Monday, 9 September 2013

Need a pretext or precedent for Middle East strikes? Cite Lockerbie

[The following are excerpts from a report published this evening on the website of the Mirror newspaper:]

Russia launched a fresh bid to protect ally Bashar al-Assad by urging him to surrender his chemical weapons to avoid war today.

President Vladimir Putin called on the bloody dictator to hand over his arsenal in talks with the Syrian regime.

The proposal came as US officials insisted that a similar suggestion from Secretary of State John Kerry was a “rhetorical argument” rather than a serious offer.

Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said he was hopeful that Syria would “place the chemical weapons under international control and then have them destroyed”. (...)

The US State Department was forced to clarify Mr Kerry’s earlier remarks at a press conference with Foreign Secretary William Hague. (...)

The Secretary of State also caused confusion over what military action Syria is facing.

Last week, President Barack Obama was said to be considering much more wide-ranging military action than the air strikes originally expected.

Today, Mr Kerry compared Assad’s gas attacks to the Holocaust and said they must not go unpunished but said any strike would be “unbelievably small”.

America would not be going to “war” or “engaging troops on the ground or any other prolonged kind of effort” but was planning a “very limited, very targeted, very short-term effort”.

“That is exactly what we are talking about doing; an unbelievably small, limited kind of effort.”

Blundering Mr Kerry also compared US plans to former President Ronald Reagan’s bungled air strikes against Colonel Gaddafi.

An American F-111 was shot down by Libyan forces while many US bombs missed their military targets and hit diplomatic and civilian sites instead.

The US Secretary of State claimed that the 1986 raid on Libya was carried out in retaliation for the Lockerbie bombing, which only happened two years later.

[Whether or not they get the chronology right, it now seems to be standard practice for politicians to cite Libya’s alleged responsibility for Lockerbie as an argument in favour of whatever aggressive action they wish to take in the Arab world.]


  1. "The US Secretary of State claimed that the 1986 raid on Libya was carried out in retaliation for the Lockerbie bombing, which only happened two years later."

    "RB: [Whether or not they get the chronology right...]"

    Hilarous! Whoever constructed that sentence should have drunk some strong coffee first.

  2. The Russian UN veto over Syria is because they gave approval for a limited US strike in Libya that turned into regime change.

    They fear the same would happen in Syria with Iran next on the list and do not want to assist US in promoting conflict on its borders.

    The US wants to promote conflict, but wants to do so in the name of the international community, rather than on behalf of the ‘neo-con and military industrial complex lobby’.

    Therefore they parade a virtue to inflict a vice and promote a double-speak concept called R2P that involves ‘starting WWIII to save lives’.

    Fortunately Cameron was unable to sell this insanity to the Commons and lost the vote.

    And the US becomes more desperate (citing Lockerbie) by claiming to be acting in the interests of the international community, when almost no else agrees with them!


    Continued with the *conspiracy of 1986, against the Gaddafi Regime (air strike of Libya, code-named Operation "El Dorado Canyon").

    *MISSION AMSTERDAM followed (1988)...

    In 1986, Colonel Gaddafi rushed out of their residence in the Bab al Aziziya compound moments before the bombs dropped. Gaddafi (alias Amsterdam) escaped the assassination. The air strike killed 45 Libyan soldiers and government officials, and 15 civilians. Colonel Gaddafi escaped injury.

    1988, under the code 'MISSION AMSTERDAM', a second conspiracy of other kind was started. The objective was to entangle Libya with Gaddafi in a terrorist attack with the "PanAm 103 atrocity"...

    Through an unethical accusation and a trial under "Scottish Law", in the end by means of manipulated circumstantial evidence, the Libyan official Abdelbaset Al Megrahi was sentenced (2001) to life imprisonment and Libya was held responsible for the damages of US$ 2.7 billion - for the families of the victims.

    On 28 June 2007 the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) established a miscarriage of justice on 6 points. Thus Mr Al Megrahi was awarded a new appeal.

    Different activities and options were activated to once again be able to prove - the now deceased - Al Megrahi's innocence through the Scottish Justice. The background for the Scottish blocking is today clearly discernible; the Scottish Justice wants to block the truth in order to prevent the biggest disaster, linked with a double-digit billion US$ indemnity from 'Libya Now'...

    Justice for Mr Abdelbaset Al Megrahi !

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

  4. What about Syria's probable involvement with Lockerbie? One wonders if they've even realised they're passing up a golden opportunity to have a go at both Syria and Iran. They only need to do a quick reverse ferret, and look at the possibilities!

  5. Except if the US officially blamed Syria for Lockerbie, particularly as an excuse for an attack, it would trigger a UN investigation aka the public enquiry they have always wished to avoid!

  6. Which is why it wont happen.

  7. Sarcasm seems to be a bit lost on you, Dave.

  8. I can't explain exactly why, but there is something about what the Americans are doing in this Syria gas-by-who-case that reminds me of the expression "painting yourself into a corner".