MEBO: Hoping for the Truth? At least, some Truth?

A reader has recently written the following comment. I post it here because I believe that all of us agree with his wishes…

I  join the voices that sincerely hope and kindly request that Mr Bollier now provides full information with regard to these visits and all agreements or connections during this period.

Also, voluntary offer up information with regard to dates, any supporting documentation of any meetings and discussions.

After all, Mr Bollier, you are one of the main figures in this whole matter who has for many years publicly maintained an opposition as to what has been presented.

Respectfully, Mr Bollier, time is marching on and no-one is getting any younger, the families are now suffering over 25 years in to this whole thing.

Mr Bollier, in my view, the legal authorities are delaying any procedure you may wish to advance.

At the current rate, your good self will be over 100 years old to even attempt to visit any court in any land.

Unfortunately, the exact same mechanisms have been engaged within the institutional corrupt Scottish judicial system.

Mr Bollier, declare and provide everything you know. If there is one thing for certain, as night follows day, the truth will out.

Craig Murray – 10/09/2015

PS. Remind me when the Senegal Timer show up?

BollierPassportFeb88

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Bollier, Comment. Bookmark the permalink.

12 Responses to MEBO: Hoping for the Truth? At least, some Truth?

  1. PaulF says:

    Bollier’s travels

    Many thanks to Craig for his own detailed questioning and analysis of the evidence presented by Dr De Braekeleer to whom readers should also be very grateful for his detailed and painstaking research into the creation, life and times of the tiny bit of circuitry which came to be known as PT35(b).

    Following on from Craig’s questions to and about Mr Bollier, recent posting of travel documents on the blog relate to Bollier who is one of the most important figures in the whole Laockerbie case and raise further questions about what he has been up to.

    The latest of these documents is what seems to be a photocopy of pages 18 and 19 of Mr Bollier’s Swiss passport, number 5004134, (see posting for 16 September). The copied pages show a visa with entry and exit stamps for Libya. Unfortunately, I do not read Arabic, but the stamps seem to show that Mr Bollier entered Libya on 14 February 1988 and left on 18 February, 4 days later. The visa appears to have been issued on arrival in Libya (on 14 February), in which case Mr Bollier would have had to hold a Letter of Invitation or No Objection Certificate from the government of Libya, without which he would not have been allowed to board a flight to Libya (or to cross a land border if he came by car from, for example, Tunisia).

    The second travel document (posted on 9 September) is a copy of a Swissair ticket (ticket number 085 4433 860 045 6). This ticker was issued in Mr Bollier’s name by the Swissair office at what was then the upmarket Nova Park Hotel in Zurich. It’s now the Holiday Inn Crowne Plaza. The ticket was issued on 16 December 1988 for travel from Zurich to Tripoli on the direct Swissair flight SR228 on 18 December 1988, just three days before the Lockerbie bombing. Attentive readers may recall that the Nova Park (or Novapark) Hotel in Zurich is specifically mentioned in the original indictments agsint Megrahi and Fhima:

    You are Indicted at the instance of The Right Honourable THE LORD HARDIE, Her Majesty’s Advocate, and the charges against you are that:
    (1) between 1 January 1985 and 21 December 1988, both dates inclusive
    at the premises occupied by you ABDELBASET ALI MOHMED AL MEGRAHI and by the Libyan Intelligence Services, in Tripoli, Libya
    at a special forces training area, Sabha, Libya
    at the premises occupied by the firm MEBO AG
    at the Novapark Hotel, Zurich, Switzerland…… [Further locations and charges follow, culminating in]:
    ……..You did conspire together and with others to further the purposes of the Libyan Intelligence Services by criminal means, namely the use of explosive devices in the commission of acts of terrorism directed against nationals and the interests of other countries and in particular the destruction of a civil passenger aircraft and murder of its occupants …
    Mr Bollier’s ticket was bought using his (or someone else’s) American Express card (Number: 37580484006100 – the last check digit is missing) and he paid the full economy return fare of 1640 Swiss francs. It is also interesting that what is missing from the ticket is the passenger number record (PNR) which links a passenger’s ticket to their computerised reservation and booking history. It is usual to include the PNR, a 5,6 or 8 digit code made up of numbers and letters, on an air ticket and the lack of a PNR is often be regarded as suspicious and an indication of possible forgery or fraud.

    It appears that Mr Bollier stayed in Libya for two nights from 18 December to 20 December when he departed Tripoli on Air Malta flight KM 231 to Luqa airport in Malta, arriving in the early afternoon. He then stayed overnight in Malta left Luqa airport for Zurich the following day on the direct Air Malta flight KM200, departing Malta 0800 in 21 December 1988.

    So, Mr Bollier was checking in for an Air Malta flight at the same time and place as another Air Malta flight, KM 180 to Frankfurt, and a Libyan airlines flight to Tripoli, LN 147. We understand that Abdel Basset Al-Megrahi was checking in for the Libyan airlines flight at the same time and that the official version of the Lockerbie bombing would have us believe that the bomb was also being checked in for the Frankfurt flight KM 180.

    Mr Bollier checked in one piece of luggage weighing 19 kilos. This is a heavy suitcase for someone travelling alone and staying only three nights away. What was carrying from Libya and/or Malta?

    Was it just a fantastic coincidence that the official version of Lockerbie has it that the MST-13 timer attached to a bomb in a suitcase was being checked in for an Air Malta flight at precisely the same time that the maker of that timer, Mr Bollier, was checking in at the same place and at the same time for another Air Malta flight?

    As Criag has said: Mr Bollier, you have a lot of questions to answer.

    PaulF

    Like

  2. Craig says:

    Dear PaulF,

    Thank you for your kind words and I respect your viewpoint.
    As I noted and I believe – one of the obvious elephants in the room is Mr Bollier.
    I don’t mean that in a bad way but Mr Bollier has information but to date refuses to share that information.
    Possibly, Mr Bollier has been double crossed ?

    Who knows ?

    He thought he was so conniving that nobody else could be as bad as him.
    Well, NEWSFLASH – Government Agencies are even worst !
    This circumstance caught even Mr Bollier unaware.

    With regard to quoting the US Indictment as a factual document.
    During the hearing the indictment was changed.
    Apologies, but it is a work of fiction, it’s not even worth the paper it’s written on and please do not believe it at all.
    A quick read through of the information will confirm this.

    There are five [5] crime scenes / organisations worthy of Official Inquiry;
    1. RARDE lab Fort Halstead
    2. FBI lab Washington DC
    3. Scottish police
    4. Scottish Crown Advocate
    5. Scottish Judiciary and Scots Court System

    If you tell me the Libyans did it, the banana dealers in Panama could have done it.
    I don’t believe you.

    This is a link to the US Justice Dept papers under FOIA;
    https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=4&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CDMQFjADahUKEwiA7KnlyfvHAhVH_3IKHeJQCcY&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.justice.gov%2Fsites%2Fdefault%2Ffiles%2Fnsd%2Flegacy%2F2014%2F07%2F23%2FPanAm103-documents.pdf&usg=AFQjCNEZV_VxLEfkek_zWcfCseT4adeWIw

    Scroll through to the end of the link, particularly page 44 onwards.
    Note how worried the US was about the ‘Malta witness’ and how they were trying everything to ‘lawfully’ get to that witness.

    Tells it’s own story.
    Malta and Gauci = Weak link.

    Like

  3. Craig says:

    Apologies, read page 65 of 67 of the above link by
    Robert S Mueller III [the tird], US Assistant Attorney General.

    Like

  4. Craig says:

    I’ve just read page 66 again and fully realised what Robert S Mueller III [the tird], Assistant Attorney General of the United States was actually conveying.
    Lets call him the bag man.

    Such was the problem in Malta, this individual [AAG] was willing to personally visit Malta to obviously discuss matters with a witness.

    He couldn’t do anything else. What else was he going to do in Malta ?
    What would be the point of personally going to Malta if it was not to influence witnesses ?

    Like

    • Scott says:

      “What would be the point of personally going to Malta if it was not to influence witnesses ?”

      Obviously those posters offering huge rewards to anyone with information which led to convictions for Pan Am 103 bombing, which were released after Messrs Fimah & Megrahi had been indicted hadn’t been enough to convince Gauci. The US must have decided he needed more convincing. I’ve no doubt they would be trying to convey to Gauci that they had tons of evidence Megrahi and Fimah were guilty but they really needed him to finger the clothes buyer. Lets face it Gauci was never convinced – never did he say it was Megrahi. He was also getting the personal touch courtesy of UK – salmon fishing trips on the River Tay for example

      Like

  5. PaulF says:

    Craig. Thanks for your very full response to my comment. I fear I haven’t been clear enough. I don’t for a millisecond think the Libyans did it or that Megrahi or Fhima were involved. Nor do I believe the indictment. I know it to be a gross fabrication. My point is that Mr Bollier exhibits much more circumstantial guilt than did either Megrahi or Fhima. Bollier was in Tripoli and Malta at that time for a reason and it seems unlikely to be purely coincidental that he was there on that day at that time. I don’t know why he was there, but I’m sure it wasn’t by chance. I suppose I’m asking the same questions as you: what do you know, Edwin?
    And I don’t need to be reminded that government agencies can and do behave despicably. I worked for one (almost the same one as you) for 25 years.
    I apologise if my initial comment gave the impression that I believe the Crown/US version of events. I was trying to make the point that the more we uncover about Mr Bollier’s antics, the more questions are raised. I think you might be right that Bollier thought no-one could be a clever or as devious as he thought he was – maybe he’ll tell us.

    Like

    • Craig says:

      Paul, apologies for the misunderstanding and excellent points well made.
      Just one issue to note as its important. I am NOT the former UK ambassador and now blogger, just the same name.

      Like

  6. Scott says:

    So Edwin is at Luqa on the very day the bomb laden Samsonite allegedly left on first leg of its journey? The very same Edwin with the Spanish typewriter incident pinning blame on Libyan’s in early days after Lockerbie.
    One has to wonder if Edwin knew all along an MST fragment was going to be “found” at the crash site.

    Like

    • Craig says:

      Agree with the secondary point – regardless with what Mr Bollier was involved in and for whom, either typewriters etc and all the rest of it.
      It is of public record Mr Bollier was in contact with CIA, this is confirmed by transcripts and Marquise.

      Of course these communications are not one-sided, for Marquise et al to note these there must be replies to the numerous communique.

      Are we to believe that CIA or any other agency was involved in communications and they did not know the source individual or business interests therein ?

      It’s great theatre for Marquise to recite coded messages and the like while also suggesting nobody knew the source.

      It’s also complete nonsense.

      Like

  7. PaulF says:

    Craig. My turn to apologise (again). I thought you were THAT Craig M. Sorry.

    Like

  8. Scott says:

    I asked Edwin via Professor Black’s Friends of JFM about his travel via Luqa 21st December 1988. He responded by telling me “it’s a lie – I was not at Luqa on 20th or 21st December 1988”.

    Scott

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s