Joe Vialls: “Setting up” Libya for the Lockerbie Bombing – Part 2

PSYCHOLOGICALLY ENGINEERING THE LOCKERBIE TRIAL

 

The Media is hyping up the ‘guilt’ of two Libyans over Pan Am 103, but the story is a calculated lie designed to protect the real bombers

On 15 August 1999 in a story titled “Airlines Fear Bomb Attacks”, Murdoch Group newspapers suggested Islamic fanatics are planning another Lockerbie-style bombing sometime during the next three months. It is far more likely that those really responsible for bombing Pan Am 103 are planning a lookalike atrocity, designed to act as a psychological reinforcer during the trial of the two Libyan suspects in late 2000. There is no credible scientific evidence linking these two men to Pan Am Flight 103 or to the village of Lockerbie, but the American Department of State and the Israeli Mossad are growing increasingly desperate for a conviction.

In a nutshell the forged evidence against the two Libyans is as follows: The suspects took delivery in Malta of a bomb disguised as a Toshiba Bombeat portable radio, said to contain 312 grams of Semtex-H explosive coupled to a barometric switch and a timer. The suspects allegedly wrapped the bomb inside children’s clothes bought in a Malta store, then packed it carefully inside a brown Samsonite suitcase for transit to Pan Am 103. The CIA claims the suitcase was then loaded by the suspects onto Air Malta Flight 180 to Frankfurt, where it was transhipped to a Pan Am 727 feeder flight to London Airport Heathrow. There it was allegedly transhipped again onto “Maid Of The Seas”, the 747 which then obligingly exploded overhead Deans Cross in the Lake District, its 500 m.p.h. forward speed and inertia ensuring the debris and bodies finally fell to earth many miles further north at Lockerbie in Scotland.

As will be explained later, it is a scientific impossibility for this bomb in this configuration and placement to bring down any 747, a fact well-known to bomb makers, so why would any “Arab” or “Moslem” group now be planning to use another bomb in exactly the same way? They would not of course, which brings us back to the story in the Murdoch newspapers on 15 August 1999. What this story is all about is making the public believe once and for all that a bomb of this sort can bring down a 747, making the forged evidence more “believable” at the trial starting in May 2000. And if the real culprits feel obliged to blow up another Boeing 747 with another 259 passengers on board to prove their point, rest assured they will do so. This time, however, they will blame the atrocity on new Arab Moslem “Terrorist of the Month” Osama Bin Laden.

The psychological cues for this second atrocity are already in place, proved by the Murdoch story in which reporter Peter Rose claims “British and US airlines are on top security alert after warnings that Islamic fanatics are planning a Lockerbie-style bombing.” Rose continues “Airline staff have been ordered to be extra vigilant in checking passengers and luggage. The warning, from the Department of Transport, which follows a tip-off from US Intelligence, specifically mentions Samsonite suitcases.” The key psychological cues are “Lockerbie”, “Samsonite” and “Suitcases”. When the next 747 explodes in mid-air, US Intelligence will provide a helpful tip-off that this was another “Lockerbie” style atrocity, caused by a bomb in a “Samsonite Suitcase” planted by Islamic fanatics, most probably led by Osama Bin Laden. Properly outraged, you the gullible public will then cheer on the prosecutors at the Libyan trial.

For terrorism buffs, here is why the forged American “evidence” against the two Libyans is a lie, and why the 312 gram Semtex-H bomb could not have brought down Pan Am 103 over Lockerbie, or anywhere else. The “evidence” claims that the bomb was constructed in such a way that its barometric switch activated when the aircraft climbed through 10,000 feet altitude, in turn starting the bomb timer. When the timer reached zero the bomb detonated, blowing a large hole in the forward left pressure hull of the Jumbo, causing it to break up and fall to earth at Lockerbie.

The “barometric switch” could never have activated at 10,000 feet on the Air Malta Boeing 737 between Malta and Frankfurt, or on the Pan Am feeder Boeing 727 between Frankfurt and London, or on the Boeing 747 designated Pan Am Flight 103 out of London for New York. The reason it could not is disarmingly simple, and known to every flight engineer on earth. The passenger cabin and baggage holds on all Boeing 727s, 737s and 747s are located inside the pressurised hull, which is designed to protect passengers from the rarefied atmosphere at its cruising altitude of about 36,000 feet, where oxygen is insufficient to sustain life. So when the aircraft takes off and climbs towards its cruising altitude, the actual altitude inside the passenger cabin and baggage holds remains much lower, well below 8,000 feet at all times, and normally below 6,000 feet, to ensure you have enough oxygen to breathe comfortably while you sip a brandy or two and watch the in-flight movie.

This is an incredibly important fact, because the inventors of the forged “evidence” have stated emphatically in writing that the barometric switch was designed to start the bomb timer when the aircraft climbed through 10,000 feet. Evidently (and fortunately) the CIA knows nothing about flight engineering, because the fictional barometric switch was in the pressurised baggage hold and thus never exceeded a maximum altitude of 8,000 feet at any point in the flight. Unless the switch reaches 10,000 feet it cannot activate itself, cannot start a timer, and therefore cannot detonate any bomb. By failing to hire an expert to forge its bomb “evidence” the culprits shot themselves through both feet, and hopefully as a result the two innocent Libyans will be set free next year.

The timer itself is of little consequence, because anyone can drop charred timer parts at the scene of a crash two years after the event, and evidence to hand suggests the CIA did exactly that. Its main reason for doing so was that sources in Europe had discovered the Libyans had bought a limited series of timers from a Swiss manufacturer, so the CIA used this data to point the finger at Tripoli. Unluckily for the devious CIA, the Swiss manufacturer has recently pointed out that the printed circuit boards for the timers were different colours, and the timer in question was never sold to the Libyans at all.

Now to the blast potential of the fake bomb in the Toshiba Bombeat radio, though this will only be covered in outline because detailed information is apparently being reserved for trial defence. It is claimed that 312 grams of Semtex-H explosive in a plastic radio was encased in woollen clothes, which in turn were encased in a Samsonite suitcase. The suitcase was then loaded into a sealed alloy baggage bin which was loaded into the forward baggage hold of Pan Am 103, separated from the immensely strong pressure hull of the aircraft by an air gap of several inches.

The shock wave from any explosion takes the line of least resistance, decreasing in pressure (p.s.i.) the further it travels from the epicentre of the blast. If this relatively puny bomb had been detonated as claimed on Pan Am 103, the initial shock wave would have been partly deflected and decreased by expansion around the clothes inside the Samsonite, then deflected and decreased still further as it expanded to fill the sealed alloy baggage bin. If the shock wave was sufficient to burst the baggage bin, huge expansion would then take place in the very large forward baggage hold zone, before coming into direct contact with the immensely strong outer pressure hull. Rough calculations show the pressure of the shock wave at this stage would have dropped below 3 p.s.i. before contacting the outer pressure hull itself, which is capable of withstanding at least 8 p.s.i. and (reportedly) as much as 12 p.s.i.

There is only one sure way that 312 grams of Semtex-H can puncture the pressure hull of a Boeing 747, and that is to be placed directly against the hull itself in the form of a “shaped charge”. In order to do this the baggage hold lining must first be removed to gain access to the hull, a complicated procedure which can only be carried out in the New York Pan Am engineering bay at John F. Kennedy Airport. Ironically perhaps, Pam Am 103 was wheeled out of this engineering bay only one hour before it flew to London early on 21 December 1988. There were no Libyans present in the engineering bay.

The CIA case is a total myth, which is starting to fall apart as each long day drags out towards the trial of the two Libyans in May 2000, and as stated earlier some of the western “authorities” are getting very nervous. It must be evident that unless something dramatic is done, public scepticism will grow to the point where the Libyan trial will collapse completely.

First item on the agenda must surely be that of “proving” the CIA “evidence” is feasible, pointing once again to the strange story peddled by the Murdoch newspapers. Readers might like to consider whether there is any pressing need for their relatives or friends to take an airline flight during the year, especially on a Boeing 747 flying an international route. Travelling by bus might be a little slower but it is likely to be much safer, at least until after the Libyan trial ends.

—————————————–

The author Joe Vialls, is an independent investigator with thirty years direct experience of international military and oilfield operations.

Please Help Maintain the Flow of Intelligence

Predictably perhaps, I remain permanently barred by American multinationals including Yahoo and PayPal, in what appears to be an ongoing attempt to obliterate my Internet presence completely. Life is never easy for a former combat veteran but it has to be admitted that this multinational stranglehold has try to make my life even harder.

If you appreciate these intelligence reports and would like to help their continuation by assisting financially, please click on the donate button below, which will redirect you to my donations page and an online payment provider.

For those who do not like online donations of any kind, I can personally process Australian Dollar or Pound Sterling checks, and convert almost any banknote into usable currency. My snail mail address is “J. Vialls”, 45 Merlin Drive, Carine, Western Australia 6020. If anyone out there has online Internet banking and the desire to donate, please direct the funds to my Western Australia bank account shown here.

“Arming yourself with Knowledge is the best form of defence”

Account name: J. Vialls

Bank Name: Bank West

Swift Code: BKWAAU6P

BSB: 306-074

Account #: 0574527

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

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