Saturday, 6 July 2013

Swire hails new play on Lockerbie

[This is the headline over a report in today’s edition of The Herald.  It reads as follows:]

A new play about the Lockerbie bombing has been described by the father of one of its victims as "searing and soul-searching".

The Lockerbie Bomber, written by Alan Clark, will be performed at the Edinburgh Fringe and will look at the links the CIA had to Libya around the time of the 1989 atrocity, which claimed 270 lives.

Dr Jim Swire, who lost a daughter at Lockerbie, said: "The Lockerbie Bomber is a searing and soul-searching drama of international significance, which dramatically shows how absolute power corrupts absolutely and how individuals and nations are diminished by the lies told in their names."

Mr Clark claims in his work that Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi, the only man convicted of the Lockerbie bombing, was made a scapegoat for the bombing, which he described as an open wound. The playwright, from Falkirk, said: "I started with an open mind but the more I researched, the clearer it became that governments and agents have systematically covered up the truth for nearly 25 years."

The Crown Office is re-examining events leading up to the attack.

[The press release on which The Herald’s story is based reads as follows:]

The revelation today (July 5) that the CIA sought to assassinate Lockerbie bomber Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi and his co-accused Al-Amin Khalifa Fhimah comes as no surprise to the Scottish author of a new play about the atrocity that’s being staged at the Edinburgh Fringe later this month.

“I believe the CIA wrote the script to incriminate Libya,” says Alan Clark, author of The Lockerbie Bomber.

The Washington lobbyist William C Chasey made the allegation in his autobiography, Truth Never Dies.

The murky involvement of the CIA is a central strand in the play,” said Falkirk-basedClark. “There’s a widespread view it wanted Megrahi and Fhimah quietly removed, as this would prevent a public trial taking place which would show that Iran and Syria, not Libya, were behind Lockerbie following the destruction of an Iranian passenger aircraft by the USS Vincennes.

“And then when the trial did take place, there are allegations they fabricated evidence and paid witnesses for their evidence. So their fingerprints are all over Lockerbie.

“These issues are all covered in the play which concentrates on their attempts to cover up the truth and why Megrahi was made a scapegoat. This in itself raises serious questions, such as who in Scotland permitted it all to happen.”

Dr Jim Swire, who lost a daughter at Lockerbie, said: “The Lockerbie Bomber is is a searing and soul-searching drama of international significance which dramatically shows how absolute power corrupts absolutely and how individuals and nations are diminished by the lies told in their names.”

Clark added: “Lockerbie has been described as "an open wound", "an indelible stain on the reputation of Scotland and its justice system" and “our national shame”. I wrote the play as a reminder that the 270 victims and their families still await justice and the truth. I started with an open mind but the more I researched, the clearer it became to me that Governments and their agents have systematically covered up the truth for nearly twenty-five years. Allegations that evidence was withheld. Evidence fabricated. Witnesses paid for their testimony. Scottish justice reduced to the level of a banana republic. It stinks.”

The Lockerbie Bomber is being staged at C Venues in Edinburgh's Chambers Street from July 31-August 13 at 12 noon daily.

12 comments:

  1. I was intrigued by the final sentence of the original Herald report "the Crown Office is re-examining events leading up to the attack". What is this about?

    ReplyDelete
  2. "While we recognise that there is some public interest in release because it relates to the Lockerbie bombing which remains a significant event in Scotland and to Mr Megrahi’s conviction, this is outweighed by the public interest in withholding information because of the ongoing criminal investigation into the involvement of others with Mr Megrahi in the bombing and the possibility of further legal proceedings in relation to Mr Megrahi’s conviction." -- from Crown Office response to John Ashton's FOIA request.

    "The ‘possibility of further legal proceedings in relation to Mr Megrahi’s conviction’ is presumably a reference to the current police investigation into the complaints of alleged criminal misconduct made by the committee of Justice for Megrahi. Revealing why the documents were not disclosed, and who made the decisions, could not possibly jeopardise ‘the ongoing criminal investigation into the involvement of others’. It might well, of course, jeopardise the reputations of the Crown Office and its officers." -- John Ashton's comment.

    I have no way of knowing, of course, whether Mr Ashton's speculation is correct.

    ReplyDelete
  3. MISSION LOCKERBIE, 2013 (doc. nr. 9973.rtf)

    I, Edwin Bollier (MEBO Ltd.) as a witness also should obviously be "eleminated" - as an witness for exoneration the former 'Gadhafi Regime' in the "Lockerbie case"...
    Event: on afternoon of 10 September 1993 !

    Text from ongoing legal proceedings - only in German language:
    +++

    Auch ich, Edwin Bollier (MEBO Ltd) sollte offensichtlich als Zeuge wegen Entlastung, des damaligen 'Gadhafi Regime' im "Lockerbie Fall" eliminiert werden...?
    Sommer 1993: Libya's Ankündigung über mögliche Auslieferung der beiden Angeklagten im "Lockerbie-Fall", Lamin Khalifa Fhimah und Abdelbaset Al Megrahi, an ein Gericht unter schottischer Rechtshoheit.

    August 1993: eine weitere Mord-Drohung geschrieben auf einem Zettel an mich, Edwin Bollier, in deutscher Sprache: "Wenn Sie weiterhin Libyen helfen, dann werden Sie beseitigt"...
    Am späteren Nachmittag des 10. September 1993, ich Edwin Bollier fuhr von MEBO AG, nach Hause. Ich fühlte mich an diesem Tag, wie mehrfach in dieser Zeit, "geheim-dienstlich" überwacht.

    Das elektrisch gesteuerte Garage Tor war bereits geöffnet, d.h. kurz vor mir musste jemand eingefahren sein. Ich fuhr in die Sammelgarage und stellte mein Auto ab.
    Beim schliessen des rechten Fensters gab es Schwierigkeiten. Ich probierte von Hand den Schaden zu beheben (ca.15 Minuten).
    Als ich danach in den Hauseingang eintrat lag ein mir bekannter Man tot vor dem Lift. Der Mann musste etwa 10-15 Minuten vor mir zu Tode gekommen sein...
    Ich war schockiert und machte mir meine eigenen Gedanken...

    Im Herbst 2010 hatte ich bei einem Meeting mit schweizer Offiziellen u.a. über diesen Todesfall gesprochen und den Verdacht geäussert, dass ich glaube dieser mysteriöse Todesfall hätte vermutlich mir gegolten, um mich als zukünftiger Zeuge zu liquidieren ?

    Ein Offizieller zeigte Interesse an dieser Aussage und fragte mich nach Name des Toten etc. Ein paar Tage später gab er mir telefonisch bekannt, dass es sich um einen normalen Todesfall handelte...
    Kürzlich sind mir Details vom Tode des Mannes bekannt geworden:
    Der Mann war kurz vor mir, ebenfalls mit dem Auto in die Sammelgarage gefahren und wollte in seine Wohnung, im selben Haus gehen. Als er den Liftknopf drückte, ging er zu Tode. Der Mann war eine gesunde Person.

    Notfall Arzt und Polizei wurden damals avisiert. Ein Gerichtsmediziner liess lange Zeit auf sich warten; an Ort und Stelle erklärte er kurzerhand, es handle sich um einen Sekunden Tod ! (ohne eine forensische Nachuntersuchung, wie in solchen Fällen üblich, wurde die Leiche beerdigt...

    Meine Vermutung:
    1993 hatten die Regierungen von USA, UK und der Schweiz, nicht daran geglaubt, dass das Gaddafi-Regime die beiden offiziellen Angeklagten, Fhimah und Al Megrahi, jemals an ein Gericht ins Ausland auslieferen werde ?
    Das offizielle US & UK Indictment gegen Fhimah und Al Megrahi, wurde am 14./15. Nov. 1991 dem Staat *Libyen zugestellt.
    (*Libyen wurde solidarisch als mitverantwortlich erklärt).

    Meine Zeugenaussagen tendierten bereits 1990 klar für eine Entlastung zu Gunsten Libyens, d.h. mit den forensischen Abbildungen (Polizei-Fotos) des massgebenden MST-13 Timer-Fragments konnte Libyen nicht mit dem PanAm 103 Attentat in Verbindung gebracht werden.
    Das wäre ein Grund, aus politischen Gründen, einen Zeugen zu beseitigen ?
    Wenn diese Vermutung von mir infrage käme, hatte man eine falsche Person ermordet ? Der Tote hatte eine ähnliche Statur wie ich, Edwin Bollier...

    Was war die wirkliche Ursache des plötzlichen Todes vom vorgesehenen Zeugen Kurt Maier, x-Ray Beamter bei der Gepäckkontrolle am Flughafen Frankfurt... ?

    Was war die wirkliche Ursache vom plötzlichen Tode des jungen "allwissenden" Staatsanwaltes von Frankfurt a.M. - Hr. Volker Christian Rath, welcher Ermittlungs-Ergebnisse zu Gunsten Libyen auslegte ...?

    Nachruf: Jedes Ereignis, alles auf der Welt hat seine Zeit

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

    ReplyDelete
  4. MISSION LOCKERBIE, 2013 - (doc. nr. 9974.rtf.)

    Questionable discussion between Swiss officials Hans *Cretton and Peter *Humert with FBI / CIA (1990/91) *alias name:
    Thoughtfully: out of the "Pandora Box" of ex Special Agent Richard Marquise, led the U.S. Task Force which included the FBI and Central Intelligence Ageny (CIA) in the Lockerbie Case...

    Document USA, nr. HZ-438.vsk (sig):
    °°°° Bollier was in financial difficulty and might be willing to take risks to solve his money problem. Bollier was not controllable and swiss Commissar. Hans *Cretton was reluctant to make him a double agent to work against the Libyan government.
    Hans Cretton said, he is a risk to all of us. Cretton wondered if Bollier could be convinced to have Megrahi meet him in Tunesia but noted that if we were not there to control him, it would be difficult to know what Megrahi said.
    Cretton was of the opinion Bollier would offer to do an undercover operational role so further the interests of the investigation. He reiterated his concern that Bollier would be killed and the blame would come back to law enforcement.

    Cretton wanted to make it clear to Meister and Bollier if they did anything unilaterally with Libyan officials, no one was encouraging them to do it.
    The Swiss wanted guidance in the event any of the people we were looking at came to Switzerland, including Megrahi. Nothing could be done at this time because no one is prepared to issue arrest warrants. No one could predigt when or if that would be done. Cretton provided with the circuit boards which Bollier had turned over to them so these could be given to Henderson along with the Togo timer. end doc. °°°°

    1991: After further interviews through FBI-Officials and officers of the Scottish Police in Zurich - and after Bollier's visites in 1991 at the FBI in Washington and at the Scottish Police in Glasgow he understood clearly: The allegedly found MST-13 timer fragment in Lockerbie was a manipulated piece of evidence with the intention to link the state of Libya with the Lockerbie-atrocity.

    In 1991 Bollier was invited to the FBI Headquarter in Wahington and Commissioner Richard Marquise offered him up to US$ 4 million and a new identity in the States if he would confirm in a police statement that the allegedly found MST-13 timer fragment originated from one of the 20 timers delivered to Libya between 1985 und 1986 !
    Now there was no more doubt for Bollier that a huge conspiracy against the Gadhafi-Regime in Libya was on the way...

    Contrary to the Libyan crown witness against Libya, Abdul Jiacha alias "Puzzlepiece" - an agent in the sold of the CIA – Bollier rejected the offer. Jiacha is currently living in the USA under a new identity...

    Incidentally:
    °°°° Swiss official Hans Cretton expressed his concerns and those of Bollier. The first was that the CIA had planted the "MST-13" Timerfragment
    (PT-35) in the wreckage found at Lockerbie.
    Scottish Senior Investigating Officer (SIO) Stuart Henderson and I (Marquise) told him this thought had also crossed our minds. Neither of us believed the CIA or any government official would do such a thing, but we had discussed the possibiility°°°° hi, hi...

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

    ReplyDelete
  5. COMPLETION

    What was the real cause of the heart attack of Allan Fracovich ...?
    Allan Francovich was an American film producer and director who made the film "The Maltese Double Cross - Lockerbie".
    He suffered a heart attack while going through US customs at George Bush Intercontinental Airport in Houston, Texas on April 17, 1997, and died.
    When the Film was released in November 1994, it was immediately blocked with legal action by lawyers acting for a US government official.

    Nachruf: Jedes Ereignis, alles auf der Welt hat seine Zeit

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

    ReplyDelete
  6. Is Professor Black's quotations of my buddy John Ashton a response to my comment? Alleged Crown misconduct are not events leading up to the bombing?

    What has happened to EBOL? I try to read his comments carefully but now he has taken to aping the claims of Patrick Haseldine! What is this claim about Richard Marquise heading the US Task Force (if such existed) which included FBI and CIA?

    What was the real cause of the heart attack of (the charlatan and fabricator) Allen Francovich? Whisky and fags perhaps?

    ReplyDelete
  7. You know, someone can be wrong without necessarily being insincere, let alone a "charlatan and fabricator". Documentary makers film "reconstructions" all the time. Sometimes they're reconstructing something they only think happened, unfortunately.

    I've seen some absolutely cracking fabrications in Lockerbie documentaries, I mean real full-on create-your-own-evidence stuff, and Francovich isn't even on the radar.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Baz, I have not posted your comment timed 16.16 today. You may be relaxed about your imputations but for me, who would in law be your publisher, life is too short to become involved in defamation proceedings or in correspondence with your target and/or his lawyers.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I counted a number of targets and the only one I actually accused of deceit is dead. I don't think accusing somebody of being the proprietor of a teashop (when they are the proprietor of a teashop!) is defamatory but its your blog. However "fabricate" is defined as "to concoct in order to deceive" (Online Dictionary) which seems to me to adequately describe the "drug conspiracy" theory advanced in "The Maltese Double Cross". In correspondence Mr Francovich claimed the bomb seemed to have exploded in the First Class compartment so I see no problem in calling him a charlatan.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I've heard an enormous number of erroneous statements from a wide range of commentators on Lockerbie. So far as I can tell, in every single case the commentator genuinely believed what he was saying.

    Allan Francovich was wrong. We can tell that now, easily, because we have far more information than he had. Some of the stuff he promoted could have been seen to be wrong at the time, but that doesn't prove he knew it was wrong.

    He seems to have believed that Jaafar's body was found close to Gannon's which he took to mean that they were sitting together. Did he have access to the seating plan? Did he bother to look?

    This case is lousy with people peddling their own pet theories, many of which are wildly wrong, but that doesn't make them fabricators. Is everyone who announces that the plane was late a fabricator? Lots of people who have been told 20 times that it wasn't late still keep repeating that. It's not dishonesty. It's human cognition. Once some people believe they know something, they don't seem to be able to un-know it.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Dear Professor Black,

    For the record I must protest about your censoring of my previous comment on the supposed grounds that it was defamatory. Indeed your use of the words "my target" may give anybody reading it the impression I had made some wild or intemperate claim. Perish the thought. However it is not actually clear to whom you were referring.

    From material outwith this blog it became clear that EBOL, possibly through cultural or language difficulties, may have taken Patrick Haseldine's claim to be Professor Emeritus of Lockerbie Studies seriously and was actually seeking his advice.

    I pointed out for Herr Bollier's benefit that he is not a Professor but the proprietor of a tea shop. As a gag I actually wrote that he had used the skills he had acquired in the Diplomatic Service to start his own business. This is not in the least defamatory and I certainly didn't call him a liar.

    There is a whiff of hypocrisy here. You are quite happy to publish the most outrageous insinuations, contradicted by historical fact, by others. (i.e. Ronald Reagan and George Bush somehow colluded in the murder of archbishop Romero.) Very often I point out where claims are demonstrably untrue. While I have denounced others as charlatans and fabricators or even in Robert Baer's case as an "aviation terrorist" this is not defamatory.

    However your concern for Mr Haseldine's reputation and your fear of defamation proceedings might be slightly more credible if you had not posted the comment "Patrick Haseldine is a liar."

    I take it the name Patrick Haseldine is not to be mentioned. While most followers purport to be interested in the truth I am as interested in claims that are untrue. However it is your blog but please don't insult my intelligence by pretending my comment was defamatory.

    ReplyDelete
  12. You are entirely mistaken about my concern being that the comment was defamatory of Patrick Haseldine. Your comments about him cause me not the slightest concern. What does cause me concern is your reference to people as charlatans, one recognised meaning of which is "a fraud". You are entitled to believe and to say that someone is wrong, wrongheaded, misconceived, wilfully blind. But you are not entitled to say, at least on a blog which I publish and for which I have legal responsibility, that someone is a charlatan.

    ReplyDelete