Monday, 4 February 2013

You read it here first

The mainstream media are catching up with stories featured on this blog some time ago.  Yesterday it was The Sunday Times with Professor Francis A Boyle’s view, expressed in a forthcoming book, that Libya was not responsible for Lockerbie. Today it is the Daily Mail with a report, based on The New York Times’s profile of French novelist, journalist and editor G√©rard de Villiers, that the US intelligence community has always known that Libya was not responsible. These stories were posted on this blog on 26 January and 2 February respectively.


  1. The libya spy and defector Abdul Majid Giaka was interviewed by
    officers of the the CIA of the United States of America over a period of months from the 10th of August to the 31st of August of 1989 (productions numbers 104 -- 804 to 828 are a total of 25 cables
    which were sent by operatives of that intelligence organisation from Malta to their masters in the
    United States informing the U.S. Intelligence community of infor-mation handed over by the man Giaka).

    It is clearly established in the evidence that Lamen Fhimah, as well
    as Megrahi, arrived at Luqa Airport on the evening of 20th December 1988 on the Air Malta flight KM 231, and not the
    LAA flight. The Air Malta flight arrived at about 5.30 p.m.
    By the time of giving evidence in the trial Kamp van Zeist, Majid Giaka was apparently able to time the events of 20th December 1988 consistently with the correct flight, namely the Air Malta flight, rather than the LAA flight. Evidence on day 50, at page 6820. And this is his answer: They came in on the Air Malta flight. It always arrived from Tripoli in the evening hours. Most of the flights used to come in at 5.30, but I think that the Wednesday and Saturday flights came in later.
    And there was, of course, an attempt to use that last comment as a basis for explaining away the earlier assertion that he had timed the event at 8.00 in the evening.

    The Crown has assert that on the evening of 20th December 1988, the second accused Lamen Fhimah left Luqa Airport carrying a brown hard-sided Samsonite suitcase which contained the bomb or components of the bomb which destroyed Pan Am 103.

    The only evidence that on 20th December 1988 Lamen Fhimah was seen carrying a Samsonite suitcase at Luqa Airport, before comes alleged from Majid Giaka. The account which Majid Giaka is not supported, even indirectly, by the
    evidence of any other witness. Further, it is not supported by any contemporaneous record from the
    CIA, which is significant, because Majid Giaka insisted that he had given such a contemporaneous
    report of the matter to the CIA !

    Now, either Majid Giaka was lying about that matter or, so it would appear, the Lord Advocate has
    been misled by CIA regarding the reports which were cabled from Malta of contact with Majid Giaka,
    because the Lord Advocate to advise this court that he had received assurances that all relevant cables concerning Majid Giaka had been produced for the purposes of this trial. He knew very well Hassan Badri - mysterious what he have testified at court about Badri
    only ?:

    Q Did you know a man called
    Badri Hassan?
    A I met him in 1986. Abdelbaset
    asked me to go and meet him.
    He was coming from Switzer-
    land. I think this was 1986,
    in the summer of 1986. And I
    went to meet him at the
    airport, and I brought him to
    see Abdelbaset. This was in

    by Edwin Bollier, MEBO Ltd. Switzerland. URL:

  2. There are two parts to this saga, the miscarriage of justice and what caused the crash.

    The former has to be dealt with to remove the stain from the Scottish justice system, but the latter may remain officially untold.

    But the dilemma facing the Authorities is if the Megrahi’s conviction is quashed, it will incite demands for a public enquiry to reveal the truth.

    I suspect the Authorities will resolve this dilemma by ignoring it, by overturning the former and then ‘revamping’ the phoney criminal investigation with new ‘suspects’.


    What was declared before the hearing on day 50, (September 26, 2000) over Witness No. 684, Abdul Majid Abdul Razkaz Abdulsalam Giaka, on the Court in Kamp van Zeist.

    TAYLOR: My Lord, before the witness comes into court, I've had a word with my learned friend before the Court sat this morning. Your Lordships are aware that in this case there are a large number of (CIA) cables which were the resultant ofconversa-tions between this witness Abdul Majid Abdul Razkaz Abdul Salam Giaka and his handler.

    A great deal -- I would go so far as to say the vast majority of the contents of those cables are hearsay. And I've told my learned friend that this is not a gentlemanly shot across the bows; it is a sincere declaration of intent that I object to any attempt by the Crown to elicit inadmissible hearsay evidence from this witness...

    by Edwin and Mahnaz Bollier, MEBO Ltd. Switzerland. URL: