Serving up this steaming pile of
Celebrity Gossip
Gay Politics
Gay News
and Pointless Bitchery
Since 1995

Was Iran really responsible for Lockerbie bombing?

French spy expert claims that CIA and FBI know but have covered the information up

The CIA has allegedly always known that Iran and not Libya was behind the deadly 1988 bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 which came down over Lockerbie, Scotland causing the deaths of 270 people.

Ignored for almost 25-years as an unverified conspiracy theory, the respected New York Times journalist and Middle-East expert Robert Worth claims in a recent piece that a former CIA operative confirmed to him an Iranian role in the December bombing.

The controversial claim that 'the best intelligence' on the Lockerbie bombing leads to Iran, rewrites a quarter of a century of accepted history that Colonel Muammar Gaddafi's Libya ordered the terror outrage as revenge for a 1986 U.S. attack on the North African country.

Girard De Villiers claimed in an interview with New York Times journalist Robert Worth that Iran was responsible for the Lockerbie bombing of 1988 - a claim that Worth says he has had confirmed Unearthed during a New York Times interview Worth conducted with French spy novelist Girard de Villiers, the evidence that Iran was responsible is allegedly classified and therefore cannot be used in court.

Buried deep in a profile on the wildly successful novelist is an exchange where de Villiers is asked about his next novel in his SAS series of spy stories.

'It goes back to an old story,' he said according to the interview.

'The book is based on the premise that it was Iran - not Libya - that carried out the notorious 1988 airliner bombing.

'The Iranians went to great lengths to persuade Muammar Gaddafi to take the fall for the attack, which was carried out in revenge for the downing of an Iranian passenger plane by American missiles six months earlier.' The motive for the attack by Iran was as revenge for Iran Air Flight 655, which was shot down over the Persian Gulf in July 1988 by the USS Vincennes, killing all 290 passengers and crew members on board.

While conspiracy theories regarding the terrorist atrocity have long centered around the role of revolutionary Iran and the Ayatollah Khomeini in the 1988 attack, they have never been found mainstream acceptance or acknowledgement - until now.

by Anonymousreply 3002/17/2015

However, Worth reignited these claims by returning to the United States and speaking with a former CIA agent.

'I learned that de Villiers was onto something,' wrote Worth in his piece.

'I spoke to a former CIA operative who told me that 'the best intelligence' on the Lockerbie bombing points to an Iranian role.

'It is a subject of intense controversy at the CIA and the FBI, he said, in part because the evidence against Iran is classified and cannot be used in court, but many at the agency believe IRan directed the bombing.'

Robert Worth, is an accepted expert on the Middle East, served as the Beirut bureau chief gor the New York Times and has contacts deep within the intelligence community.

His interview with de Villiers was based mainly around the fact that the 83-year-old who has sold over 100 million books, has a similar if not more impressive chain of sources.

Indeed, Worth comments in the lengthy interview on the prescience of some of de Villiers work - such as writing about an attack on diplomatic interests in Benghazi months before U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens was killed in Libya. Pan Am Flight 103 was a transatlantic flight from London Heathrow to New York's JFK on Wednesday December 21st 1988.

She was destroyed by an explosive device detonated in the front section of the plane which killed 243 passengers, 16 crew members and 11 on the ground. A three year investigation by Scottish police and the FBI led to murder warrants being issued for Abdelbaset al-Megrahi and Lamin Khalifah Fhimah in 1991.

It took eight-years before Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi released the men to be tried at Camp Zeist, Netherlands in 1999 and in 2001, al-Megrahi was jailed for the bombing and Fhimah was found not guilty.

However, in August 2009, to the outrage of the U.S. government, he was released on compassionate grounds by the Scottish government after being diagnosed with prostate cancer.

He died in May 2012 as the only person to ever be convicted of the attack.

Until 2003 Libya never formally admitted carrying out the 1988 Lockerbie bombing. On 16 August 2003 Libya formally admitted responsibility but not guilt for Pan Am Flight 103 in a letter presented to the president of the United Nations Security Council.

Felicity Barringer of The New York Times said that the letter had 'general language that lacked any expression of remorse' for the people killed in the bombing.

The letter stated that it 'accepted responsibility for the actions of its officials'

by Anonymousreply 102/03/2013

This is why the CIA is so vile. Nothing they say can ever be trusted.

by Anonymousreply 202/04/2013

So what's your point? That law enforcement investigative bodies should open their files to you and your fellow amateur sleuths? Do you plan to make a citizen's arrest?

Why do these people think they get to know all these things - especially if there may be no solid proof. Did you ever think that revealing what we know could compromise more important things?

by Anonymousreply 302/04/2013

R3, people like you are what's wrong with America. When you allow an organization to function in complete secrecy with no accountability to the public or to Congress, you get abuse of power.

That's kind of how the CIA has been able to get away with:

- assassinating JFK

- torturing suspects illegally & destroying the tapes

- bullying Congress & the President

- far exceeding the statutory powers granted to it by President Truman in the 1947 Act in which it was created

And on and on. Do some research on this organization for many years first before you mouth off on this topic.

Speak to Attorney Mark Lane. He's been uncovering the CIA's vile behavior since 1963. Former NY State Senator and Kennedy friend.

by Anonymousreply 402/04/2013

What makes you think I haven't done "research" on the CIA or that I am somehow unfamiliar with the agency?

Setting aside your typical conspiracy allegations for the moment and your typical delusion that everyone else is clueless but you have all the answers, the issue remains why is it you think you need to know or have the right to know every secret your government has? You have an incredibly naive attitude as well as an ignorance of how nations work.

And please stop trying to sell Mark Lane. His expiration date was up decades ago. If you actually knew this man you would realize you shouldn't be banking on him or his research. Mark Lane? Don't make me laugh.

by Anonymousreply 502/04/2013

They're not conspiracy allegations, R5 - they are facts. It's a fact that the CIA tortured people and destroyed the tapes. It's a fact that the CIA was involved with the JFK assassination as former CIA agents have admitted as much. And it's a fact that they are exceeding their legal authority granted to them by Congress in the 1947 Act - they aren't even supposed to OPERATE within the U.S. That is the jurisdiction of the FBI.

And Mark Lane has a huge amount of credibility and integrity on this subject, as do many others who have worked on the issue. I'm suspicious of anyone who attacks Lane, so now I am suspicious of you.

Read the work Governor Jesse Ventura and his investigators have done on the subject. Read the works of Fletcher Prouty. And read the book on JFK by James W. Douglass. They all come to the same basic conclusion.

by Anonymousreply 602/04/2013

You tanked any credibility you might have by citing Ventura, whose goal is staying famous and making money.

by Anonymousreply 702/04/2013

A typical smear attack on Ventura, R7. And absolute nonsense. And even if you take Ventura out and don't like him, it doesn't change the validity of all the other evidence I stated above. I notice you still haven't addressed any of those issues.

by Anonymousreply 802/04/2013

Ventura claims Lennon's murder was a CIA conspiracy. Honey, please. If you take him seriously, I cannot take you seriously.

by Anonymousreply 902/04/2013

The CIA is certainly not above lying, or being manipulated for political purposes.

by Anonymousreply 1002/04/2013

R4 forgot causing the Irish potato famine and causing genocide on all of the little Mr. Potato Heads of this world.

by Anonymousreply 1102/04/2013

Why are the French trying to get Bush off the hook for starting a war with the wrong country after the fact?

by Anonymousreply 1202/04/2013

R9 & R11 obviously aren't interested in having a serious discussion

by Anonymousreply 1302/04/2013

R9 it is known that Lennon was on FBI watch lists and Nixon's Enemies List. The CIA helped get Reagan/Bush elected via the secret deal with the Iranian hostage-takers. The Reagan years marked a huge increase in military spending. Lennon was a peacenik with a large following who opposed military spending. Eliminating him would have been desirable to the Military Industrial Complex.

Is it really plausible that "lone nuts" are the only kind of successful assassins?

by Anonymousreply 1402/04/2013

Thanks, R14. A lot of people don't realize that people like Lennon were targeted by the CIA & FBI in the same way MLK was. They don't realize that these organizations go after any world figure that seeks peace and unity.

by Anonymousreply 1502/04/2013

I was alive and an adult at the time Lennon was killed. Yes, he had a history of being anti-war; no, he was not a great leader of people at the time. It's ludicrous to believe that any government agency would have cared enough about Lennon to mount an operation to kill him and set up a crazy guy to take the fall.

by Anonymousreply 1602/04/2013

Maybe read some of the evidence on the case, R16?

As in the case of previous lone nut assassinations, a piece of incriminating evidence (The Catcher in the Rye) just happened to be left at the scene of the crime, and just happened to be used as a pretext for the murder in a way the public would remember.

by Anonymousreply 1702/04/2013

Maybe you should talk to people who were adults in 1980. Lennon was at or near the height of his fame when paranoid Nixon considered him a threat. In 1980 Lennon had enough residual fame that people still paid attention to what he did; but he was not relevant enough to get a lot of people active in an anti-war movement. Really. Don't trust me. Ask some Americans now in their 50s how much political traction Lennon would have had at that point. That should disabuse you of any belief in the CIA caring about John Lennon in 1980.

by Anonymousreply 1802/04/2013

R18, I'll go with the evidence that's been uncovered by researchers and the CIA's own track record of previous assassinations over your feelings on the subject, thanks.

by Anonymousreply 1902/04/2013

Okay, you sound like a complete nutter.

Mark Lane has NO credibility. None. He has been incredibly irresponsible throughout his life and anyone who sings his praises has no judgment whatsoever. Mark craves publicity and attention and despite his instincts earlier in his life for decency the kindest thing I can say for Mark is that he is so very, very misguided.

by Anonymousreply 2002/04/2013

R21, accusing others of insanity makes you sound like a liar and a cover-upper.

by Anonymousreply 2102/04/2013

Oops - I meant to address that to R20!

by Anonymousreply 2202/04/2013

Yea, that's right - I'm a cover up. Here on DL. It's where all we "cover-ups" congregate. Get a life and invest in better tinfoil.

By 1980 John Lennon was considered vintage. Hardly worthy of a "hit." Seriously where does some of this stuff come from?

by Anonymousreply 2302/04/2013

Iran being responsible for Lockerbee is just the Neo-cons building their case for going to war with Iran.

by Anonymousreply 2402/04/2013

"Ignored for almost 25-years as an unverified conspiracy theory, the respected New York Times journalist and Middle-East expert Robert Worth claims in a recent piece that a former CIA operative confirmed to him an Iranian role in the December bombing."

Please learn some grammar. And if you don't know what's wrong with this paragraph, please ask someone to explain it to you.

by Anonymousreply 2502/04/2013

Yoko Ono was the daughter of a Japanese banking tycoon and royalty. She was placed as an operative to destroy heroin addicted John Lennon and the Beatles.

by Anonymousreply 2602/04/2013

Reading most of the replies are hilarious. I keep thinking it is the same person arguing with itself. The idea that Iran would intentionally kill civilians because of a royal fk up by the US military is truly believable because it shows how disgusting they can be. There are 2 options.. the US did it willingly and wanted to kill Iranian civilians for some reason? Or it was the over reaction by the captain of the ship and the complete illegality of moving into Iranian territory to do this. The US admitted it did the shooting and paid over 60 million in reparations.... how much has Iran paid for the Lockerbie bombings?

by Anonymousreply 2702/16/2015

These conspiracy threads are always a giggle. The loonies really are almost artful in their delusional theories.

by Anonymousreply 2802/16/2015

Definitely "intelligence" would be concerned about John Lennon. We know they were watching him - there are files about this. They spy on very minor peace groups etc. They would definitely spy on a major beloved figure that talked about peace and other political subjects. He had to fight to stay in the US.

by Anonymousreply 2902/16/2015

R24 is right.

It would be too logical. Real life is not logical. And Qaddafi would never have coughed up the money for Iran. They couldn't pay him, now, could they?

by Anonymousreply 3002/17/2015
Loading
Need more help? Click Here.