The Lockerbie Case: Lockerbie lies

Saturday, 4 June 2011

Lockerbie lies

This is the heading over an item posted today on the website of the Libyan (Gaddafi regime-supporting) Mathaba news agency. It highlights John Pilger's article Megrahi was framed and a YouTube video featuring, amongst other things, an interview with me. The Mathaba item begins with the following (which even I regard as just a bit over the top):

"If anyone, including those lazy `journalists` think that Libya has anything at all to do with the Lockerbie bombing and terrorism, you had better view this. Only after you have viewed this, can you have any credibility to even mention the word `Lockerbie'."

1 comment:

ebol04 June, 2011
MISSION LOCKERBIE, 2011: LOCKERBIE LIES:
View the video on URL below:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=oGuzIHwkAf4

for an overview, to understand why Libya is not guilty of the Lockerbie PanAm 103 bombing.

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

Add comment

Comments

Readers are invited to comment on blog posts. All comments require to be pre-moderated by me, and I shall reject all (a) that are not related to the Lockerbie disaster or (b) that fail to meet my -- perhaps idiosyncratic -- standards of courtesy towards other contributors. Comments will not be rejected simply because I disagree with them or because I, or other contributors, find them irritating. But comments will be rejected if they distort or misrepresent the evidence; are defamatory; or if they risk embroiling me, as publisher, in defamation proceedings. I am perfectly relaxed about being sued in respect of material which I personally have posted -- but not in respect of material that others wish to post as comments and which, in any case, I often strongly disagree with.

Particularly during my sojourns in South Africa, it may not be possible for me to perform the moderation function speedily. I regret the necessity of moderation but it has been rendered inevitable by the behaviour of a particular commentator whose contributions will always and without exception be rejected.

No correspondence will be entered into regarding moderation decisions.