Lockerbie, Libya, and who?

Everybody knows the Libyans were behind the Lockerbie bombing. After all, they were convicted in a court of law. And the Libyans paid compensation – you don’t do that if you are not involved.

Maybe. And maybe not.

Some of those closely involved in the judicial process believe that there was never enough relevant, concrete evidence to convict those who were in the dock. Megrahi’s release just before his appeal was, some said, indicative of a deal which included some cover up. What was the cover up about? Was there a deal done for oil?

Those of us who might be classed as amateur observers wondered if there were something foul and nasty that the authorities – US or British or both – wanted to keep from being aired at the appeal. Something that was, at the very least, embarrassing.

The Herald has an amazing article with a piece of news which fits slam, bang, right on target.

How UK Government hid secret Lockerbie report

(Here’s a general rule of thumb I have: if the government doesn’t want me to read something, or know about it, then I want to read it and know about it. I want to know why they don’t want me knowing something. For example, I had no interest in Spycatcher till it was banned.)

The article continues (with my added emphasis):

The highly classified document, which has never even been aired in public or shared with the courts, originally came from Jordan and indicates that a Palestinian terrorist group was involved in the bombing that killed 270 people – something the UK Government has vehemently denied.

The UK Government has gone to considerable lengths to prevent details of the document – which casts further doubt on the safety of the conviction of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al Megrahi – being published by The Herald.

It has threatened legal action to stop publication of the newspaper and asked the paper to sign up to a court-approved gagging order.

Our decision to publish details of the document, which was obtained by the Crown Office but never shown to the defence team, will prove highly embarrassing to the Crown, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and the Office of the Advocate General, whose lawyers have worked tirelessly to prevent it ever being even discussed in public.

The document incriminates the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine – General Command (PFLP-GC) in the Lockerbie bombing.

The PFLP-GC were the original suspects in the investigation into the biggest terrorist atrocity ever to have been committed in mainland Britain. However, by 1991 police and prosecutors were entirely focused on Libya. Since then politicians and the investigating authorities have denied the possibility of their involvement, instead blaming the whole atrocity on Libya.

To summarize: there was a report which blamed a Palestinian terrorist organization for Lockerbie. Those suspicions were cast aside. The report was hidden.

This is not news if you have been closely following the Lockerbie story. Unfortunately, like in so many other cases, most people follow the headlines and the misdirection much of that generates.

Meantime, there are still so many questions, not least: why were the PFLP-GC removed as suspects? If there was no evidence against the PFLP-GC, disclosing the information to the defense would not have harmed the prosecution case. The reasonable conclusion is that there was evidence. (And since there was so little evidence against the Libyans, that was a problem.)

The excellent Private Eye report – a bargain buy which everyone should buy and read – sets out some of the evidence against the PFLP-GC (presumed to be acting for Iran as revenge for the shooting down of an Iranian Airbus). It also provides an amazing political, military, and intelligence background to the move from focusing on the PFLP-GC to the Libyans. (Incidentally, it’s believable that the Libyans would pay to prevent a Palestinian terror group being brought in to the limelight. And since we certainly do not know the whole truth, it’s also possible that the Libyans were involved.)

So many questions.