Unless you’ve been living under a rock you will have noticed the media buzz around the release of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi, the only man convicted for the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103, over Lockerbie Scotland on December 21, 1988. The flight carrying mainly US and UK passengers was on route to JFK International in America.

The media coverage is focusing on the fact that somebody convicted of Terrorism shouldn’t be released, even if they are dieing of prostate cancer. How can a man that murdered many, be released on compassionate grounds. Where was his compassion?

The other layer to the story is whether Gordon Brown coerced the Scottish government in to releasing him, not because of compassion, but because it increased political relations with Libya, and aided a possible oil deal for BP.[1]

However here at WideShut we like to dig a little deeper than the superficial corporate media coverage. Now evidence is evidence and I haven’t got the time or knowledge to mull over the case. The man was convicted, so he should do his time. Or should he? Some claim he is completely innocent, which wouldn’t surprise me. According to the newspaper ‘Scotland on Sunday’, 28 August 2005, a Scottish Police chief has revealed that the Lockerbie evidence was faked.[2] The evidence that linked Megrahi was a tiny fragment of circuit board found in a wooded area many miles from Lockerbie.

Edwin Bollier the owner of the company that created the circuit board, told the Guardian “I was shown fragments of a brown circuit board which matched our prototype. But when the MST-13 went into production, the timers contained green boards. I knew that the timers sold to Libya had green boards.”[3]

The claim is that the US CIA fudged this evidence as a possible pretext to take out Colonel Gaddafi, or to over up an Illegal CIA drugs ring.

Major Charles McKie, who worked for the US Intelligence reportedly uncovered a CIA team who were working with Manzur El-Khassar, a Syrian drug dealer, to smuggle weapons and drugs. McKie was on the plane that went down over Lockerbie and drugs were found in the debris.[4] It’s a clever way of silencing somebody and making it look like the fault of another country, but this implies collusion by Libya, meaning Gaddafi used Al-Megrahi as the fall guy, or sent him there on behalf of the CIA. It could also be that the CIA completely set up the whole thing.

Taking in to account these facts, I want to point out some hypocrisy, which might make you think twice about your “loving” Governments.

The first people to jump on the oil conspiracy were none other than United States Congress.[5] Well I’ll be blown. Granted many US citizens died that day, but when we speak of corrupt oil deals you don’t have to look any further than the US, Bush family[6] and the sickeningly wealthy US corporations. For years the US has invaded and pillaged poorer countries to steal their oil or to keep their economy in the toilet. Just look at Iraq or America’s historical oil orgy with the Saudis[7], which did nothing but keep the top players in that region rich and the regular citizens in poverty. If there needs to be a probe in to oil deals, start with the US!

Of course getting caught in a UK vs US debate in itself is pointless, considering their alliance and the fact that the same bigwigs control the majority of the world through the interlinking private banking systems; but you still have to laugh at the gall of their accusations.

Oil aside, it is worth looking at the political situation itself. Nobody just bombs an airplane for no reason. Terrorists aren’t mad men, they are provoked, manipulated and in some cases fighting for a good cause! If Al-Megrahi was manipulated as a fall guy to protect a CIA drug ring, or if he was doing it on his own merit in the name of Libya, there are reasons why he’d be in that mindset.

In 1986 the UK supported the US in a horrific bombing of Tripoli[8], the capital of Libya after various back and forth grapples between the US and Gaddafi’s country; with the US claiming Colonel Gaddafi was the financier of many terrorist operations. You see following World War 2, the US took on and off military occupation of a small stretch of land known as the Gulf of Sidra, which is off the coast of Libya[9]. The US and UK empires are renowned for building military bases around the globe to keep an iron grip over the world. They’ll either be trying to in-debt the region with false loans and therefore force them to become an ally or they’ll just invade under the guise of Terrorism, which 9 time out of 10 is caused be these invasions in the first place. Wouldn’t you fight back if another country came and invaded England or messed with your economy, politics or religion?

So the Tripoli bombing was a message to Libya, saying “hey we now own this land despite it being right next to your country!” The Lockerbie bombing, although devastating, could have just been a retaliation for the unjust murder of 270 mainly innocent Libyans, or a very convenient alibi for staging the attack. The compassionate release, now looks a lot more reasonable if it was a retaliation; although I’m a firm believer that if you kill anyone, consequences must be faced. And there is no doubt Gaddafi has been involved in terrorism over the years, despite the reasonings probably being skewed by western media.

So now we turn to Al-Megrahi himself. The lone bomber.

Huh?

Sounds a little fishy doesn’t it. An international Terrorist attack was single-handedly carried out by one man? What is he Jean-Claude Van Damme? Despite this insane notion, the simple minded public and their manipulative Governments are quite happy to funnel all their hate on to this one guy, who was probably paid a lot of money, forced or brainwashed by his Government; or simply standing up for his country, instead of demanding a reinvestigation in to who helped him and why we didn’t go after those pulling the strings higher-up. That’s your conspiracy.

Strangely, despite all of this back and forth bloodshed the UK has managed to actually remain on good terms with Libya, without mentioning the murder of Yvonne Fletcher outside the Libyan Embassy in London and plots to assassinate Colonel Gaddafi in the 90s.[10] The idea that they have interest in oil and trade is very real, and this is probably why they are now such good buddies. Like all anti-western leaders, with grand dreams of doing away with capitalism and imperialism, Gaddafi seems to have eventually succumb to western riches (check out those suits) and traded the well-being of his country’s people for oil deals and military assistance to the UK/US empires. They have even aided the “war on Terror”,[11] meaning they’ll be rewarded with protection for now. That is until us Westerners decide we either want to do away with trade and steal their economy all together, or claim they are terrorists so we can invade and give them our loving democracy.

The levels to this case are reaching the complex conspiratorial web of 9/11 and at every turn there reasons and motives. What we do know is Government can’t be trusted to give accurate accounts of events, and that the media never tread very deep in to the real political aspects of a story.

Just remember there is always A LOT more to a story than we are led to believe and it is dangerous to assign blame and hate to individuals without doing some of your own research.