13:04 Uhr bis 13:10 wurde das inter-line Baggage von AirMalta und 1 Stück on-line Bag von PA-643, um 13:07 Uhr als Tray No. B-8849, am gleichen Counter codiert.

    10.) Wichtig: Das damalige Baggage Conveyancing System in Frankfurt war zu dieser Zeit das modernste Computer gesteuerte System der Welt. Gepäckstücke inter-line und on-line von verschiedenen Fluggesellschaften konnten an einem der 7 Counter
    von V3 durcheinander programmiert werden und wurden dadurch je nach Status über die X-Ray Anlage geleitet und zum jeweiligen Weiterflug Ladegate befördert.

    Wenn es möglich war, wurde jeweils on-line Gepäck direkt von PanAm Flugzeug zu PanAm Flugzeug ausserhalb der Tarmac umgeladen.
    Wenn on-line Gepäckstücke über das FRA Baggage conveyancing System durchgecheckt wurden bekamen sie den gleichen Code wie inter-line Gepäckstücke; nur die codier Zeit war different.

    11.) Das massgebende on-line "Bag" Tray B-8849 musste wie bekannt aus betriebstechnischen Gründen (Flugzeug war nicht anwesend) mit dem gleichen Counter-Code wie die inter-line Bags von AirMalta codiert werden; nur der Zeitpunkt 13:07 Uhr war different.

    12.) Am Gericht in Kamp van Zeist konnten die Richter, durch diese "verwirrenden" Umstände, falsch überzeugt werden, dass das Bag
    B-8849 ein inter-line Bag war und von AirMalta KM-180 auf PanAm, PA-103/B transferiert wurde !

    Nachweislich wurde das on-line Bag B-8849 von PanAm PA-643 befördert. Somit kann der Transport eines angeblichen "Bomb-Bag" mit AirMalta KM-180 definitiv ausgeschlossen werden und die Beschuldigung Mr. Al-Megrahi habe ein "Bomb-Bag" auf AirMalta, KM-180 eingeschleust muss endlich offiziell zurückgezogen werden.

    13.) In der Buchführung des gesammten Gepäck-Umschlages von Total 136 Gepäckstücken auf PanAm 103/B in Frankfurt, gab es keine Unregelmässigkeiten, d.h. alle Gepäckstücke können Passagieren oder Fluggesellschaften zweifelsfrei zugeordnet werden.

    14.) Today it is well-known, that doubtful German experts with limited knowledge in the Baggage system range, partially as a witness of Defence team Duff & Taylor beige-pulled became and therefore at this fatal false acceptance with the AirMalta Bag, are jointly responsible!

    by Edwin Bollier, MEBO Ltd., Switzerland
    URL: www.lockerbie.ch

    ReplyDelete
  4. "Since 1988 successive Maltese Governments have always maintained that the bomb which downed the Pan Am flight 103 had not departed from Malta and ample proof of this was produced. The Maltese Government hopes that this statement will put an end to this kind of speculation once and for all". (31st October 2009)

    It's coming up to a year since Tonio Borg, Malta's Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs, said that he was going to "deeply consider" backing a UN General Assembly Inquiry, since when not a peep - not that I've heard anyway.

    So long as the Maltese government fails to take any public steps to actively seek a new inquiry, it can surely only mean that it is prepared to accept the contentious Megrahi conviction even though it, of course, inextricably taints Malta and Luqa airport (don't even mention the embarrassing stigma of the Maltese Gauci brothers).

    It's all very well maintaining in the press that it has been proven that Malta had no connection with the atrocity but that's not quite the same as doing something active about really proving it once and for all, is it?

    Perhaps the Maltese government has a very big reason to keep its head down and say as little as possible . . . hmmmm?

    Just how deep, Mr. Borg?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Well you know its a fair question. It might be an idea to have the Maltese government pushing for the same outcome as the rest of us: a full investigation and the hearing of the appeal. I hope lots of Maltese sign the petition.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Mi unka sayen al eet needs de singature af de greet man dom mintaff an alla dem malta eeslan peple can rite de names on dis scotch paytishone. man they trully angray wid de lugage ting

    ReplyDelete
  7. Oh yes, Malta has much to hide, it seems. They kicked the whole investigation off the island briefly, probably when they finally concealed all the evidence, huh? And the Air MAlta baggage handlers refused en masse to appear at the Zeist trial. Suspicious!

    The investigation thought so, in advance, and tapped phone lines, etc. to find the clues of Maltese intrigue with Libya. They were trying to explain why Bogomira's locker-paper differed from the elaborate and intact records on Malta. Was there anything which could be twisted to appear like collusion to cover it up? Nothing was found except Maltese annoyance and protest.

    Well, that'll have to do then. It's pretty suspicious. It's got Gala wondering anyway...

    ReplyDelete
  8. "Nothing was found except Maltese annoyance and protest."

    All the more reason for them to stay annoyed and keep protesting.

    ReplyDelete