Thursday, December 10, 2009

ANOTHER CALL ON MALTA

ADMIT IT ALREADY!
[Pan Am 103 Series]
Adam Larson / Caustic Logic
December 11 2009


Note: The Following does not necessarily reflect the author's true views in all regards

The Status Quo
Two previous posts explained al Megrahi’s Malta-based plot to destroy Pan Am 103. First we witnessed the keen memory and staunch bravery of eyewitness Anthony Gauci, standing alone against an uncaring island subdued by Libyan barbarians. Next I chronicled the complete subjugation of Air Malta and its security operations at Luqa Airport, allowing the PA103 bomb to hurtle uncontrollably to Lockerbie. And finally, at the end of the second piece, I just started hinting at their infuriating denials after the fact that any such plot ever did pierce their magical force field.

It’s noteworthy that Air Malta has avoided the notoriety and bankruptcy that sunk Pan Am following this disaster. How, when their initial “failure” is what gave Pan Am its chance to fail as well? As usual in a world rife with anti-American plots, the true villain escapes unharmed, allowed to live and thrive, while the innocent passerby is shot to death. The distatsteful status quo is thus the Americans got their (little fish) bad guy, but lost a major airline, while the Libyans have paid up and admitted responsibility, while cynically denying responsibility, and all Malta had to do was keep quiet on its part. It’s a more than fair deal for the government in Velletta, and one should think they’d be grateful. And normally they act that way.

Demands of the Disgruntled
Some have agitated to upset that stasis, but so far the calls on Malta are quite one-sided, encouraging them to “clear their name” of the Lockerbie taint altogether. These pleas usually come from a small, well-known group of people who would like to de-blame Libya itself. Now if that doesn’t illustrate the axis of malice between Velletta and Triploi, nothing does.

Just in the last couple of months, Lockerbie trial “architect” and general grumpy gus Professor Robert Black piped up in late August. He opined “the Maltese government should be pressing very hard within the EU for an enquiry into Lockerbie,” and criticized the Scottish judges for accepting that Megrahi’s bag from Malta ever existed.

On 25 October that one UN guy, Köchler, that was at the trial and said some bad stuff about it, called for a Maltese probe of Gauci in particular: "If they are committed to the rule of law, the Maltese authorities should open their own investigation and interrogate Mr Gauci," One must wonder how much Gaddaffy is paying Herr Köchler to get at the hero of Silema like the lurking Libyans never were able to?

Never Enough Proof
The Maltese authorities have really done a great job “clearing their name” without the encouragement, but with it they went haywire. On 31 October the UK Daily Telegraph reported “Malta to investigate evidence of key Lockerbie witness.” This was based on an unnamed “Maltese legal official” who said “Tony Gauci is an area where we have to investigate more thoroughly and we are preparing for this. There was never enough proof, to be frank, on the circumstances of his evidence and there is pressure coming from many quarters on Malta to move to resolve the issue." There’s not enough proof in the world, apparently.

The following day, 1 November, the Justice Department specifically denied such preparations, disowning any comment that may have been made. However, their press release took the chance to repeat the infuriating claim that since 1988, the Maltese government has "always maintained the bomb which downed Pan Am flight 103 had not departed from Malta and ample proof of this was produced.” Oh, so now the mountain of proof of a Maltese-origin bomb, that’s “never enough,” is trumped by that tired old paperwork? It becomes clearer.

To top off this cowardly dodge, on the same day, Prime Mnister Gonzi affirmed their disinterest in Gauci. “Over the years we cooperated with every investigation,” he explained, which is technically true. But like the others, he ignores the terrorist plots hatched there that were uncovered by these efforts. “Our position,” he pronounced, “was always that Malta had nothing to do with the terrorist attack.” Well they did host the whole thing except the explosion, so presumably he means nothingconsciously to do with it. But this too is in doubt. When asked if his decision not to re-question Gauci was due to pressure from the U.S., Gonzi replied “it is totally untrue.” Indeed, their own embarrassment seems more at stake than America’s in again contrasting Tony’s sharp eye with the complacent approach everyone else in Malta takes towards the Libyans.

I’d like to quote Stuart Henderson, that proper Scottish copper who led the whole police investigation of Lockerbie. He wasn’t specifically referring to any of the Maltese vomiting this vile venom above when he spoke about Megrahi's release in August. But those who doubt the official story, as most Maltese seem to, “make my blood boil” and are “an insult to our police officers … an insult to the Americans, to the Germans, to the Swiss and the Maltese officers.” That’s right, you guys are slandering your own who helped prove just exactly how the Libyans killed 270 with a bomb your lame-ass airport just “missed” and somehow you can’t just admit it.

Another Call and Surely Not the Last
But it didn’t end there, as proved by a 29 November letter, urging Malta to “defend itself,” issued by the Orwellianly-named “Justice for Megrahi campaign.” The letter was signed by, among others, British MPs Tom Dalyell and Teddy Taylor, plus Noam Chomsky - all outspoken Leftist weirdos who argue that Megrahi is an innocent little lamb framed by “the West” (i.e. – the New World Order, aka “Illuminati”). Professor Chomsky, not surprisingly, called the proper conviction based on proof of a terrorist mass murderer "a remarkable illustration of the conformism and obedience of intellectual opinion in the West". Oh, Chomsky… yawn-skip-yawn-skip-yawn-skip… "I think the trial was very seriously flawed,” he further opined to the Times of Malta, “including crucially the alleged role of Malta. There is every reason to call for a very serious independent inquiry." Certainly Triploi has the roster for it drafted already, and a few more bought souls from now we might see Justice turned on its head, to Chomsky’s delight.

And finally to quote again then Minister of Home Affairs, Tonio Borg, quite a while back in early 2000: "We have no proof that these two Libyan suspects were involved in anything illegal in Malta regarding this case, particularly the placing of this bomb on Air Malta Flight ... 180.” I had hoped he would be fired since then, especially after the trial at camp Zeist shortly put the lie to such claims. Rather, he’s prospered just like Air Malta; since then he’s been Minister of Foreign Affairs and of Justice (ironically), and is currently honored with the titles Deputy Leader of the Nationalist Party, leader of the House of Representatives, and Deputy Prime Minister. Would Germany have been tolerated promoting its holocaust deniers like this?

The Final Call: Pull Malta Back From the Dark Side
Clearly this talk of a UN inquiry, under Libyan control, torturing Tony Gauci into recanting his story, and all the rest, has got to stop. That is hardly worth mentioning outright it's so elemental. But while we’re at it, we must ask if this tiny, easily manipulated island nation was really just used by the Libyans against its will? Or have they been swayed to the dark side all along? The petitioners seem to bet on the latter.

Historically, the Maltese are notoriously soft on Islam, and perhaps by now sympathetic to the anti-American Jihad. At the very least they’re likely to slide that way if Libya’s evil grip is allowed to continue unaddressed. Therefore, let’s make it more explicit and issue a new international call on Malta to “Admit it! You're Tripoli's little pet and happy about it!” Sign the informal petition by leaving a comment below. We are all Americans now, worldwide, and we will get our perps, be they Libyan, Maltese, and also otherwise. The case is open!

I specifically speak to Brits – Scots, Welsh, English, Etc. It must be asked if all this was caused by the UK letting go of the island’s hand in this world crowded with evil. Recall that after you freed Malta from the Freemason French, you cared for them and left your names all over, until you set them loose in the hippie 1960’s. But as usual permissiveness breeds wickedness and by 1988, planes were falling on the UK itself due to losing Malta. If those people can’t behave responsibly and face up to the consequences of their long dance with Libya, perhaps independence should be seriously re-considered.
---

10 comments:

Charles said...

This is a perfectly dreadful post

Michael Follon said...

Not only is this a dreadful post - it is short on facts and long on assumptions.

'But to many observers, including me, it seemed that the case presented by the prosecution was a very weak circumstantial one, and was further undermined by the additional prosecution concession that they had not been able to prove how the bomb that destroyed Pan Am 103 got into the interline baggage system and onto the aircraft.'

SOURCE: 'THE LOCKERBIE TRIAL AND APPEAL' by Robert Black Q.C.
http://knol.google.com/k/robert-black/the-lockerbie-trial-and-appeal/178khla0op77w/2.


Following the trial and verdict at Camp Zeist Granada Television broadcast a documentary in which it stated that the bomb that destroyed Pan Am 103 was initially loaded onto an Air Malta flight at Luqa Airport. Air Malta took out a libel action against Granada Television in the English courts. Granada Television reached an out of court settlement with Air Malta because it would have been able to show that there was no unaccompanied baggage on the Air Malta Flight KM 180 to Frankfurt. All baggage loaded at Luqa was claimed at Frankfurt and there was no transfer from the Air Malta flight to Pan Am 103A, the feeder flight for Pan Am 103 from Frankfurt to London Heathrow.

Frank said...

This is hardly dreadful, it is a welcome change from the bilge we have to read from the Libya shills. They have no shame and cannot be embarrassed by the facts. Thank you for your efforts to publish the truth, you are like a breath of fresh air.
Frank Duggan, President
Victims of Pan Am 103, Inc

Caustic Logic said...

This is hardly dreadful, it is a welcome change from the bilge we have to read from the Libya shills. They have no shame and cannot be embarrassed by the facts. Thank you for your efforts to publish the truth, you are like a breath of fresh air.
Frank Duggan, President
Victims of Pan Am 103, Inc

Frank, you truly get it and you are awesome. I appreciate your work and acute perception of the facts.

Caustic Logic said...

To Michael and Charles, it's good that you're so argumentative, but if you read it just a lttle more closely, or try to gather any context clues, your view may change.

That is, how friggin dumb an argument do I have to make before people realize "wait a minute, that's too dumb to be serious?" Skip the smart wordy tone and look at the info...

I think Mr. Duggan will have to put me on his shit list soon.

And also, the Granada lawsuit is decent evidence, but not the best, since it was settled out-of-court. The best evidence for no such bag is Air MAlta's careful records and the fact there's no evidence for it, aside from Bogomira Erac's locker souvenir printout. The official computer records just VANISHED it seems and that ain't right.

Check the thread I started at the JREF:
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=155657

Hope I haven't made you guys' shit list too.

Caustic Logic said...

Mr. Duggan - did you or did you not lose anyone you cared about in the crash on PA103? That is, are you a victim, or just the president of a victim's corporation, apparently designed to squeeze money from Libya? I only ask because I'm trying to understand your mindset and motives.

Thanks

Michael Follon said...

Adam Larson,

Having re-read the post as well as the two previous posts and following the URL to the thread at JREF which you supplied I can see that I initially over-reacted. Obviously I should have read them first instead of submitting a comment in isolation from the earlier posts.

Caustic Logic said...

Mr. Follon - no worries. It was supposed to be sort of disguised after all. Sarcasm announced doesn't work as well. I'm glad it worked at first, just sorry it kept working until after you typed. :)

baz said...

Actually the Granada TV documentary (as I recall a dramatisation starring Timothy West) was braodcast years before the Camp Zeist Trial and verdict and was mentioned in the 1994 documentary "The Maltese Double Cross".

Had it been broadcast after the trial Granada would have had a good defence to libel.

I think one ought to recognise that Granada lawyers made a commercial decision in not defending the action as I suspect Air Malta were more interested in an apology and a retraction that damages.

Caustic Logic said...

Exactly. It was a short-term commercial decision, based on the circumstances of the time. Case in point, the BBC Conspiracy Files showed just the same thing in 2008 and I didn't hear any protests then.

All the Granada lawsuit really demonstrates, as evidence, is that Air Malta are willing to step up and say "sorry, you're just wrong. 55 bags only." It is worth knowing, and I should have included it in these posts actually.

Oh, and I just realized that is an error:
"Following the trial and verdict at Camp Zeist Granada Television broadcast a documentary..."

This was all 1994 or prior (initial broadcast, settlement, hazy recall...). Thanks for catching that. And hey, it's Christmas. Happy day to you, Baz.