Sunday, 15 September 2013

Important forthcoming Lockerbie books

[What follows is the text of a message sent today to Justice for Megrahi supporters by JFM’s secretary, Robert Forrester:]

By now, I am sure that very few of you will not already be aware of the fact that preparations for the quarter century anniversary of the Lockerbie atrocity are in hand.

To accompany this event, I wish to draw your attention to two publications which will soon be released to coincide with this commemoration: both courtesy of members of our organisation, namely: John Ashton and our Secretary Depute, Dr Morag Kerr.

You will be aware that John co-authored Cover Up of Convenience: the Hidden Scandal of Lockerbie with Ian Ferguson (one of our original members), and also wrote Megrahi: You are my Jury, which, amongst other things, revealed the forensic flaws and misdemeanours surrounding the infamous shard of PCB claimed to have originated from the timing trigger for the detonator, which COPFS have chosen to blithely ignore for nigh on eighteen months now. Additionally, John was part of the research team working on Abdelbaset al-Megrahi's defence. On 3rd October his latest Lockerbie/Ziest related publication, Scotland's Shame: Why Lockerbie Still Matters will be released by Birlinn. For details, see:

Whilst John and I unstintingly make a point of meeting up when I make my annual summer pilgrimage to Brighton, and clearly, we always discuss matters Lockerbie related, normally, our conversation circulates around the activities of JFM with respect to how matters are advancing regarding the general campaign.

My relationship with Dr Kerr, our Secretary Depute, is quite different. We are in constant contact with each other in advancing the cause of justice on this issue. Morag is a highly qualified scientist, and, as such, has applied her talent/training/call it what you will to the forensic shortcomings of the Lockerbie investigation with some not inconsiderable aplomb.

To coincide with the Twenty-fifth Anniversary, her book: Adequately Explained by Stupidity? Lockerbie, Luggage and Lies will be published on 21st December 2013, by Troubador to precisely coincide with the anniversary, and is, moreover, introduced with a foreword by Terry Waite CBE (another JFM member). For details, see:

John's reputation precedes him, need I say more? However, quite obviously, I have a close working relationship with Morag, and, as such, was privy to Adequately Explained by Stupidity as it took form. In my opinion, having had the immense privilege of proofing aspects of this book, it is, without question, nothing less than a work of genius. Amongst many other features studied, it conclusively demonstrates, via a highly detailed and scholarly analysis of the evidence relating to the luggage carried in the hold of Pan Am 103, how horrifically bungled the Lockerbie investigation was. Its implications are truly shocking. It is high time that executive powers in Scotland were brought to bear on the Police, Crown Office and forensic officials responsible for this outrageous scandal. Inaction is leaving Scotland looking weak, corruptible and, frankly just plain downright feart.

I strongly recommend both publications to you. And please spread the word too.


    Scotland's Shame - Why Lockerbie Still Matters ?

    "THE U.N. IS THE CONSCIENCE OF THE WORLD", said former Secretary General Kofi Annan.

    U.N. must investigat the background of the 'Scottish Fraud' about the bombing of flight, Pan Am 103, over Lockerbie - produced by a miscarriage of Scottish Justice!

    MEBO Ltd fight for TRUTH and Money.

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

  2. I have no detailed, or even overall knowledge of John's book, only the elements which refer to JFM. I am, however, very well acquainted with the content of Morag's. Without question, it is the most meticulous and exhaustive demolition of the forensics surrounding AVE4041 and the evidence presented by COPFS at Zeist relating to the interline shed, and, as such, it is going to leave a considerable amount of egg on quite a few faces.


  3. > "MEBO Ltd fight for TRUTH and Money."

    - in no particular order, I assume? ;-)

  4. to SM:
    correctly guessed --- compensation first...

  5. A luggage container blasted open by a ‘bomb’ on the container floor would reveal scorch marks on the reconstructed floor, if it by chance it survived the blast!

    The picture of the container floor that Dr Morag Kerr would have liked to use on the cover of her new book does not show scorch marks – and this is confirmed in the AAIB report!

    Therefore perhaps just as well to use another picture to illustrate her new book.

    And the clip chosen from the false animated simulation of the break-up is definitively more dramatic.

  6. Ah, Dave, you never fail to disappoint.

    The matter at issue is not "scorch marks", but "sooting and pitting". There is absolutely no necessity for that sheet of aluminium to have demonstrated sooting and pitting, with a bomb in the bottom suitcase packed as that suitcase was packed, with the IED in the extreme left-hand side and the other contents of the case protecting the floor.

    Intriguingly, although the floor of the container did not show sooting and pitting such as was seen on the horizontal strut, the airframe under the container absolutely did show sooting and pitting. How come? Examination of the reconstructed floor reveals that it swung downwards like a trapdoor hinged on the right, and it was probably protected by something in the case at that point - maybe the tweed jacket. This seems to have directed the blast at the airframe itself rather than the floor of the container.

    It really is that simple. Unfortunately the people examining that evidence weren't the sharpest knives in the drawer. Good at describing what they saw, and taking nice pictures of it, but absolutely terrible at interpreting their findings.

  7. So the ‘bomb’ blasted the floor of the container through the airframe, that ‘swung like a trap door’, but a tweed jacket prevented the floor from being marked by the ‘bomb’.


  8. Have you even looked at the pictures?

    No, thought not.

    Tell you what, Dave, I'm not actually talking to you, because you're not worth it. You have so little idea what you're talking about you're like some sort of black hole sucking the life out of every discussion.

    I post to demonstrate what nonsense you're talking, for the people who read this thread.

    As Richard Keen pointed out at Camp Zeist, even sellotape is enough to protect a surface from sooting and pitting from a welding torch. Exactly which surfaces close to the explosion will have been protected by the equivalent of the sellotape in the first microseconds of the explosion is a function of how the surrounding material moves in response to the blast - which is more or less random.

    It's interesting that the airframe was affected, while the floor of the container wasn't. However, when you look at the pictures and the diagrams, it's not hard to see how it happened.

    The airframe was affected. And the horizontal strut of the baggage container. And the surrounding luggage. And the entire aircraft suffered over-pressure so that parts of the skin gave way and started to peel off, remote from the petalled hole surrounding the blast penetration.

    The evidence is perfectly clear. Even the forensics guys got that far. We're only arguing about whether the bomb was in the suitcase on the bottom layer, or one layer up.

    If you want to come in on the "one layer up" side, Dave, feel free to present your case. Otherwise, go away and do some reading of your own for a change - read something not written by John Barry Smith please, because that guy doesn't have a scooby.

  9. Hell, so that's where my old Harris Tweed got to!

  10. The AAIB report says the absence of ‘sooting and pitting’ on the container floor is because the ‘bomb case’ was up a layer and not on the container floor.

    Thus implying that if the ‘bomb’ case was on the container floor it would have resulted in ‘sooting and pitting’ on the container floor!

    Are you challenging the contents of the AAIB report?

  11. Not unless it was a fake tweed jacket! That one had never seen the Isle af Harris in its life. I note the records are always very careful to describe it as "imitation" Harris Tweed.

  12. Dave, I'm challenging anyone who says the bomb suitcase was up a layer. That includes Peter Claiden, Christopher Protheroe, Allen Feraday, Ian Cullis, Thomas Hayes and Christopher Peel. And anyone else I might have missed.

    That is an absolutely central point in the entire debacle. If however you want to press the point that the bomb suitcase was on the second layer, feel free to present your evidence.

    To counter the "absence of pitting on the container floor", my first response is to point out the presence of pitting on the airframe which was under the container floor.

  13. And are you also now contending that the blast went downwards rather than outwards?

  14. Look at the pictures, Dave. They're pretty clear.

  15. And

    “As Richard Keen pointed out at Camp Zeist, even sellotape is enough to protect a surface from sooting and pitting from a welding torch”.

    Except even if true it’s a false comparison!

    The sentence means the sellotape will protect the surrounding area, to that being torched, from sooting and pitting.

    It does not mean the area being torched will not suffer sooting and pitting.

    Also a torch is a directed flame, whereas a bomb would blast in all directions - and burn the sellotape.

  16. And

    It has been said that the ‘bomb’ was effective not because of size but due to its remarkably fortunate location!

    If the blast went downwards rather than outwards would this make a difference to its effectiveness?

  17. No.

    Tell you what, Dave, why don't you read up on some actual facts, rather than indulging in free-association speculation. In two or three months, you can even buy a book that explains some of this.

    In the mean time, there are pictures and diagrams in the AAIB report that show exactly how the blast impacted on the plane.

    You're butting into a discussion about which of two adjacent positions was occupied by the suitcase containing the bomb, without having the foggiest idea about, well, anything frankly.

  18. “In the meantime, there are pictures and diagrams in the AAIB report that show exactly how the blast impacted on the plane”.

    Well yes, but now that even you are disputing parts of the AAIB report, is it safe for readers to assume the rest of the report is accurate?

  19. Dave, I'm tired of this. You have no idea what you're talking about, you make it up as you go along, and you have no objective other than to be disputatious for the sake of it.

    I'm happy to discuss the AAIB report with someone who actually has some grasp of the issues. Which leaves you off the hook.


  20. "grasp of the issues" ...

    May we start with "gravity" ?

  21. Dear Dave,

    Think I've cracked it. You are really Richard Marquise having a lark! Right?

    Pip, pip.

  22. Hello Rolfe,

    I‘m sorry to read you won’t be posting on this blog anymore as you are a master class in dissembling and evasion and your fulmination about the location of the ‘bomb case’ is an inspiration to all good conspiracy theorists?

    But I’m still not convinced you are right that 269 storeys of reinforced steel and concrete were turned into dust at free fall speed due to office fires, but hey, say it often enough and I may change my mind!

    Oh, and do you think the tweed could have survived in an identifiable form with an intact bill in the pocket?

  23. My God, the idiot's a 9/11 truther as well. Why am I not surprised about that? (Probably thinks that was just four terribly unfortunate aviation accidents as well.)

  24. Dear Dave,

    " you are a master class in dissembling and evasion and your fulmination about the location of the ‘bomb case’ is an inspiration to all good conspiracy theorists..."

    - but your argumentation for it - see example below - makes no sense _to me_.
    It does (unlike Rolfe's theory) not reflect that you have spent time on learning facts about the case.
    I think you ask numerous questions that I can't see answered in any sensible way, and even if so would not lead to something meaningful.


    "It has been said that the ‘bomb’ was effective not because of size but due to its remarkably fortunate location!

    If the blast went downwards rather than outwards would this make a difference to its effectiveness?"

    Methinks Rolfe has spent too much valuable time on trying to get anywhere on such basis. (I may be in the same boat, though! :-) There is more important work to do. Quite unforgivable, actually.

    You are entitled to any opinion you may have - but when dealing with it is likely to lead to anything meaningful, time should not be spent.

    People who discuss the whether the lookouts on Titanic can be held responsible for the disaster, will not be likely to get anything else than "discussion" out of responding to posts from a man who believes that there was no iceberg at all and who pays little attention to the evidence.
    An analogy I think in some way comes close to our case here.

    I recall long time ago stating that I would not let myself get sucked into this. I'll try again.

    - - -

    FWIW, I have enjoyed a number of your postings over time.

  25. No doubt Rolfe has looked at AE9/ and thinks Richard Gage and all the other qualified architects and engineers are ‘scooby’!

    This is revealing, but also illustrates the difficulty in persuading people to see what’s staring them in the face, when they don’t want to look due to a fear of what they may find.

    For example, Megrahi’s conviction was debunked on the very day it was delivered by the judges themselves when they said their verdict was based on a lack of evidence!

    But Magnus Linklater who is an educated journalist and should know better is still prepared to say in public that those doubting his guilt are ‘scooby’!

    The explanation for this is not a lack of clarity on the part of JfM, but is the result of an establishment figure fearing the political damage to himself and the State in admitting the truth.

  26. Haha. Landscape architects and software engineers for paranoid delusion.