January 7 2021 — On December 21 2020 (the 32nd anniversary of the Lockerbie tragedy), the US DoJ announced new charges against a third former Libyan intelligence operative for his role in the destruction of Pan Am Flight 103. I this final post, I summarize my conclusions and I will also take this opportunity to tell a story about MASUD that has far-reaching consequences. Follow us on Twitter: @INTEL_TODAY
RELATED POST: Four Years Ago — Dead Man Diary : Sarkozy 2007 Presidential Election Campaign Funded by Gaddafi [UPDATE : Prosecutors seek 4-years prison term for French President. Gaddafi strong man Abdullah Senussi wanted Sarkozy pardon for UTA. Now, he is in the US cross-hairs for Lockerbie.]
Lockerbie — Three Decades of Lies: J’Accuse…!
To make it easier for the readers to retrieve various chapters of my book, I have created a special page “Lockerbie” where all the links to the chapters will be listed with a brief description. You can access that page directly as it appears at the far right of the top bar of this blog.
Lockerbie — Three Decades of Lies: J’Accuse…!
UPDATE (November 4 2021) — According to Libya’s foreign minister, a third suspect may be extradited to the United States in the near future.
Najla El-Mangoush told the BBC that “positive outcomes are coming” in the case of Abu Agila Mohammed Masud.
Ms El-Mangoush said the Libyan government “understands the pain and sadness” of the victims’ families but “needs to respect the laws”.
The US and Libya were collaborating on the case, she said, and it was progressing.
Mr Masud is a former Libyan intelligence official who is currently in a Libyan prison having been convicted on unrelated charges.
He has been charged in the US with terrorism-related crimes.
US officials claim he helped build the bomb which downed the aircraft, and set the timer.
US officials also say Mr Masud conspired with another Libyan intelligence official, Abdelbaset al-Megrahi. [BBC News — Lockerbie bombing: Libya could work with US on extradition]
Once again, this BBC piece is all about opinions (“Maybe, ‘it’ was Iran according to some relatives…”), and entirely fact-free.
If these ‘journalists’ only had read the FBI affidavit, they would realize at once that there are serious issues with the new indictment.
Contrary to the statement made by FBI agent Rachel F. Otto, the confession of Abu Agila Masud is NOT “corroborated by evidence gathered by Scottish and American investigators in the years following the bombing, as well as evidence gathered and provided by other countries.”
To be clear, this statement is totally incorrect. As I have explained in this series, these new charges fully contradict the initial indictment as well as some of the facts which were established (by the CIA) even before the Lockerbie tragedy.
PS — Allow me to remind you that there is ZERO evidence of a bomb having caused the tragedy of Pan Am 103. I have summarized all my research on this subject in a single graphic.
I would argue that anyone who understands these data does not need to wait until at least 2026, and possibly much longer, to determine the real cause of the tragedy. It is plain obvious!
END of UPDATE
On December 21 2020 (15:30 GMT), Attorney General William Barr, Assistant Attorney General for National Security John Demers, and Acting U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, Michael Sherwin, announced new charges against a former Libyan intelligence operative.
The US DoJ believes that there is enough evidence to prosecute Abu Agela MASUD for his role in building the bomb that killed 270 individuals in the destruction of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland on Dec. 21, 1988.
I started this series with a post about the new story of the “Magic Suitcase”.
Initially, the FBI claimed that Megrahi brought it himself to Malta on December 20 1988.
Now they claim that Masud brought the infamous SAMSONITE suitcase on December 14 1988.
But there is one problem. The FBI claims that Masud arrived in Malta on December 14 1988, bizarrely also described as “three or four days” before the tragedy.
At the same time, the indictment alleges that Masud was met by Megrahi at the airport.
That is of course impossible as — according to the FBI’s own TIMELINE — Megrahi was not in Malta from December 9 to December 17 1988.
In the second post of this series, I reviewed the information available regarding Abu Agela Masud.
And I concluded that post with a simple question for the FBI & CIA.
The CIA station in Malta had a Libyan agent — Majid Giaka — keeping them informed of all arrivals and departures of ESO officers to and from Luqa airport in Malta.
Yet, Giaka never reported the arrival of MASUD on December 14 1988. Why on earth not?
In the 3rd post, I pointed out the indisputable fact that the FBI Timeline has been falsified to support the new charges. There is no denying it.
TWO entries in that TIMELINE have clearly been fabricated.
December 9, 1988 — MASUD traveled from Malta to Tripoli
December 14, 1988 — MASUD traveled from Tripoli to Malta
Obviously, the FBI falsified the TIMELINE to make it ‘compatible’ with MASUD’s confession.
In the 4th and last post, I looked at the comments of MASUD regarding the IED he claimed to have built.
According to MASUD’s confession, he did not conceal the SEMTEX and the infamous MST-13 timer inside a TOSHIBA radio.
If true, that would imply that the initial evidence has been fabricated. That much has always been rather obvious.
And now, let me tell you a funny story…
When did GIAKA meet MASUD in Malta?
According to FBI “STAR” witness Majid GIAKA, MEGRAHI brought the primary suitcase to Malta on December 20 1988.
GIAKA made a few other claims regarding this event.
He said that MASUD had traveled with MEGRAHI who introduced him (GIAKA) to MASUD during a discussion they had outside the airport.
After GIAKA had been transferred to the US, he was shown a few pictures and he was asked to point to MASUD. At that time (1991), Giaka did not even know that MASUD was a black man!
GIAKA could not pick MASUD’s picture. In fact, Giaka simply never met MASUD.
Lockerbie Trial (Page 6933)
Q Well, you were shown a picture of him in
17 1991. We can see that at page 100. BBB, Masud,
18 Abouagela, CW, cooperating witness, and that is you,
19 did not recognise the person in the photograph.
20 For the simple reason you were never
21 introduced to him. You never met him; isn’t that
23 A I told you that I saw the person two
24 years before. Just because I didn’t recognise him in
25 the picture, I wouldn’t necessarily remember his
2 Q Well, let’s look at what you said about
3 this incident to some other people. If we go to
4 Production Number 859, and page 16. Let’s see what you
5 had to say about it to the Scottish police in a
6 statement that we know you gave in January of 1992.
7 The foot of page 16, please.
8 I cannot remember where I first saw Lamen. It
9 was either as he came out of immigration or at the
10 carousels. I saw that Baset was with Lamen and two
11 other Arabs or Libyans. One of them was a black —
12 Next image, please.
13 — Libyan, and the other was either a Libyan
14 or an Arab. I walked up to them, and I shook hands
15 with all four. I cannot recall if Lamen introduced me
16 to them or I just shook hands with them. It could even
17 have been Baset who introduced me to them. Some time
18 later I learned that the black Libyan was a member of
19 the technical administration of the JSO.
20 Did you say that to the police?
21 We can take the image off the screen now.
22 Did you say it to the police?
23 A If it is in the statement, or if in the
24 police’s records, then I must have said it. But maybe
25 this was a different visit, because Abdelbaset came to
1 Malta on various occasions.
But maybe this was a different visit? You better believe it. That visit occurred in early October 1988 and that visit had nothing to do with Lockerbie whatsoever.
And once again, Giaka was not at the airport to witness that visit…
By the way, who gave a picture of MASUD to the FBI? How come they had a picture, but he was a ghost? Why did MASUD become suddenly a bomb-maker when he was known to the CIA as a Telecom expert?
Intel Today Conclusion
Just minutes after Bill Barr had explained the new charges, people had already made up their mind regarding this extraordinary story.
Today, no one has time for reading, studying and/or thinking. Most people only have time for talking. Mostly nonsense…
For those who believe that Libya is responsible for Lockerbie, it was the triumph of Justice, as this editorial makes it very clear.
“Last week marked the end of Barr’s second act leading the DOJ. To say the least, he has not always behaved honorably in the position. But his final acts — flatly rebutting Donald Trump’s anti-democratic nonsense and bringing a terrorist who long evaded consequences to justice — have been his noblest ones.”
For those who would like to blame Iran for Lockerbie — without a shred of evidence — this was a parody of Justice.
Aamer Anwar — Megrahi’s lawyer — immediately gave one of his usual ‘grandstanding’ press conferences during which he made the most ridiculous statement about the FBI’s affidavit.
What he said was not just incorrect. It was the exact opposite of what is actually written in the affidavit! Who has time for reading? And this clown expects to be taken seriously?
In a letter to the Lord Advocate, the Justice for Megrahi campaigners wrote:
“We, and many other commentators, consider the statements made by Mr Barr and others, and the contents of the affidavit, to be prejudicial to the Megrahi family’s appeal, and that had they been made in Scotland they would have been deemed to be in contempt of court.”
That has not worked exactly as planned. This letter was so convincing… that the Lord Advocate now wants to prosecute MASUD himself! Good luck with that…
In truth, none of these people are actually thinking. The fact is that a serious analysis of the affidavit shows that the new charges could be highly problematic.
In her affidavit, FBI agent Rachel F. Otto writes:
“I have also determined, from my review of other evidence, and speaking with other investigators from Scotland and the FBI, that MASUD’s confession is corroborated, as laid out in greater detail below, by evidence gathered by Scottish and American investigators in the years following the bombing, as well as evidence gathered and provided by other countries.”
This statement is totally incorrect. As I have explained in this series, these new charges fully contradict the initial indictment as well as some of the facts which were established even before the Lockerbie tragedy.
Just one question. Was the CIA even consulted regarding the drafting of this document?
Former Senior Libyan Intelligence Officer and Bomb-Maker for the Muamar Qaddafi Regime Charged for The December 21, 1988 Bombing of Pan Am Flight 103
US DoJ Website : Former Senior Libyan Intelligence Officer and Bomb-Maker for the Muamar Qaddafi Regime Charged for The December 21, 1988 Bombing of Pan Am Flight 103
AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF A CRIMINAL COMPLAINT
LOCKERBIE — Analysis of the New Indictment [UPDATE : Libyan 3rd Suspect to be extradited to the U.S.]