Many highly professional people stated openly that the man accused of the Lockerbie bombing, Megrahi, was innocent. Many people agree with them, but the real culprits have never been found. There are situations where the only way to prove somebody is innocent is by finding the real culprit and anyone accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty. Brilliant. Except for the loopholes: most professional criminals do not waste time studying the law, only the loopholes that their defence team has to use.

That is possibly why the Lockerbie case has never been resolved. It was expertly planned not to be resolved, possibly by using Megrahi as a pawn and, eventually (by coincidence?), the Maltese shop-owner to divert the investigations. Whether the suitcase bomb left from Malta or not, is irrelevant. What is undeniable is that it was loaded onto the Pan Am 747 at London Heathrow. So Megrahi is irrelevant too. The brainwave could have been precisely to mislead people. The Maltese shop-owner could have been just a ‘bonus’ and was only included later to continue the misdirection of the investigation, so that it would never be resolved.

Whether the suitcase bomb started its journey from Malta or London, and whether it was Megrahi or not, should have been the most irrelevant part of the final outcome. If this was a real brainwave, then Megrahi was chosen to be the ‘sacrificial lamb’ without his knowledge. It is highly unlikely that he was even told anything about it. He was most probably really innocent, but a very important ‘pawn’ in the plan. 

One of the best ways to ensure that a person accused is never proved to be guilty is to choose someone who will not know anything about a highly criminal plan. Many people in the world do not trust Muslims because of their track record in terrorism. This is incorrect, because the majority of Muslims are peace-loving people. Their guilt (?) is that do not speak-up; they are highly cultured (programmed like a computer) to remain silent. This gives immense power to the minority ‘extremists’ amongst them. Even in the Western world, people are cultured (programmed) to believe that crime does not pay’. But is that really true, when it seems that accused criminals know they have a good chance of escaping justice if their defence team is stronger than that of the prosecution?

There seems to be hardly any doubt that Megrahi was innocent, and that he was not even aware of the plan. This mass murder will probably remain unresolved, which is how it was planned to be, and so far it has worked. All the energy and brains of some of the top investigators in the world were wasted (unintentionally or otherwise) on Megrahi and eventually on the owner of a tiny Maltese shop. The question remains whether it was a brainwave of whoever planned it, and whether it will remain a mystery.

Too many people appear to have been misled and this points out more to the possibility that it was a brainwave. It is highly probable that neither Megrahi nor the shop-owner knew they were being used as pawns. If this is correct, then the plan worked perfectly, and the real culprits may never be found – or never exposed. Sometimes even politics has to work that way for the protection of the majority of the people, but that does not necessarily make politics guilty either. Perhaps there are situations where it would be better if the real culprits, or masterminds, are never known.

Reggie DeBono

ATTARD