Saturday 22 August 2009

Robert Fisk: For the truth, look to Tehran and Damascus – not Tripoli

Forget all the nonsense spouted by our beloved Foreign Secretary. He's all too happy to express his outrage. The welcome given to Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi in Tripoli was a perfect deviation from what the British Government is trying to avoid. It's called the truth, not that Mr Miliband would know much about it.

It was Megrahi's decision – not that of his lawyers – to abandon the appeal that might have told us the truth about Lockerbie. The British would far rather he return to the land of the man who wrote The Green Book on the future of the world (the author, a certain Col Muammar Gaddafi, also wrote Escape to Hell and Other Stories) than withstand the typhoon of information that an appeal would have revealed.

Brown and Gaddafi. Maybe they should set up as a legal company once their time is up. Brown and Gaddafi, Solicitors and Commissioners for Oaths. Not that the oaths would be truthful.

Megrahi's lawyers had delved deeply into his case – which rested on the word of a Maltese tailor who had already seen a picture of Megrahi (unrevealed to us at the time) so he could identify him in court – and uncovered some remarkable evidence from the German police.

Given the viciousness of their Third Reich predecessors, I've never had a lot of time for German cops, but on this occasion they went a long way towards establishing that a Lebanese who had been killed in the Lockerbie bombing was steered to Frankfurt airport by known Lebanese militants and the bag that contained the bomb was actually put on to the baggage carousel for checking in by this passenger's Lebanese handler, who had taken him to the airport, and had looked after him in Germany before the flight.

I have read all the interviews which the German police conducted with their suspects. They are devastating. There clearly was a Lebanese connection. And there probably was a Palestinian connection. How can I forget a press conference in Beirut held by the head of the pro-Syrian "Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine" (they were known, then, as the "Lockerbie boys") in which their leader, Ahmed Jibril, suddenly blurted out: "I'm not responsible for the Lockerbie bombing. They are trying to get me with a kangaroo court."

Yet there was no court at the time. Only journalists – with MI6 and the CIA contacts – had pointed the finger at Jibril's rogues. It was Iran's revenge, they said, for the shooting down of a perfectly innocent Iranian passenger jet by the captain of the American warship Vincennes a few months earlier. I still happen to believe this is close to the truth.

But the moment Syria sent its tanks to defend Saudi Arabia after Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait in 1990, all the MI6 truth-telling turned into a claptrap of nonsense about Col Gaddafi. (...)

Of course, we must now forget the repulsive 2004 meeting that Blair arranged with Gaddafi after the latter had supposedly abandoned plans for nuclear weapons (not that his Tripoli engineers could repair a blocked lavatory in the Kebir Hotel), an act which the former foreign secretary Jack Straw called "statesmanlike". (...)

Thank God for Jack Straw. He cleaned up Gaddafi's face and left it to Miliband to froth on about his outrage at Megrahi's reception back in Tripoli.

Meanwhile the relatives of those who died at Lockerbie – and here I am thinking of a deeply sad but immensely eloquent letter that one of those relatives sent to me – will not know the truth.

I suspect that the truth (speak it not, Mr Miliband, for you do not wish to know) lies in Lebanon, in Damascus and in Tehran. Given your cosy new relationship with the last two cities, of course, there's not a whimper of a chance that you'll want to investigate this, Mr Foreign Secretary. And not much encouragement will "Mad Dog" Gaddafi give to such an undertaking, not after the gifts – oil deals, primarily, but let's not forget the new Marks & Spencer in Tripoli – which he has given us. (...)

Ironically, Megrahi flew home to Tripoli on an Airbus A300 aircraft, exactly the same series as the Iranian plane the Americans shot down in 1988 – and about which Gaddafi never said anything.

It was Ayatollah Hossein Ali Montazeri (once Khomeini's chosen successor but now a recluse under semi-house arrest who stands up for President Ahmadinejad's political opponents) who said in Iran in 1988 that he was "sure that if the Imam [Khomeini] orders, all the revolutionary forces and resistance cells, both inside and outside the country, will unleash their wrath on US financial, economic and military interests".

Remember that, Mr Miliband? No, of course you don't. Not even a whimper of outrage.

[The above are excerpts from Robert Fisk's column in today's edition of The Independent.]

15 comments:

  1. Robert Fisk's latest Lockerbie odyssey includes the following statement in support of his drugs mule conspiracy theory:

    "Given the viciousness of their Third Reich predecessors, I've never had a lot of time for German cops, but on this occasion they went a long way towards establishing that a Lebanese who had been killed in the Lockerbie bombing was steered to Frankfurt airport by known Lebanese militants and the bag that contained the bomb was actually put on to the baggage carousel for checking in by this passenger's Lebanese handler, who had taken him to the airport, and had looked after him in Germany before the flight."

    Sorry to spoil such a neat theory but Fisk has to explain how come - if the bag that contained the bomb was actually loaded on the feeder flight Pan Am 103A at Frankfurt airport - the bomb was not detonated by its barometric trigger on the flight from Frankfurt to Heathrow.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I don´t know who really was responsible for downing the PanAm 103. But if those responsible started the bomb at Frankfurt with the aim PanAm 103 they were certainly clever and able enough not to use a barometric trigger. What does it tell us about who the perpretrators were? Nothing!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Whilst I cannot lay claim to being an expert in the finer arts of bomb-making, I cannot believe it to be beyond the capabilities of those in the know to piece together a timing, or other device, which will not activate the barometric trigger until a preset moment in the future, ie: the barometric trigger is not activated until it enters a given window. In this respect, it is not impossible to imagine said bomb entering the chain of events at Frankfurt.

    Even though this proposition is less insane than the one which convicted al-Megrahi (Malta - Frankfurt - London), it is, nevertheless, nuts. I cannot imagine the bomber/s of 103 opting for anything other than the obvious: Heathrow. Security there, in terms of access to airside, was proven to be parlous even after Lockerbie, and in any case, would you, as a self-respecting bomber, go out of your way to make your life more difficult and dangerous by either placing the bomb on a flight from Malta (where security was known to be very tight) or Frankfurt (where it was known to be less so) when your aim was to bring down a plane leaving from Heathrow? It simply doesn't stack up Mr Fisk.

    ReplyDelete
  4. @QR:
    I would totally agree. Heathrow is the most likely starting point, Frankfurt is next and most unlikely is Malta. For simple technical reasons. And because only a totally idiotic intelligence service would start any war operation from its own doorstep.

    ReplyDelete
  5. The whole point about the Ahmed Jibril PFLP-GC bombmakers at Neuss in Germany is that their bombs had barometric triggers. If Robert Fisk maintains, as I think he does, that it was a PFLP-GC operation originating at Frankfurt, then the bomb ought to have gone off on the Frankfurt-Heathrow leg of Pan Am Flight 103's journey, n'est-ce pas?

    ReplyDelete
  6. @PH:
    Why should the Jibril people not be able to produce a bomb with a (less complicated) timer detonator when needed?

    ReplyDelete
  7. The fact is that the five or six PFLP-GC bombs from Neuss all had barometric triggers. Read up on it, Adam, and don't keep trying to let Robert Fisk off the hook!

    ReplyDelete
  8. According to the DIA files: The first Jibril idea was to destroy an American airplane filled with GIs on a direct Christmas vacation flight starting from Frankfurt. For that purpose you could use a barometric steered detonator. This plan was not executed as we know. Most likely because the people in Neuss were found. So a new plan had to be hatched - without barometric device and maybe a different starting point. And, obviously, innocent civilians.

    ReplyDelete
  9. That's intriguing, Adam. Can you give us the weblink for the source of your information, so that we can read about it for ourselves.

    Or, did you just make it all up?

    ReplyDelete
  10. I thought, that was (more or less) commonly known. I´ll find a way and send a copy to you.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Just post the weblink here, Adam, if it exists.

    Meantime, sorry to spoil such a neat theory but Robert Fisk has to explain how come - if the bag that contained the bomb was actually loaded on the feeder flight Pan Am 103A at Frankfurt airport - the bomb was not detonated by its barometric trigger on the flight from Frankfurt to Heathrow.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Thanks, Adam, for sending me the redacted DIA report dated 24 September 1989, which reads as follows:
    SECRET
    PAN AM FLIGHT 103 AND UTA FLIGHT 772 (U)
    2. COOPERATION TREATY FOR TERRORISM SIGNED BY IR, LY, AND SY (U)
    WARNING: (U) THIS IS AN INFORMATION REPORT, NOT FINALLY EVALUATED INTELLIGENCE. REPORT CLASSIFIED S E C R E T NOFORN WNINTEL.
    DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
    DOI: (U) 890924
    REQS: (U) blank
    SOURCE: (S/NOFORN/WNINTEL) blank
    SUMMARY: (S/NOFORN) THIS REPORT FORWARDS LIMITED INFORMATION CONCERNING IRANIAN INVOLVEMENT IN THE BOMBINGS OF PAN AM FLIGHT 103 AND UTA FLIGHT 772. IRAN, LIBYA, AND SYRIA HAVE SIGNED A COOPERATION TREATY FOR FUTURE TERRORIST ACTS.
    TEXT: (S/NOFORN) THE BOMBING OF PAN AM FLIGHT 103 WAS CONCEIVED, AUTHORIZED AND FINANCED BY ALI-AKBAR ((MOHTASHEMI-PUR)), THE FORMER IRANIAN MINISTER OF INTERIOR. THE EXECUTION OF THE OPERATION WAS CONTRACTED TO AHMAD ((JABRI'IL)), POPULAR FRONT FOR THE LIBERATION OF PALESTINE GENERAL COMMAND (PFLP-GC) LEADER, FOR A SUM OF 1,000,000 US DOLLARS. ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS OF THIS MONEY WAS GIVEN TO JABRI'IL UP FRONT IN DAMASCUS, SY, BY THE IRANIAN AMBASSADOR TO SY, MUHAMMAD HASSAN ((AKHARI)), FOR INITIAL EXPENSES. THE REMAINDER OF THE MONEY WAS TO BE PAID AFTER SUCCESSFUL COMPLETION OF THE MISSION. THE MISSION WAS TO BLOW UP A PAN AM FLIGHT THAT WAS TO BE ALMOST ENTIRELY BOOKED BY US MILITARY PERSONNEL ON CHRISTMAS LEAVE. THE FLIGHT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE A DIRECT FLIGHT FROM FRANKFURT, GE, TO NEW YORK, NOT PAN AM FLIGHT 103 WHICH WAS ROUTED THROUGH LONDON, UK. THE SUITCASE CONTAINING THE BOMB WAS LABLED WITH THE NAME OF ONE OF THE US PASSENGERS ON THE PLANE AND WAS INADVERTANTLY PLACED ON THE WRONG PLANE POSSIBLY BY AIRPORT GROUND CREW MEMBERS IN FRANKFURT. THE TERRORIST WHO LAST HANDLED THE BOMB WAS NOT A PASSENGER ON THE FLIGHT.
    2. (S/NOFORN) ALTHOUGH THE PAN AM FLIGHT ORIGINALLY TARGETED WAS NOT DESTROYED, MOHTASHEMI-PUR CONSIDERED THE CONTRACT FULFILLED AND ARRANGED FOR THE REMAINDER OF THE MONEY TO BE PAID TO JABRI'IL. IN LATE JANUARY OR EARLY FEBRUARY 1989, MOHTASHEMI-PUR WROTE A CHECK DRAWN ON THE IRANIAN CENTRAL BANK FOR 500,000 US
    SECRET
    NOFORN WNINTEL

    On the assumption it's genuine - ie not compiled by Vincent Cannistraro - the report does nothing to help Robert Fisk answer the question I posed above: if, as Fisk maintains, a PFLP-GC bomb with its barometric trigger was loaded aboard an aircraft in Germany, why didn't the bomb explode within 40 minutes of take-off from Frankfurt airport?

    ReplyDelete
  13. In this context:
    In the days before the catastrophe Mossad alerted the US (obviously the CIA) that an attack would be made against an American passenger flight departing from Frankfurt. Mr. Marquise refers to this in his book.

    ReplyDelete
  14. PS:
    It is my guess, that this alert is exactly the document(s) which were refused to be presented in court due to "security reasons".

    ReplyDelete
  15. I read Robert Fisk's article and alighted on the same passage highlighted by Patrick Haseldine (who I am surprised to find myself in agreement with). Fisk wrote "the bag that contained the bomb was actually put onto the baggage carousel for checking in by this passengers Lebanese handler".

    As anybody who has ever travelled will know you don't check in your luggage by putting it onto a carousel!

    ReplyDelete