“Intel Today is really providing top-notch analysis that is hard to find anywhere else.”
Ulrich — Munich, Germany
September 27 2023 — Last week, I received a message from a reader of Intel Today. With his authorization, I have decided to share with you his comments and questions. I will address all these issues and a few more in the coming weeks. Stay tuned! Follow us on Twitter: @INTEL_TODAY
RELATED POST : One Year Ago — Lockerbie : Why I ruled out the bomb theory [Technical Analysis of the Debris Lines]
RELATED POST : On This Day — The Lockerbie DIA Memo (September 24 1989) [The Legend of The Iranian Payment]
RELATED POST : 3 Years Ago — Lockerbie – Three Decades of Lies: J’Accuse…! [Chapter XI : J’Accuse!]
RELATED POST : Lockerbie – Three Decades of Lies: J’Accuse…! [Chapter VIII : PT/35(b) — The Most Expensive Forgery in History]
“PT/35(b) was extremely, extremely dodgy. It was very, very suspicious. The way it suddenly appeared, embedded in a shirt collar, with the information on the page overwritten and changed, all police procedures were thrown out of the window.”
Reverend John Mosey
Here is the letter.
I recently discovered your fascinating (…) analysis proposing a no-bomb mechanical failure as explanation for the crash of Pan Am 103. I believe this analysis is a major advance over previous discussions and it deserves more attention. Some feedback and questions from my side:
1) I agree that existing theories have never been convincing. Libya never had a motive, Iran had some motive but it didn’t make a lot of sense, the CIA was involved in drug trafficking but why bomb an entire airplane?
2) I also believe that the timer fragment was a fake planted by the CIA to divert attention to Libya. I recently discovered Bill Cran made a documentary about this topic that apparently was never shown on TV. [Lockerbie – The Cover Up (Censored documentary by Bill Cran, 2019)]
3) Your hypothesis that the entire Semtex/suitcase/clothing evidence was planted is very intriguing. Have other Lockerbie researchers already commented on this?
4) The apparent mechanical weakness at Boeing-747 section 41/42 is also very intriguing. Are there any additional reports or experts who could confirm this?
5) TWA 800: Do you exclude an accidental US Navy missile during an exercise? I always thought this was the most likely scenario since there were several witnesses (not just Salinger). [The False Tale of TWA 800]
6) I’m not yet entirely convinced the US government would invent three cover-ups just to protect Boeing. In the case of the Boeing 737 MAX, a design failure was acknowledged after two crashes and the planes were grounded worldwide for almost two years.
7) Even so, if a crash occurs, the US government might try to blame it on somebody for political reasons. In 1988, the obvious choice was Iran, and later Libya.
At any rate, I believe your novel hypothesis deserves more attention. What about publishing it in a Scottish newspaper or on a website like Global Research or Covert Action Magazine?
Be patient. The truth will come out one day… The truth never dies.
PS — In the meanwhile, I encourage you to take this test : Do you have what it takes to be an Intelligence Analyst?
—
सत्यमेव जयते नानृतं
Truth alone triumphs; not falsehood.
Mundaka Upanishad (3.1.6)
REFERENCES
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 — Questions from a reader
“It is clear that the American authorities were keen to recover any items that may have belonged to (Major Charles – Chuck – Dennis) McKee in particular, which could be linked to their duties. It may well have been the case that certain items were not recorded in the normal manner to protect American interests.”
“Lockerbie X File”
Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission
Intel Today 
I’m with the Reverend on this one.
Yes, your theory deserves more attention.
LikeLike