[This is the heading over a recent post by Michael Meacher MP on his blog. It reads as follows:]
An international corruption scandal is fast brewing with potentially explosive significance for the reputation of the US. The lawyers representing Abdelbaset al-Megrahi, the Libyan convicted of murdering 270 people in the bombing of the Pan Am flight 103 in 1988, have just published on-line the documents which they would have used for his appeal, had not Megrahi withdrawn his appeal last month after a deal was struck to release him on compassionate grounds since he has terminal prostate cancer. What the legal documents reveal is that the key prosecution witness, Tony Gauci, a Maltese shopkeeper, and his brother had been secretly given rewards of $3 million in a deal discussed by Scottish detectives and the US Government. Gauci had given the crucial evidence at the trial declaring that Megrahi had bought clothes later used in the suitcase that allegedly contained the Lockerbie bomb. No other evidence connected Megrahi to the bomb. Now for the first time these latest documents disclose that in 1989 the FBI told the Scottish police that they wanted to offer Tony Gauci "unlimited money" and $10,000 straightaway. The US Justice Department was also asked to pay a further £1 million to Gauci's brother who did not give evidence, but halped to identify the clothing and to "maintain the resolve of his brother". The implications of these revelations are sensational.
These secret payments were brought to light by the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission, with many references contained in the private diaries of the detectives involved, though not in their official notebooks. Other highly relevant evidence is made known for the first time by these documents. They disclose that in 23 police interviews before the trial Gauci gave contradictory evidence about the person buying the clothes, his age, appearance, and the date of purchase. Significantly also Gauci said the area's Christmas lights were not lit when the clothese were bought (stated to be 7 December), but the current Maltese High Commissioner to the UK, then the local MP, has insisted that the lights were switched on on 6 December. But the key pointer is the bribe. If Gauci was telling the truth, why did he have to be bribed, and his brother bribed too to shore him up?
It neve made sense for Libya to have carried out the Lockerbie atrocity. But it did for Iran. The US navy in the Gulf had just previously without provocation shot down an Iranian civil airliner carrying 290 passengers. For a year after the bombing Iran was universally suspected of the crime, but then the Americans suddenly asserted that they had new evidence that pointed to the Libyan connection. American concerns had shifted towards a Middle East coalition for the containment of Saddam Hussein whose ambitions threatened the US long-term interest in Middle East oil, and they didn't want a hostile and vengeful Iran to scupper their plans, so a scapegoat had to be quickly found. Gadaffi's Libya, with which the US had had several brushes in the mid 1980s (including a US air attack in 1986 aimed at killing Gadaffi), fitted the role nicely. That just left the small matter of having to concoct the necessary evidence, and it is the breathtaking corruptness of the US Government in fabricating this lie which is now being brought to light.