Chomsky Lockerbie Bombing US drug dealers

Sunday, 29th November 2009

British MPs, activist say Malta should defend itself on Lockerbie case

Caroline Muscat

Noam Chomsky, emeritus professor at the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology and renowned political activist, said the Lockerbie case is
an illustration of conformism in the West.

Two former British Labour and Conservative MPs have joined American
political activist Noam Chomsky in calling on the Maltese government
to defend the country's reputation.

Prof. Chomsky and the British MPs are signatories to a letter sent to
the government calling on Malta to support a demand for an inquiry by
the UN General Assembly into the 1988 Pan Am bombing that claimed 270
lives.

The letter sent by the 'Justice for Megrahi' campaign, which includes
relatives of the victims in the bombing, is also signed by South
African Archbishop Desmond Tutu.

Tam Dalyell, Labour MP for 43 years, and Teddy Taylor, MP for the
Conservatives for 36 years, said they had doubts about the original
verdict. They said if the Maltese government supported a UN inquiry,
then it could clear the country's name and help the families of the
victims establish the truth.

Prof. Chomsky described the events surrounding the case of the
convicted bomber Abdelbasset Al Megrahi as "a remarkable illustration
of the conformism and obedience of intellectual opinion in the West".

He told The Sunday Times: "I think the trial was very seriously
flawed, including crucially the alleged role of Malta. There is every
reason to call for a very serious independent inquiry."

The 'Justice for Megrahi' campaign argues that the verdict was guided
by political interests at the time and an inquiry by the UN General
Assembly is required. They believe Malta has an equal interest in
exposing who was really behind the act of terrorism.

Their hopes had been pinned on the appeal initiated by the convicted
bomber. But Mr Al Megrahi, who has terminal prostate cancer, was freed
last August on compassionate grounds and flown home to Tripoli to die
with his family. Consequently, he dropped the appeal.

To this day, Mr Al Megrahi contends he has been the victim of a
miscarriage of justice - a claim supported by the expert appointed by
the UN to monitor the trial, Hans Kochler.

The original conviction of Mr Al Megrahi had relied heavily on the
testimony of Tony Gauci, the owner of a shop in Sliema who said the
Libyan had bought clothes from his shop that were later found wrapped
around the bomb.

But it has since emerged that Al Megrahi's defence team had argued in
the recent appeal that the Maltese witness was paid "in excess of $2
million", while his brother Paul Gauci was paid "in excess of $1
million" for their co-operation. Neither has ever denied receiving
payment.

The former British Conservative MP referred to Mr Gauci's testimony
when speaking to The Sunday Times. He said if "our friends in Malta"
were willing to pursue the issue at the UN and seek the truth that may
have been flawed by "a statement of a resident of Malta who appears to
have benefitted enormously from his identification and who then moved
to Australia", then the government would help relatives of the
victims, and itself.

Mr Taylor recalled Malta's role in the Second World War, saying
"British people my age have a very special regard for Malta as a
centre of brave and trustworthy people who were willing to stand firm
against fascism".

Mr Dalyell said: "I have believed since 1991 that the Crown Office in
Edinburgh should have respected the stated view of the Maltese
government, Air Malta, Luqa airport authorities and the Malta police
that no unaccounted for luggage, let alone a bomb, was placed on the
flight."

Although Malta has always denied any involvement in the act, it
remains implicated by the government's refusal to take up the cause.

When Mr Gauci said in the original trial that he believed Mr Al
Megrahi purchased clothes from his shop, it provided the prosecution
with grounds to argue that the bomb had left from Malta and then
transferred to the fateful flight.

Malta had provided ample evidence to support its contention that there
was no unaccompanied luggage on Air Malta flight KM180 on December 21,
1988. But Malta's defence was trumped by Mr Gauci's testimony.

Comments

Jesmond Micallef (4 hours, 50 minutes ago)
Malta's reputation ?? May I remind people of the UN approved Embargo
on Libya.
On the notion of Monetary Payment say for Justice, It seems to me that
money does not indeed satisfies ones inner peace. I Love the truth
too. Was it not American Intelligence Services such as the DEA
conducting a Drugs operation in Syria. Is it a mere coincidence that
operatives of this undercover operation ending up on this Il fated
Flight ? Why where such people onboard a civil aircraft ? Has the ICAO
anything to say about this ?
Jimmy Magro (11 hours, 55 minutes ago)
The issue here is not Libya or Megrahi. The focus is to defend the
name of Malta and maintain our high standards in the international
domain. How can one man's opinion be trustworthy more than that of the
Malta Government, Air Malta, airport authorities, legal team led by
the late Dr. Edgar Mizzi. It is a fact that the US used coersive
methods to get Mr. Gauci says what they wanted. The US is also known
to have used bonus money to get witneses in other cases and this could
have happened in this case too.
The Government should join the campaign to get the UN inquiry going
for the sake of justice and Malta's name.

Stumble It!