Press reease for tonight’s Channel 4 News Lockerbie report

There follows the text of a press release issued this afternoon by Channel 4 News. I shall be releasing the documents upon which the report is based on this blog at 7.30 pm.

REVEALED:

Secret CIA testimony identifies true Lockerbie mastermind

Strictly Embargoed: 6.00pm Friday 20 December 2013

Please credit Channel 4 News with all content used

Documents released for the first time today reveal that both high-level Syrian officials and the CIA independently stated that a Syrian-based Palestinian group, not Libya, was responsible for the Lockerbie bombing.

An exclusive report to be broadcast on Channel 4 News reveals that a deep cover CIA agent was told by up to 15 high-level Syrian officials, and the CIA itself, that a Syrian-based Palestinian group, rather than Libya, was responsible for Lockerbie.

The documents which will feature in tonight’s programme, were made in two US court depositions by CIA agent Dr Richard Fuisz in late 2000 and early 2001.

Fuisz stated that in 1989 he was briefed by the CIA that the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command had carried out the bombing. More importantly, he added that, between 1990 and 1995, 10 to 15 senior Syrian officials also told him that the group was responsible. He said that the officials interacted with the PFLP-GC’s leader, Ahmed Jibril, ‘on a constant basis’ and that he was the mastermind behind the bombing.

Fuisz gave a deposition at the request of defence lawyers for Abdelbaset al-Megrahi and Lamin Fhimah, who were, at the time, on trial for the bombing. However, the revelations came too late to be used at the trial, which ended within days of the second hearing. Three unnamed CIA officers and a US department of justice lawyer were present throughout the hearings, ensuring that Fuisz was prevented from answering many of the questions.

The PFLP-GC were the original prime suspects in the bombing. Declassified US intelligence documents claim that the group was paid by the Iranian government to avenge the 290 lives lost when Iran Air flight 665 was accidentally shot down by a US battleship of over the Persian Gulf a few months before Lockerbie. Members of the PFLP-GC were arrested in West Germany two months before Lockerbie. During the raids the police recovered a Toshiba radio-cassette player containing a barometric bomb. Forensic investigators determined that the Lockerbie bomb had also been contained in a Toshiba radio-cassette player.

The transcripts of the hearings, and related documents, are being released by Scotland’s Shame author John Ashton, who found them earlier this year in the Libyans’ legal files. Mr Ashton has been involved a Channel 4 News item about the new evidence, which will be broadcast tonight.

Mr Ashton said today: ‘This evidence is yet another indication that the real Lockerbie bombers got away and that Abdelbaset al-Megrahi was wrongly convicted. The British and American governments declared in 1991 that Libya was solely responsible for the bombing, yet for years after senior Syrians were saying that the PFLP-GC was responsible. It seems it was an open secret that the real bombers lay outside Libya.’

 

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

More on tonight’s Channel 4 News Lockerbie report

The following text has just appeared on the Channel 4 News website:

New documents reveal that both high-level Syrian officials and the CIA independently stated that a Syrian-based Palestinian group, not Libya, was responsible for the Lockerbie bombing.

An exclusive report to be broadcast on Channel 4 News at 7pm reveals that a deep cover CIA agent was told by up to 15 high-level Syrian officials, and the CIA itself, that the Syria-based group was involved.

The documents which will feature in tonight’s programme were made in two US court depositions by CIA agent Dr Richard Fuisz in late 2000 and early 2001. Fuisz stated that in 1989 he was briefed by the CIA that the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command had carried out the bombing.

More importantly, he added that, between 1990 and 1995, ten to 15 senior Syrian officials also told him that the group was responsible.
He said that the officials interacted with the PFLP-GC’s leader, Ahmed Jibril, “on a constant basis” and that he was the mastermind behind the bombing.
Fuisz gave a deposition at the request of defence lawyers for Abdelbaset al-Megrahi and Lamin Fhimah, who were, at the time, on trial for the bombing.
However, the revelations came too late to be used at the trial, which ended within days of the second hearing.
Three unnamed CIA officers and a US department of justice lawyer were present throughout the hearings, ensuring that Fuisz was prevented from answering many of the questions.
The PFLP-GC were the original prime suspects in the bombing.
Declassified US intelligence documents claim that the group was paid by the Iranian government to avenge the 290 lives lost when Iran Air flight 665 was accidentally shot down by a US battleship of over the Persian Gulf a few months before Lockerbie.
Members of the PFLP-GC were arrested in West Germany two months before Lockerbie. During the raids the police recovered a Toshiba radio-cassette player containing a barometric bomb.
Forensic investigators determined that the Lockerbie bomb had also been contained in a Toshiba radio-cassette player.
The transcripts of the hearings, and related documents, are being released by Scotland’s Shame author John Ashton, who found them earlier this year in the Libyans’ legal files. Mr Ashton has been involved a Channel 4 News item about the new evidence, which will be broadcast tonight.
Mr Ashton said today: “This evidence is yet another indication that the real Lockerbie bombers got away and that Abdelbaset al-Megrahi was wrongly convicted.
“The British and American governments declared in 1991 that Libya was solely responsible for the bombing, yet for years after senior Syrians were saying that the PFLP-GC was responsible. It seems it was an open secret that the real bombers lay outside Libya.”
Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Major new Lockerbie revelations in Channel 4 News report to be broadcast tonight

Channel 4 News will tonight reveal major new evidence about the real Lockerbie bombers. The report, by Julian Rush, which I produced, will also include a critique of the Scottish authorities by two influential MSPs and an important interview with a senior former UK diplomat.

I shall be releasing the evidence on this blog when the programme airs.

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Libya’s justice minister speaks

Libya’s justice minister, Salah al-Marghani, has told ITV news that British and American authorities will be allowed to question Gadafy’s former intelligence chief Abdullah Sennusi about Lockerbie. He said: ‘What we are working on is finalising the arrangements for this as much as obtaining the evidence that’s available with the UK and US authorities. We all need to know the facts.’ You can view the relevant extract of the interview here and a further extract here.

Last year Mr Marghani told the Daily Telegraph ‘The [Lockerbie] matter was settled with the Gadafy regime. I am trying to work on the current situation rather than dig into the past.’ His deputy, Hameda al-Magery, went further saying, in effect, that the case was closed. It is interesting that at no stage in either clip does he state, either that Libya carried out the bombing, or that the new Libyan government has any significant evidence to hand over. Could it be that he choose his words very carefully?

 

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

The misreporting of Operation Bird

A number of press reports on Operation Bird, including the original one published by Exaro news and the one in today’s Scotsman, claim that the Bird investigation would have been central to Abdelbaset’s second appeal. This is completely untrue. The investigation was commissioned in the run up to Abdelbaset’s first appeal, but its findings were not used because the investigation failed to turn up any hard evidence. It was rejected by the SCCRC for the same reason and because some of the findings were contradicted by known facts. For these reasons it would have played no part in Abdelbaset’s second appeal. My reservations about the investigation are set out in yesterday’s blog post.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Operation Bird – some words of caution

Today’s media contains a number of articles about an investigation codenamed Operation Bird, which was carried out by a firm called Forensic Investigative Associates, on behalf of Abdelbaset’s defence team prior to his first appeal. The main articles, by the excellent John Davison, are published by Exaro news, and can he read here and here. There are follow up pieces in the People and Sunday Mail. The subject was originally covered by the Mail on Sunday on 16 August 2009.

The reports of the Operation Bird investigation claim, in essence, that the Lockerbie bombing was planned by a terrorist coalition led by the PFLP-GC and was carried out by Mohamed Abu Talb. Anyone wishing to familiarise themselves with the detail can find a summary in chapter 16 of the SCCRC’s statement reasons, which can be read here. The SCCRC concluded that many of Operations Bird’s central claims were ‘incapable of being regarded as credible and reliable by a reasonable court.’ However, the commission made no serious effort to investigate them.

The Bird investigators – former New York district attorney Jessica de Grazia and former deputy head of Scotland Yard’s Anti-Terrorist Branch Philip Corbett –undoubtedly had a couple good sources within terrorist groups close to the PFLP-GC. The question is, were those sources telling the truth?

Their main claim, that Lockerbie was the work of the PFLP-GC and fellow travellers, including Hezbollah, is very likely true. However, some of their specific claims strike me as unlikely, while others, I believe, are probably invented.

Among the most important of the unlikely claims is that Mohamed Abu Talb travelled to London by on a merchant ship, arriving in the early hours of 21 December 1988 (the day of the bombing), and organised the placing of the bomb on PA103 at Heathrow. The main reason for my scepticism is that on 1 November, less than a week after the Autumn Leaves raids in Germany, Abu Talb was arrested by the Swedish police and questioned about his activities over the previous weeks. Although released the same day, both he and the PFLP-GC must have feared that he was being monitored and therefore could not risk taking a central role in the bombing operation.

Another unlikely claim is that the bomb contained an MST-13 timer that Hezbollah had obtained from the Russian mafia. OK, not so much unlikely as just plain bizarre.

According to the Bird reports, Abu Talb attended two key planning meetings in Malta, the first on 13 March 1988 and the second, crucial one on 20 October 1988. It is not disputed that Abu Talb was in Malta from 19 to 16 October, however, there is good reason to doubt the March trip. The sources alleged that he entered Malta on a stolen Swedish passport in the name of Fred Edwards. When they received this information, Abdelbaset’s defence team instructed Swedish lawyers to investigate the claim. They made inquiries with the Swedish authorities, who said that only four people called Frederic Edwards and one called Freddie Edwards had ever been registered in the country. Three of the five had never held a Swedish passport, the fourth emigrated in 1953 and his passport expired in 1963, and the fifth was only four at the time of Lockerbie, so had a child’s passport. The passport could, of course, have been forged, but it seems most unlikely that either the forgers or Abu Talb would have chosen such a suspiciously incongruous name.

The primary cause of my scepticism is the claim that the crucial meeting in Malta on 20 October was attended by the leader of the PFLP-GC’s German cell, Hafez Dalkamoni. Dalkamoni was closely monitored by the German federal police, the BKA, throughout most of October, however, as the Bird investigators noted, there seems to be a break in the surveillance from the evening of the 19th until 22October. BKA and Scottish police reports record that on 20 and 21 October he called the PFLP-GC’s bomb-maker Marwan Khreesat in Nuess and fellow group member Bassam Radi from unknown locations. Maybe, then, he was in Malta – or maybe not.

Dalkamoni was last observed by the BKA meeting Bassam Radi at 18.10 on 19 October at the railway station in Giessen. Giessen is close to Frankfurt, which is where he would need to be if he was flying to Malta. However, evidence buried in the translated BKA files suggests that he never left Frankfurt.  The files show that when the BKA searched his car they found a ticket dated 20 October 1988 for the Atelier X-Hot Maxi porn cinema in Frankfurt. It had the number 063336 printed on it. They showed the ticket to the cinema staff, who said that the number indicated that it had been issued between 10.30 and 14.00. That would, of course, leave him time to get to Malta, if there was a flight, however, the ABC world airlines timetable, which was a Crown production at trial, shows that the only direct flight on a Thursday (the 20th was a Thursday) departed at 09.00 and the only indirect one at 10.15 (arriving 14.55). A further reason to doubt the Bird account is that Khreesat told the FBI that Dalkamoni arrived back in Neuss on the late morning of 21 October. Khreesat was a German intelligence mole, so was hardly likely to cover up for Dalkamoni.

The Bird investigation’s sources reported that the bomb was flown from Cyprus to Heathrow by two of Abu Talb’s in-laws from the Moughrabi family, possibly the brothers Ahmed and Mohamed. As was revealed at Abdelbaset’s trial, four people called Moughrabi flew from Cyprus to London on 21 December on Cyprus Airlines flight CY1634. Could they have included the brothers? No, because the flight manifest shows that two of them were women and the other two children.

Detail aside, there is another, more important, reason to treat the Bird claims with caution. Terrorist sources are, by their nature very tricky: anyone who is prepared to take up armed struggle for their cause is unlikely to have qualms about telling a few fibs to investigators in order to serve their ideological or personal agendas. (The personal agendas might include self enrichment. One of the Bird reports states that one of the sources, codenamed Ivan, had been paid as an “operative to develop critical intelligence.” The report does not specify who made the payment.)

Why should we trust the claims of the Bird sources any more than we should trust those of Mobdi Goben, Tunayb, Atef Abu Bakr and any other former terrorists who claim to have inside knowledge of the bombing? The answer is that we shouldn’t, especially as their accounts contain numerous factual conflicts.

It wouldn’t surprise me if the Bird sources were engaged in a classic disinformation exercise: telling a story that was essentially true, but lacing it with details that were demonstrably false in order to discredit the whole story. It wouldn’t be the first time that investigators had been led into a wilderness of mirrors.

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Nelson Mendela’s message to Megrahi

Nelson Mandela visited Abdelbaset al-Megrahi in Barlinnie prison on 10 June 2002. Here is Abdelbaset’s account of the visit and below it a photo of the two men together and one of the inscription that Mr Mandela wrote in an Arabic version of his book Long Road to Freedom, which he gave to Abdelbaset:

Three months after my transfer to Barlinnie, Nelson Mandela kept his promise to visit me. That the world’s most respected statesman should again take the trouble to demonstrate his solidarity gave me a great lift. We chatted for sometime, mainly about the unjust guilty verdict. Having spent 27 years imprisoned on Robben Island, the agonies of prison life were etched into his soul. He asked me about my living conditions, the standard of my food and my bed, clearly aware of the huge importance of those things to a prisoner’s wellbeing. Before he left I introduced him again to my family, who thanked him and presented him with a bouquet of flowers. I was allowed to take photographs of him in the reception area and he signed my Arabic version of his book Long Walk to Freedom, which describes his prison years. In it he wrote: ‘To Comrade Megrahi, Best wishes to one who is in our thoughts and prayers continuously. Mandela.’
Following the meeting he held a press conference, in which he declared: ‘Megrahi is all alone. He has nobody he can talk to. It is a psychological persecution that a man must stay for the length of his long sentence all alone.’

Mandela photo 5

Mandela inscription 3

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

A G-Man rewrites history

I have just read Three Sisters Ponds: My Journey from Street Cop to FBI Special Agent – from Baltimore to Lockerbie, Pakistan and Beyond, by Phillip B J Reid, (or, at least, chapter 12, which charts his involvement in the Lockerbie case). Reid was one of the main FBI agents assigned to the Lockerbie investigation and spent a lot of time conducting inquiries in Malta with the Scottish police. It is a remarkable work not least for the number of factual error and distortions that it contains.

At p.144 he states that Abdelbaset and Lamin Fhimah were partners in a Maltese travel agency. The agency in question, Medtours, was in fact owned by Lamin and his Maltese friend Vincent Vassallo, and Abdelbaset had no role in it. The original indictment against the two Libyans claimed that Medtours was a JSO front. Reid makes no mention of the fact that, shortly before the end of the trial, the Crown dropped the allegation for lack of evidence, no doubt because the only person to make the claim was the money grabbing fantasist – and the FBI’s star witness – Magid Giaka.

At p149-50 Reid describes how Tony Gauci picked out Abdelbaset’s photograph on 15 February 1991, and in doing so completely re-writes history. He states that Gauci chose the photo, but said that the man who bought the clothes “was about 10 years older” than the one depicted in the photo. What Gauci in fact said was that the man would have to look 10 years or more older. Moreover, he was clear that the photo showed someone in their thirties, which meant that the clothes purchaser was at least in his forties. As Reid must know, but omits to mention, Abdelbaset was 36 at the time of the clothes purchase.

To make matters worse, Reid goes on to state “we later determined that the passport photo in question was about 10 years old.” This is complete nonsense. As Reid recounts, the photo was obtained by the CIA “from one of their overseas counterparts.” Other evidence confirms that the counterparts in question were the Swiss. The photo had been used by Abdelbaset for two Swiss visa application, which were dated 11 July 1988 and 16 December 1988.

Most outrageously, Reid states: “Gauci went on to say that the person in the photo had thick hair while the man who had come into the shop was thinning on top.” As Reid must have known at the time of writing, Abdelbaset was thinning on top. It seems that he is inviting us to infer that in the years between the photo being taken and the clothes purchase Abdelbaset had lost a lot of his hair. Nice theory, but completely at odds with the facts: Gauci had consistently described the clothes purchaser as having a full head of hair and the only recorded comment he made about hair on the 15 February was that the man in the photo’s was perhaps a bit longer than the clothes purchaser’s. Nowhere does Reid acknowledge that Gauci also consistently described the purchaser as 6 feet tall, around 50 years old heavily built and dark skinned, ie completely different to Abdelbaset.

At p.152-3 Reid writes that the FBI and Scottish police were able to view passenger manifests for every flight in and out of Malta during the critical timeframe, except for those operated by Libyan Arab Airlines. He claims that, with the help of the Maltese police, they visited the LAA office at Luqa airport and surreptitiously searched the records, only to find that the records for the flights in the days of interest were missing. “It was obvious”, he writes, “that the records had been deliberately removed to keep us from finding out who was on LAA flights in and out of Malta on the days surrounding the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103.” Although Reid doesn’t say when this took place, as the book gives a broadly chronological account of the investigation, and as the previous page refers to events on 18 April 1991, it is very likely that it was after that date. The key flight in question was LAA flight LN174, which Abdelbaset took from Malta to Tripoli on the day of the bombing. The suggestion that the investigators were unable to access the flight’s passenger manifest is complete rubbish. A statement by DC Brian McManus (S3070FZ) describes how Inspector Godfrey Scicluna of the Maltese Police handed the manifest to him on 20 January 1991. DCI Harry Bell, who worked closely with Reid throughout the Maltese investigation showed the manifest to witnesses at Luqa airport on 18 & 19 February 1991 (statement S2632BN).

Pages 154-162 deal with Giaka, who is referred to only by his codename of Puzzle Piece. Reid explains that this name was coined “because he provided the missing pieces to the Pan Am Flight 103 investigation.” He adds: “It was clear that he was honest, almost to a fault.” That, of course, was not the CIA’s assessment of Giaka, rather his handlers described him as a shirker, whose primary interest was in getting the agency to pay for sham surgery in order to fake an injury so he could dodge military service. Nowhere in the chapter does Reid acknowledge that Giaka failed to implicate Abdelbaset and Lamin in the bombing until he had fled Libya and was desperate for asylum in the US. Neither does he acknowledge that, armed with the CIA’s cables on Giaka, defence counsel were able to destroy him in the witness box, and that the judges said that they considered him to be neither credible nor reliable.

Reid is at his most interesting when describing the role of the CIA in the investigation. It was the CIA, he says, who told the FBI that Abdelbaset sometimes used the cover name Abdusamad. More importantly, it was the agency who encouraged him to investigate the Libyans when the Scottish police were still pursuing the PFLP-GC. Reid describes how, in August 1990, he wrote a memo to his superiors, which argued the case that the Libyans were responsible. He gave a copy to his “CIA partners in Malta” even though he had been told by his superiors not to work with the agency. He writes that the CIA partners “reviewed the document and wholeheartedly agreed with my conclusions.” He then describes how he worked with them to develop potential leads, and how they eventually gave him the names of Abdelbaset and Lamin.

Reid confirms that, with his full knowledge and blessing, the CIA tapped the phone of Mohammed Abu Talb’s associate Abdelsalem Abu Nada. He also describes how the agency failed to remove the bugging device, which Abu Nada discovered and handed to the authorities, resulting in the Maltese government suspending the investigation for two months.

Undoubtedly the book’s most interesting claim is that there was evidence that Abu Talb was in Malta on 9 December 1988. This almost coincides with the date upon which the clothes purchase occurred, according to the Crown (7 December). More remarkably still, Reid writes: “We determined through passenger manifests and Maltese embarkation/disembarkation records that Talb had visited the island during the critical period around December 21, 1988.” According to the evidence explored at trial, there was nothing to indicate that Abu Talb was in Malta after 26 October 1988. If true, Reid’s claims are hugely important and the corresponding evidence should have been disclosed to the defence. However, given his appalling grasp of the facts elsewhere in the chapter, that’s a big ‘if’.

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

A lord advocate writes … almost

On 3 October Jim Swire and I wrote to the lord advocate, Frank Mulholland QC, to ask three simple but very important questions. We have just received the response below from the head of the Crown Office’s serious and organised crime division, Lindsey Miller. Eagle-eyed readers will note that it fails to answer any of our questions.

Dear Dr Swire and Mr Ashton

Thank you for your open letter of 3 October to the Lord Advocate. He has asked me to reply on his behalf.

The Lord Advocate is well aware of his duties as a public prosecutor. As the Crown has stated repeatedly, the only appropriate forum for the determination of guilt or innocence is the criminal court.

The criminal investigation remains live, and the Crown will not make any public comment about the nature of that investigation.

Yours sincerely

 

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Released today: the forensics files

I am today releasing a second batch of important documents, most of which were withheld from Abdelbaset’s lawyers. All concern the forensic evidence and give a very different picture to that which the Crown presented to the trial court and the wider public. There are ten documents in all. The first five can be read here, along with explanatory notes, and the second five here. My publisher, Birlinn has today issued the following press release:

Newly released documents show that police and prosecutors were aware of deep flaws in Crown case before Abdelbaset al-Megrahi’s trial for the Lockerbie bombing. The documents, which prosecutors had kept secret, directly contradict crucial trial testimony of the Crown’s lead forensic expert and fatally undermine the prosecution case.

Three of the documents concern the fragment of circuit board, known as PT/35b, which was allegedly from the bomb’s timer. Easily the most important physical evidence against Megrahi, the Crown alleged that it was from a batch of 20 timers that were supplied to Libya by Swiss company Mebo. The papers show that the Crown, police and forensic expert Allen Feraday were all aware of a crucial metallurgical difference between the fragment and the circuit boards used in the 20 timers. This disparity proved that the fragment could not have originated from one of the timers.

The papers, which are being released by Scotland’s Shame author John Ashton, also show that:

  • Feraday privately harboured doubts about a crucial analysis conducted by the Crown’s other lead forensic expert, Dr Thomas Hayes.
  • Feraday successfully urged the police to prevent tests that might have challenged his own conclusions about the bomb.
  • Both he and Hayes were chronically overburdened by other casework.
  • The police bitterly mistrusted Feraday’s American opposite number Tom Thurman.

Mr Ashton said: ‘These documents tear the heart out of the Crown’s forensic case. They also raises serious questions about the neutrality of the most important forensic witness. The Crown’s failure to disclose them to the defence is nothing short of scandalous. Such failures underline why the Scottish government must order a public inquiry in to the case.”

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment