Tuesday, 21 June 2011

Some Gaddafi regime Lockerbie myths

[What follows is an excerpt from a long report published yesterday on the Libyan (Gaddafi regime supporting) Mathaba news agency website. It is instructive to see the Libyan media peddling myths about Lockerbie that are just as fanciful as those peddled by the Western media (though, of course, very different).]

During the 1990's when Libya was unjustly subjected to a decade of sanctions and no-fly zone by the same colonial powers and the USA, it was African countries that broke the deadlock by refusing to recognise the UN resolutions because those who sponsored them, the usual culprits, had not taken up any initiatives to resolve the issues.

By flying to Libya in violation of the British-American UNSC resolutions, a long-standing plan of Nelson Mandela and Muammar Qaddafi to allow the trial of two Libyans to take place at The Hague in Holland, was finally accepted by the British and Americans, who attempted to pass it off as their own plan.

The Americans paid a Libyan $4 million in order to give false testimony which led to the conviction of one and the release of the other accused, even though both had been charged on the same charges and evidence, and lawyers around the world were stunned. The accused remained in jail for decades, after being transferred to Scotland, and released to die, without compensation.

The initial judges at what was called the "Lockerbie Trial" had resigned ahead of the start of the trial, because of "political pressure exerted upon them to reach a guilty verdict even before the trial had begun", and the trial only started after judges who were willing to go along with the promise to reach a guilty verdict, had been found.

Libya had paid billions of dollars to the families of the victims of the Israeli attack against Pan Am 103, which occurred because of a bomb placed in the skin of the aircraft some weeks earlier with a timer, during a major maintenance overhaul of the Boeing 747 in New York.

As the airliner had been delayed, it blew up over Lockerbie, instead of, as planned, over the Atlantic Ocean where wreckage would not have been found. All VIP, including racist Apartheid South Africa's senior official, various senior American officials, and other VIP's had been taken off the plane before it took off, and mainly students who had been on standby, waiting at the airport to return home to the US for Christmas, took up the seats.

Libya in a deal reached with the US and Britain in order to have the unjust sanctions lifted, gave a statement that "Libya claims responsibility for the actions of its officials", but not at all in reference to any terrorism nor Lockerbie, so that the British and American media could claim that Libya had "claimed responsibility" but adding "for Lockerbie."

To this day many western media, who have not followed the Lockerbie Trial nor developments since, nor bothered to check the facts of the historical record on what statements had been given, continue to wrongly attribute the bombing of Pan Am 103 to Libya, instead of to Israel's MOSSAD.

As the air craft had not meant to be downed over land but far out to sea, within hours of the timer-bomb exploding, the CIA including with helicopters, were on the scene in Scotland, removing evidence, as witnessed by Scottish police and British explosives experts. They could not have arrived so fast, had they not already realised with the delay of take-off, that the plane may crash on land rather than out to sea. The CIA, MOSSAD and Britain's SIS (MI6) work closely together.

During the Lockerbie Trial there was uproar when it was found that the person responsible for briefing the international media during the trial, was exposed as being a senior MI6 officer.

[For the first time in two weeks, the blog yesterday had a visit from within Libya.]


  1. A Lockerbie myth peddled by both Libya and the Western media is that apartheid South Africa's foreign minister "had been taken off" Pan Am Flight 103. In fact, Pik Botha and his entourage had never even been booked on the doomed flight: they all travelled on Pan Am Flight 101 which departed Heathrow at 11:00am on 21 December 1988 and arrived safely at JFK, New York in the afternoon.

    Please see Why the Lockerbie flight booking subterfuge, Mr Botha?

  2. They say MOSSAD did it but don't give a motive - and then say the CIA, MOSSAD and MI6 all collaborate closely. This needs explaining.

  3. Funny, I always thought PA101 left at 1pm.

  4. It is a fact that Pan Am Flight 101 departed Heathrow with Pik Botha and entourage on board. It is an enduring myth that Botha et al were booked on (and "taken off") Pan Am Flight 103.

    Please see Why the Lockerbie flight booking subterfuge, Mr Botha?

  5. Considering that many people blame Lockerbie on Iran why in the heck would Mossad want us to think it was Libya? Baffling.

  6. So Mr Botha himself helped perpetuate this myth by his interview in 1994 reponding to the assertion made in the MDC and Scotsman newspaper?

    Did a majority of the South African party of 22 not return straight home to S.A. after arriving at Heathrow? With only about 6 of the SA officials eventually taking PA101 and on to New York as intended. And yet PA103, as we know, had plenty of seats still available to accomodate the rest of that party if PA101 was full.

  7. Actual quote from Francovich.

    The South Africans booked on flight 103 cancelled just before departure. Along with Pik Botha, General Mallon the Defence minister, and General van Tonda, head of the Secret Service, BOSS, and other senior government officials. Botha, Mallon and van Tonda confirm this change in travel arrangement to British businessman Tiny Rowlands. They tell him the source of the information was of the kind that could not be dismissed. Botha rebooks on the earlier Pan Am 101. General van Tonda and two other members of BOSS cancel their trip altogether.

    I suppose it all depends on who you believe. Tiny Rowlands or - well, Patrick.

  8. Three observations:

    1. Allan Francovich and Tiny Rowland are dead and cannot therefore be asked to explain themselves;

    2. General Magnus Malan was SA Defence Minister;

    3. Gen. C J Van Tonder was Director of Military Intelligence (BOSS was replaced by the SA National Intelligence Service in 1980);

    On 15 May 2011, I put the following question to Pik Botha on Facebook: Why the Lockerbie flight booking subterfuge, Mr Botha?

    Mr Botha has so far failed to respond.

  9. This is what Pik Botha has to address in his response:

    "Pik Botha's claim to have been booked on the Lockerbie flight was shown to be false by the now retired South African MP Colin Eglin of the Democratic Party. In a letter to a British Lockerbie victim’s family dated 18 July 1996, Mr Eglin wrote of questions he had put to South African Justice Minister Dullah Omar in the National Assembly. On 5 June 1996, Mr Eglin asked Mr Omar if Pik Botha and his entourage 'had any plans to travel on this flight (Pan Am Flight 103) or had reservations for this flight; if so, why were the plans changed?'

    "In reply in the National Assembly on 12 June 1996, Justice Minister Omar stated he had been informed by the former minister of foreign affairs (Pik Botha) that shortly before finalising their booking arrangements for travel from Heathrow to New York, they learned of an earlier flight from London to New York: namely, Pan Am Flight 101. They consequently were booked and travelled on this flight to New York.

    "Mr Eglin went on to write in his letter to the Lockerbie victim’s family: 'Since then I have done some more informal prodding. This has led me to the person who made the reservations on behalf of the South African foreign minister Pik Botha and his entourage. This person assures me that he and no-one else was responsible for the reservations, and the reservation made in South Africa for the South African group was originally made on PA 101, departing London at 11:00 on 21 December 1988. It was never made on PA 103 and consequently was never changed. He made the reservation on PA 101 because it was the most convenient flight connecting with South African Airways Flight SA 234 arriving at Heathrow at 07:20 on 21 December 1988.'

    "Mr Eglin gave the victim’s family the assurance that he had 'every reason to trust the person referred to' since he had been given a copy of 'rough working notes and extracts from his personal diary of those days.'

    "In his letter Mr Eglin wrote: 'In the circumstances, I have to accept that an assertion that the reservations of the South African group were either made or changed as a result of warnings that might have been received, is not correct'."

  10. And Mandy Rice-Davies might have made a very pertinent comment on that. The guy couldn't even get the time of the flight right.

  11. But South African Airways Flight 234 from Johannesburg did arrive at Heathrow at 07:20am on 21 December 1988.

    And it's worth recalling the reason why the South African party had to change planes at Heathrow: the US Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid Act banned SAA flights from landing in America.

  12. And PA101 did not depart from Heathrow at 11.00. Nor was it scheduled to do so.

  13. According to the German newspaper, Die Zeit, because South African foreign minister Pik Botha and his entourage of VIPs were booked to travel on Pan Am Flight 101, a special security check of the aircraft had to be carried out.

    This might explain why PA101 did not depart from Heathrow at 11:00am.

  14. Or, the fact that it wasn't scheduled to depart until 1.00pm might explain why it did not depart until 1.00pm.

  15. A Lockerbie myth peddled by both Libya and the Western media is that apartheid South Africa's foreign minister "had been taken off" Pan Am Flight 103.

    In fact, Pik Botha and his entourage had never even been booked on the doomed flight: they all travelled on Pan Am Flight 101 which departed Heathrow at 11:00am [Rolfe insists PA101 departed at 1:00pm] on 21 December 1988 and arrived safely at JFK, New York in the afternoon.

    Please see Why the Lockerbie flight booking subterfuge, Mr Botha?