Lockerbie bomber still not dead
DVH
reached at his home or in hospital.
Libyan officials could say nothing about the whereabouts of Abdul Baset Ali
al-Megrahi, and his Scottish monitors could not contact him by telephone.
They will try again to speak to him today but if they fail to reach him, the
Scottish government could face a new crisis.
Under the terms of his release from jail, the bomber cannot change his
address or leave Tripoli, and must keep in regular communication with East
Renfrewshire Council."
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article6958291.ece
broadssailor
The fact is that we don't know if the Lockerbie bomber is dead - we
don't know who it was , since it certainly wasn't al-Megrahi !
That flight left with many empty seats, all of which had been booked
for US Nationals at the Embassy in Germany. They were told not to
travel at VERY short notice. The Americans know why, and they ain't
tellin' !
Redman
"broadssailor" <graham....@tiscali.co.uk> wrote in message
news:6800267c-ce3b-4fa4...@e20g2000vbb.googlegroups.com...
Hear Hear, spot on m8 and that's only one part of the big picture
Redman
Robert Peffers
"Redman" <redma...@btinternet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:00a46816$0$26797$c3e...@news.astraweb.com...
Airbus A300B2 operated by Iran Air as IR655 that was destroyed by the U.S.
Navy's guided missile cruiser USS Vincennes. This illegal action happened
when the USS Vincennes steamed into Iranian waters and shot down the
civilian airliner in Iranian airspace and killed 290 people including 66
children. The grateful USA citizens awarded the Vincennes crew with medals
and battle honours but has squealed for Libyan blood, any Libyan blood, ever
since the Lockerbie bomb incident that is thought to have been a revenge
attack.
I do not suppose we will ever get the truth but the evidence certainly
points to USA Government involvement in Lockerbie's tragic involvement.
--
Auld Bob
DVH
"aracari" <spamtrap@v�ilable.here.com> wrote in message
news:65d3a6537e78a2c1...@aracari.127.0.0.1...
> Rotfl. As if the Scottish legal system has any power to enforce
> such conditions on a man in Tripoli.
East Renfrewshire Social Services must have a branch office in Libya.
William Black
I'd be prepared to bet that someone from the local probation office gets
a trip to the nice warm Libyan desert now and again...
At our expense...
--
William Black
"Any number under six"
The answer given by Englishman Richard Peeke when asked by the Duke of
Medina Sidonia how many Spanish sword and buckler men he could beat
single handed with a quarterstaff.
DVH
"William Black" <willia...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:hgagtf$fme$3...@news.eternal-september.org...
> DVH wrote:
>> "aracari" <spamtrap@v�ilable.here.com> wrote in message
>> news:65d3a6537e78a2c1...@aracari.127.0.0.1...
>>
>>> Rotfl. As if the Scottish legal system has any power to enforce
>>> such conditions on a man in Tripoli.
>>
>> East Renfrewshire Social Services must have a branch office in Libya.
>
> I'd be prepared to bet that someone from the local probation office gets a
> trip to the nice warm Libyan desert now and again...
>
> At our expense...
The Corinthia Hotel looks adequate
http://www.tripadvisor.com/Hotel_Review-g293807-d301269-Reviews-Corinthia_Hotel_Tripoli-Tripoli.html
Mel Rowing
wrote:
> "Redman" <redman1...@btinternet.co.uk> wrote in message
>
> news:00a46816$0$26797$c3e...@news.astraweb.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > "broadssailor" <graham.trim...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote in message
USS Vincennes entered Iranian water in pursuit of an Iranian gunboat
that had engaged one of her helicopters in international waters.
IR655 was picked up on radar was mistakenly identified as a F15 of the
IAF she was challenged on both military and civil frequencies and made
no response. She defied orders either to change course or to identify
herself through IFF and so was shot down. Why we shall never know.
It was an unfortunate accident and nothing more.
USS Vincennes did not enter Iranian waters with the intent of engaging
civilian aircraft from Bandar Abbas airfield
> The grateful USA citizens awarded the Vincennes crew with medals
> and battle honours but has squealed for Libyan blood, any Libyan blood, ever
> since the Lockerbie bomb incident that is thought to have been a revenge
> attack.
No decorations or honours were awarded to the ships company
specifically in respect of this incident. Honours that were awarded
were with respect to Vincennes' general service in the Gulf in defence
of international shipping which involved 14 transits of the Straits of
Hormuz.
> I do not suppose we will ever get the truth but the evidence certainly
> points to USA Government involvement in Lockerbie's tragic involvement.
What evidence?
All the evidence here points to the fact that you have been selective
with the truth.
My late cousin was Chief Engineer on the bulk carrier Fidelity.
She was escorted through the straits by a US warship which may or may
not have been Vincennes. Whatever the case 24 hours after she left her
escort she was sunk by an Iranian launched Exocet missile. He survived
to be picked up by the Iranians and to spend 6 weeks in filthy Iranian
custody facilities before being repatriated through Jordan.
He was one of the lucky ones. Others died.
abelard
i expect it's due to the advanced cuban trained socialist
health service
regards
--
web site at www.abelard.org - news comment service, logic, economics
energy, education, politics, etc over 1 million document calls in year past
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
all that is necessary for [] walk quietly and carry
the triumph of evil is that [] a big stick.
good people do nothing [] trust actions not words
only when it's funny -- roger rabbit
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Saracene
You make the yanks sound so innocent.
>
> USS Vincennes did not enter Iranian waters with the intent of engaging
> civilian aircraft from Bandar Abbas airfield
Here's from an article in the latest London Review of Books:-
"Cynically supporting Saddam Hussein in his war of aggression against
the mullahs in Tehran led to pointless slaughter. Each of these
episodes opened a door through which US forces entered the
region. .... When In 1987 the Iran -Iraq war reached stalemate,
threatening to disrupt the flow of Persian gulf oil US naval forces
assumed responsibility for escorting takers across the gulf, managing
among other things, to shoot down an Iranian commercial airliner
killing all 290 people on board. "
Later thug Reagan declared 'we have apologised enough'.
>
> > The grateful USA citizens awarded the Vincennes crew with medals
> > and battle honours but has squealed for Libyan blood, any Libyan blood, ever
> > since the Lockerbie bomb incident that is thought to have been a revenge
> > attack.
>
> No decorations or honours were awarded to the ships company
> specifically in respect of this incident. Honours that were awarded
> were with respect to Vincennes' general service in the Gulf in defence
> of international shipping which involved 14 transits of the Straits of
> Hormuz.
>
> > I do not suppose we will ever get the truth but the evidence certainly
> > points to USA Government involvement in Lockerbie's tragic involvement.
>
> What evidence?
http://www.indybay.org/olduploads/maltese_double_cross.wmv
Robert Peffers
"Mel Rowing" <mel.r...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:a3b97217-6b43-4f78...@t42g2000vba.googlegroups.com...
It is illegal to enter any country without that countries express
permission.
There is no excuse for an illegal acts by claiming you are chasing people
who are also doing wrong.
IR655 was picked up on radar was mistakenly identified as a F15 of the
IAF she was challenged on both military and civil frequencies and made
no response.
Sheer reckless incompetance on the part of the USS Vincennes crew who not
only illegally in another countries waters but had now made a grave error of
identification of a civilian aircraft and were illegally demanding they
identify themselves. Let me remind you, the civilian aircraft was going
about its legal business and the USS ship was the alien craft in this area.
It is the USS ship who are legally charged with the duty of identifying
themselves.
She defied orders either to change course or to identify
herself through IFF and so was shot down.
The USS ship had no authority to be there in the first place and thus had no
authority to even ask the aircraft to identify itself.
As it was the alien craft it was the one in the wrong in every action it
took while within another countries waters.
To then open fire makes their actions an act of criminal intent, a war crime
against a country that the USA was not even at war with, and mass murder of
innocent civillians by a bunch of crimilans subsequently backed up by a
corrupt country, its government and its people.
Why we shall never know.
We do know. The civilian aircraft was in its own airspace, over its own
waters, and being challanged by an illegal, alien, warship.
They had no duty, need or legal resposibility to identify themselves to
such alien aggressors.
Quite simply the USA had no right even being where they were.
They were at fault from the moment they crossed into Iranian territory and,
in fact should have been held, tried and found guilty of being illegal
aliens in Iranian territory.
It was an unfortunate accident and nothing more.
It was a series of sheer incompetant and illegal actions by a band of
murderers and was backed up by a government that was even more incompetant
and guilty.
USS Vincennes did not enter Iranian waters with the intent of engaging
civilian aircraft from Bandar Abbas airfield
It entered another countries territory with an express intention of
retaliation against that country and\ then compounded the crime by the
incompetant identification of a civilian craft that they then chose to
attack.
There was no accident here but a deliberate incursion within another
countries to exact revenge for an attack they deemed was by that country but
their powers of identification were obviously very poor. It was nothing
short oif the mass murder.
The did not even have the right to cross into Iran.
> The grateful USA citizens awarded the Vincennes crew with medals
> and battle honours but has squealed for Libyan blood, any Libyan blood,
> ever
> since the Lockerbie bomb incident that is thought to have been a revenge
> attack.
No decorations or honours were awarded to the ships company
specifically in respect of this incident. Honours that were awarded
were with respect to Vincennes' general service in the Gulf in defence
of international shipping which involved 14 transits of the Straits of
Hormuz.
> I do not suppose we will ever get the truth but the evidence certainly
> points to USA Government involvement in Lockerbie's tragic involvement.
What evidence?
All the evidence here points to the fact that you have been selective
with the truth.
My late cousin was Chief Engineer on the bulk carrier Fidelity.
She was escorted through the straits by a US warship which may or may
not have been Vincennes. Whatever the case 24 hours after she left her
escort she was sunk by an Iranian launched Exocet missile. He survived
to be picked up by the Iranians and to spend 6 weeks in filthy Iranian
custody facilities before being repatriated through Jordan.
He was one of the lucky ones. Others died.
Get rea l- the Iranians had every right to retaliate after a USA ship sails
into their territory and shoots down and kills 290 civilians.
The general tread of USA citizens to make so little of the deaths of
innocent civilians, (as long as they are not USAsian), is stomach churning
for the rest of the human race.
For Heavens sake the USA decorated that bunch of incompetant numpties who
were directly responsible for killing 290 civilians, (including 66
children), whilke in the illegal position of being illegal aliens in a
foreign countries territory.
Reverse the rolls - what would you think if a foreign power were to come
onto USA territory and kill innocent civillians?>
Oh! Wait a moment some already have and we have been dragged into several
wars and never heard the end of it ever since.
Do you get it now?
The USA warship had no more right to be in Iran than the 9/11 terrorists had
to be in the USA. Both were illegal aliens and both committed mass murder.If
one lot are bad then so also are the other lot. If one lot deserve
decorations from their country then so do the other lot.
One wrong does not make another wrong right.
--
Auld Bob
The Highlander
> DVH wrote:
> > "aracari" <spamtrap@váilable.here.com> wrote in message
> >news:65d3a6537e78a2c1...@aracari.127.0.0.1...
>
> >> Rotfl. As if the Scottish legal system has any power to enforce
> >> such conditions on a man in Tripoli.
>
> > East Renfrewshire Social Services must have a branch office in Libya.
>
> I'd be prepared to bet that someone from the local probation office gets
> a trip to the nice warm Libyan desert now and again...
>
> At our expense...
Mel Rowing
> "Mel Rowing" <mel.row...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
> > Considering that the Lockerbie bombing also followed the downing of an
> > Airbus A300B2 operated by Iran Air as IR655 that was destroyed by the U.S.
> > Navy's guided missile cruiser USS Vincennes. This illegal action happened
> > when the USS Vincennes steamed into Iranian waters and shot down the
> > civilian airliner in Iranian airspace and killed 290 people including 66
> > children.
>
> USS Vincennes entered Iranian water in pursuit of an Iranian gunboat
> that had engaged one of her helicopters in international waters.
>
> It is illegal to enter any country without that countries express
> permission. There is no excuse for an illegal acts by claiming you are chasing people
> who are also doing wrong.
The Iranian theocratic government was and is a pack of bandits.
They laugh at the rule of law. We are talking in the context of the
takeover of the US embassy by Iranian students an incident that
dragged on for over a year. There is but one way to deal with bandits.
Vincennes was about her lawful business in international waters. The
attack on her helicopter was in itself an act of war. From that moment
on all legal niceties are off. She pursued the gunboat into its own
waters with a view towards sinking it.
> IR655 was picked up on radar was mistakenly identified as a F14 of the
> IAF she was challenged on both military and civil frequencies and made
> no response.
>
> Sheer reckless incompetance on the part of the USS Vincennes crew who not
> only illegally in another countries waters but had now made a grave error of
> identification of a civilian aircraft and were illegally demanding they
> identify themselves.
In these days of automated warfare adversaries rarely see one another
close enough to recognise markings and pennants. Whatever the
legalities, hostilities were on going. That being the situation, no
civil aircraft should have been in the area. The truth probably is
that the captain of IR655 was blissfully unaware of what was going on
under him. Equally likely ATC Bandar Abbas were not aware either
otherwise flying would have been redirected or suspended altogether.
It's just as likely that the Iranian authorities were unaware and that
the gunboat crew had not reported the situation. These are not high
calibre western military personnel who have the use of a sophisticated
logistic support and communications system.
> Let me remind you, the civilian aircraft was going
> about its legal business and the USS ship was the alien craft in this area.
> It is the USS ship who are legally charged with the duty of identifying
> themselves.
And would have identified itself in its attempt to communicate with
the aircraft on both civil and military frequencies. The most probable
scenario is that for whatever reason he did not receive either
otherwise he would have cooperated. His first duty was to the safety
of his passengers.
Vincennes had every right to assume at that tie that the unresponsive
aircraft on the radar screen had hostile intent and react accordingly.
What if it had been an F14? Was the commander supposed to wait until
the first missile crashed through his decks? Had he done so and
survived then without doubt he would have been up before the Navy
Board (or US equivalent) for endangering the safety of his ship.
In fact it is quite usual for warships to maintain an air defence zone
around them particularly when on operations. Indeed I believe that one
of the boasts of the USN is that no aircraft without authorisation
even in international waters can get closer than 200 miles to a
capital ship within a battle group and survive. Quite right too! These
are valuable pieces of kit in more ways than one.
> > I do not suppose we will ever get the truth but the evidence certainly
> > points to USA Government involvement in Lockerbie's tragic involvement.
>
> What evidence?
WHAT EVIDENCE ?
True Blue
> reached at his home or in hospital.
>
> Libyan officials could say nothing about the whereabouts of Abdul Baset Ali
> al-Megrahi, and his Scottish monitors could not contact him by telephone.
> They will try again to speak to him today but if they fail to reach him, the
> Scottish government could face a new crisis.
This scale of naivety reminds me of the scene at the end of The Life
of Brian, when the Good Samaritan is being hoisted up on a cross he
was mistakenly assigned to, after the man he felt sorry for left him
holding it; "Will you let me down if he comes back?"
abelard
wrote:
>Mel Rowing <mel.r...@btinternet.com> wrote in
>news:9f7519eb-a835-4778...@19g2000vbq.googlegroups.com:
>No she wasn't. she was in Iranian waters and, at one point also illegally
>in UAR waters and told to clear off.
>
>> The
>> attack on her helicopter was in itself an act of war.
>
>This was the helicopter that was illegally skulking around in Iranian
>waters spying and harassing gunboats.
>
>
>> a.
>>> It is the USS ship who are legally charged with the duty of
>>> identifying themselves.
>>
>> And would have identified itself in its attempt to communicate with
>> the aircraft on both civil and military frequencies.
>
>Except the Vincennes didn't have the necessary equipment to monitor
>civilian frequencies. Had the done so, they'd have heard an ongoing
>commentary from the airbus to ATC.
>
>
>> Vincennes had every right to assume at that tie that the unresponsive
>> aircraft on the radar screen had hostile intent and react accordingly.
>
>Why? The aircraft was squawking IFF correctly on both COMAIR and MILAIR.
>The failure was on the part of the Vincennes.
>
>> What if it had been an F14? Was the commander supposed to wait until
>> the first missile crashed through his decks?
>
>No. He should have checked with other USN ships in the area who had
>correctly identified it as a civilian aircraft
jeezus you commies don't half agonise....
the good guys won....that's what matters...
not your boring whining
Mel Rowing
> Mel Rowing <mel.row...@btinternet.com> wrote innews:a3b97217-6b43-4f78...@t42g2000vba.googlegroups.com:
> It was already identifying itself on civilian IFF. The Vincennes didn't
> have the neccessary equipment on board to monitor civilian frequencies.
> It was also following the standard internationally agreed scheduled
> airliner flightpath and it was climbing.
That would surprise me!
She was brand new state of the art for her day.
Modern warships bristle with electronics. They are more than the "war
canoes" of yesteryear. They double up as command and control and
intelligence gathering centres. In the years that Soviet warships used
to occasionally sail down the North sea and through the Straits of
Dover, they were doing a little more than showing the flag. They (both
sides apparently) also used to use trawlers for similar purposes
Similarly when Bear aircraft flew similar routes they were doing more
than demonstrating capability.
There's much to be gained radar frequencies and systems, microwave
links to be probed, military communication and other systems the lies
of you and me have never dreamed of.
> > Why we shall never know.
>
> Sure we do. The Vincennes engaged in reckless, aggressive and
> illegal harassment of Iranian vessels in their own waters and then got
> everything wrong as the crew went into meltdown. It's two sister ships,
> also in the area, correctly identified the Iranian airbus as a scheduled
> flight. And immediately reported the Vincennes had hit a civil airliner.
>
> > It was an unfortunate accident and nothing more.
>
> Really? And yet the crew got given a medal for his actions on that day.
>
> > USS Vincennes did not enter Iranian waters with the intent of engaging
> > civilian aircraft from Bandar Abbas airfield
>
> That's right, it illegally entered Iranian waters with the intention of
> provoking a reaction.
> "Commander David Carlson, commanding officer of the USS Sides, the
> warship stationed near to the Fisk, 2005 at the time of the incident,
> said that the destruction of the aircraft "marked the horrifying climax
> to Captain Rogers' aggressiveness, first seen four weeks ago.""
> >> attack.
>
> > No decorations or honours were awarded to the ships company
> > specifically in respect of this incident.
>
> Yes they were. They specifically mention actions on that day. The
> citation from the Navy Commendation Medal awarded to the air warfare
> co-ordinator names the day, the medal citation noted his ability to
> "quickly and precisely complete the firing procedure.
Much of this is lifted straight from Wiki particularly here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655
Whilst there's nothing particularly wrong in that, I use Wiki myself,
there is always the problem of seperating fact from agenda. The source
should never be taken for granted.
For instance:
Find the details of the above quoted citation in the cited source:
http://www.history.com/content/militaryblunders/iran-air-shot-down
It doesn't appear. At the same time mitigating circumstances in favour
of the Vincelles action are simply ignored.
> At the end of the day, The US stumped up $140M in compensation to
> pursued the Iranians to stop the case the Iranians had raised against
> them in the International Justice Court.
Well they had to didn't they?
The alternative explanation to the claim that the shooting down of
IR655 was inadvertent is that it was deliberate and that would beg the
question why.
The major point you miss.
Had the roles been reversed the US would never have got Iran to the
Hague. No compensation was ever paid with respect to the US Embassy
hostages who were illegally imprisoned for over 400 days.
Similarly when an incident like this occurs the incident is
investigated in the full light of public scrutiny and a free press.
There is no free press in totalitarian regimes. Truth takes the form
of a statement by the authorities that goes unquestioned and
unexamined. Further they will milk a situation like this for all its
worth.
The notion of international law is fine in a situation whereby all
parties respect it. However, such countries don't enter
into conflict with each other. So you generally get the situation
where one side respects law the other doesn't One side treats the
other's prisoners according to the Geneva convention. The other
beheads them.
It's regrettable but at the end of the day it is the standards of
behaviour of the most ruthless that prevail. In war you have to be as
ruthless as your opponent.
It confuses me that one should see moral equivalence between the
governments of the United States and Iran where the Iranians aren't
even particularly nice towards each other.
Robert Peffers
On Dec 16, 2:00 pm, "Robert Peffers" <peffer...@btinternet.com> wrote:
> "Mel Rowing" <mel.row...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
> > Considering that the Lockerbie bombing also followed the downing of an
> > Airbus A300B2 operated by Iran Air as IR655 that was destroyed by the
> > U.S.
> > Navy's guided missile cruiser USS Vincennes. This illegal action
> > happened
> > when the USS Vincennes steamed into Iranian waters and shot down the
> > civilian airliner in Iranian airspace and killed 290 people including 66
> > children.
>
> USS Vincennes entered Iranian water in pursuit of an Iranian gunboat
> that had engaged one of her helicopters in international waters.
>
> It is illegal to enter any country without that countries express
> permission. There is no excuse for an illegal acts by claiming you are
> chasing people
> who are also doing wrong.
The Iranian theocratic government was and is a pack of bandits.
That has nothing whatsoever to do with USS Vincennes crossing the border
into another countries territory.
Nether is it the business of anyone who is not an Iranian.
t the rule of law. We are talking in the context of the
takeover of the US embassy by Iranian students an incident that
dragged on for over a year. There is but one way to deal with bandits.
Actually that is not true but, however, the bandits in this case were the
illegal aggressors who sailed USS Vincennes into another nations territory.
Even if they had done so in error, they would still have been acting
illegally. To do so with aggression jusy makes them even more culpable. To
then to have the sheer temerity, as an illegal invader, to demand a legally
classified civilian should, at gunpoint, identify themselves, is, without
doubt, as grave an offence in international law as anyone is likely to find
anywhere. For someone to attempt to defend such illegal actions by citing
any other criminal activity is the hight of utter stupidity. Youare thus
utterly stupid.
opter was in itself an act of war. From that moment
on all legal niceties are off. She pursued the gunboat into its own
waters with a view towards sinking it.
Exactly what I said, theUSS Vincennes sailed into another countries waters
with the express intention of sinking a boat.
So not only were they breaking international law by just being across that
border but they did so to commit an illegal act.
It is not a defence in law to say, "but your honour - he/she did it first".
I have to wonder at the typically USAsian attitude, so often seen on these
newsgroups, that goes along the lines of, "but what about the Russians,
Chinese, Germans, or whatever other nation the USAsian perceives as haveing
committed a graver crime than that committed by some USAsian or other.
Don't you get it? It cannot justify an action that someone else has either
done the same, or done worse. The crime is still a crime and does not become
less of a crime by comparason with another.
.> IR655 was picked up on radar was mistakenly identified as a F14 of the
> IAF she was challenged on both military and civil frequencies and made
> no response.
>
> Sheer reckless incompetance on the part of the USS Vincennes crew who not
> only illegally in another countries waters but had now made a grave error
> of
> identification of a civilian aircraft and were illegally demanding they
> identify themselves.
In these days of automated warfare adversaries rarely see one another
close enough to recognise markings and pennants. Whatever the
legalities, hostilities were on going.
In the first place, as a retired electronics worker with the MOD, I need no
lectures from anyone on modern warfare.
In the second place the matter was out of hand and illegal, the moment the
USS Vincennes sailed across that border and thus put herself in the wrong.
Now, to show my own knowledge of the electronic warfare situation, I will
show you just how much the USS Vincennes were total incompetants.
The flight path of the civilian aircraft at the time of USS Vincennes
opening fire was a long slow climb.
So even a child could have figured out that it was not, in any way, in an
attacking situation. You do not fly up and away from your target if you
intend to attack it.
So we have one of the USA's most sophisticated, guided weapons, crusiers,
supposedly crewed by a fully trained crew, that cannot figure out that a
target they are ready to shoot out of the sky is flying up and away from
them. Don't make me laugh, the truth is that they knew full well the target
was not a warplane, was not in an attacking position and was not a threat to
them.
They shot it down none the less.
That being the situation, no
civil aircraft should have been in the area. The truth probably is
that the captain of IR655 was blissfully unaware of what was going on
under him. Equally likely ATC Bandar Abbas were not aware either
otherwise flying would have been redirected or suspended altogether.
It's just as likely that the Iranian authorities were unaware and that
the gunboat crew had not reported the situation. These are not high
calibre western military personnel who have the use of a sophisticated
logistic support and communications system.
Whatever the situation was, or was not, the fact that USS Vincennes sailed
across the border put the USA in the wrong - even if they had turned round
and sailed back out, they had violated the Iranian territory and broken
international law.
> Let me remind you, the civilian aircraft was going
> about its legal business and the USS ship was the alien craft in this
> area.
> It is the USS ship who are legally charged with the duty of identifying
> themselves.
And would have identified itself in its attempt to communicate with
the aircraft on both civil and military frequencies. The most probable
scenario is that for whatever reason he did not receive either
otherwise he would have cooperated. His first duty was to the safety
of his passengers.
Oh! Come on! We are talking about an aircraft in its own airspace but with a
war zone just across the border. Need I remind you that radio waves are no
respectors of international borders and the airwaves must have been full of
several countries electronic signals.
Vincennes had every right,
Rubbish! USS Vincennes had no rights whatsoever. She was NOT in
international waters but had deliberatly sailed into another country where
she was an alien invader breaking international law.
She had no rights whatsoever but to give herself up as an illegal alien and
request clemency as a lawbreaker.
> to assume at that tie that the unresponsive
aircraft on the radar screen had hostile intent and react accordingly.
Nope! USS Vincennes had no such right while out of international waters.
Furthermore the flight path of the civilian aircraft, as shown on every
radar in the area, was a long slow climb away from the illegal alien ship.
Not only that but when the data recorders were examined later it was shown
that USS Vincennes were showing the wrong time and their electronics were
thus out of sync with everyone elses.
What if it had been an F14? Was the commander supposed to wait until
the first missile crashed through his decks?
As ti happens, as long as he was in another countries waters illegally, that
is exactly what he should have done.
In the first place the civilian aircraft was flying up and away from him
when the weapons officer gave the order to launch the two guided weapons at
a plane that was flying up and away from him. There is no way in this World
\that he did not know the flight path of the civilian aircraft for after a
target is identified it goes from the main radars to the attack radars, (all
of which would \have been locked on to the target).
Had he done so and
survived then without doubt he would have been up before the Navy
Board (or US equivalent) for endangering the safety of his ship.
He should have been there anyway as soon as he sailed out of international
waters and into another countries territory as an invader. If there had been
any Iranian warships, aircraft, submarines or guided misiles within range
they had legal carte blanch to blow him out of the water.
In fact it is quite usual for warships to maintain an air defence zone
around them particularly when on operations. Indeed I believe that one
of the boasts of the USN is that no aircraft without authorisation
even in international waters can get closer than 200 miles to a
capital ship within a battle group and survive. Quite right too! These
are valuable pieces of kit in more ways than one.
Now you really are showing how stupid your points are.
You have just claimed that it is all right for any USA ship, anywhere in the
World, has the right to take out anyone who comes withiin 200 mile3s of them
but you are attemting to make the case for a USA warship to sail into
someone else's territory and deny that country the right to take it our.
> > I do not suppose we will ever get the truth but the evidence certainly
> > points to USA Government involvement in Lockerbie's tragic involvement.
>
> What evidence?
WHAT EVIDENCE ?
> All the evidence here points to the fact that you have been selective
> with the truth.
The whole truth is that a USA warship sailed into another countries
territory and knowingly brought down a civilian aircraft that was flying up,
and away, from murdering 290 civilians in the process.
The evidence is clear on every radar in the area that the civilian craft was
flying up and away from USS Vincennes when she opened the attack.
--
Auld Bob
Robert Peffers
"abelard" <abel...@abelard.org> wrote in message
news:c17ii55451ps9p2ch...@4ax.com...
I see we have yet another thick English idiot back again.
The normal English people must really be embarrassed by these numpties.
--
Auld Bob
Robert Peffers
"Mel Rowing" <mel.r...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:9df68843-3d39-49a5...@n31g2000vbt.googlegroups.com...
On Dec 16, 4:08 pm, soupdragon <m...@privacy.com> wrote:
> Mel Rowing <mel.row...@btinternet.com> wrote
> innews:a3b97217-6b43-4f78...@t42g2000vba.googlegroups.com:
> It was already identifying itself on civilian IFF. The Vincennes didn't
> have the neccessary equipment on board to monitor civilian frequencies.
> It was also following the standard internationally agreed scheduled
> airliner flightpath and it was climbing.
That would surprise me!
She was brand new state of the art for her day.
Modern warships bristle with electronics. They are more than the "war
canoes" of yesteryear. They double up as command and control and
intelligence gathering centres. In the years that Soviet warships used
to occasionally sail down the North sea and through the Straits of
Dover, they were doing a little more than showing the flag. They (both
sides apparently) also used to use trawlers for similar purposes
Similarly when Bear aircraft flew similar routes they were doing more
than demonstrating capability.
There's much to be gained radar frequencies and systems, microwave
links to be probed, military communication and other systems the lies
of you and me have never dreamed of.
Speak for yourself. I spent 50 years in the MOD on in Electronics.
I served in the Instrument Shop, The Weapons section, The Radar Bay and the
RADIAC.
Here is just two little facts, that do not require special knowledsge, that
prove the USS Vincennes knew the airliner was not a threat to that ship.
TheUSS Vincennes had her time wrongly set up and was thus out of sync with
every other navy vessel in the area.
The flight path of the civilian aircraft that showed on every ship, ground
station and aircraft within radar range showed that the civilian craft was
climbing, up and away, from the USS Vincennes.
The conclusion can only be this - USS Vincennes had a helecopter harrassing
gunboats in Iranian waters, when the Iranians opened fire, (in fact they did
not have enough range to hit the aircraft), the USS Vincennes then sailed
into Iranian territory in pursuit of the gunboats. While there she shot down
a civilian airliner that was obviously flying away from the USS Vincennes.
In so doing she murdered 290 people invluding 66 children. The USA then
decorated the crew of the USS Vincennes for those 290 murders.
No matter how you try to twist the facts the evidence is plainj and it comes
from several different nations. Including those who are allies of the USA.
The skipper and officers of USS Vincennes should have rotted in prison for
their actions and the fact that they have not has a lot to do with the
Lockerbie bomb incident and the WTO attack by terrorists.
If you think you are above the law the only way the underdog can hit back is
by terrorism and history teaches us that you cannot beat a terrorist
organisation by attempting to wipe them all out. Thing is, that every time
you wipe out another one you create another batch from their friends and
family.
--
Auld Bob
Mel Rowing
> "Mel Rowing" <mel.row...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
> > > I do not suppose we will ever get the truth but the evidence certainly
> > > points to USA Government involvement in Lockerbie's tragic involvement.
>
> > What evidence?
>
> WHAT EVIDENCE ?
WHAT EVIDENCE of "USA Government involvement in Lockerbie's tragic
involvement" (Your words not mine!) ?
Not only are you claiming that a US warship deliberately and knowingly
targeted a civil airliner, a decision that would need to have been
taken much higher than the commander of the vessel concerned, but that
the US authorities somehow connived in the destruction of Pan Am 103.
And you call other people stupid?
Mel Rowing
> "Mel Rowing" <mel.row...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
> Speak for yourself. I spent 50 years in the MOD on in Electronics.
> I served in the Instrument Shop, The Weapons section, The Radar Bay and the
> RADIAC.
What happened then?
Did they buy a vacuum cleaner?
William Black
> On Dec 16, 3:39 am, William Black <william.bl...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>> DVH wrote:
>>> news:65d3a6537e78a2c1...@aracari.127.0.0.1...
>>>> Rotfl. As if the Scottish legal system has any power to enforce
>>>> such conditions on a man in Tripoli.
>>> East Renfrewshire Social Services must have a branch office in Libya.
>> I'd be prepared to bet that someone from the local probation office gets
>> a trip to the nice warm Libyan desert now and again...
>>
>> At our expense...
>> Not at your expense. At the expence of the Scottish government.
1. Learn to configure a newsreader.
2. Who do you think pays for Scotland's parasitic talking shop?
abelard
>I see we have yet another thick English idiot back again.
>The normal English people must really be embarrassed by these numpties.
you dependents don't have a vote
Robert Peffers
What happened then?
They had long established most areas for electronics as, "Clean areas", and
employed a succession of semi-idiots, much like yourself, under a government
policy agreed with Trade Unions. They took a percentage of such unfortunate
people to clean up. However, I had retired as an electronics specialist long
before these poor unfortunates were sacked after the defence work was
transferred to the private sector.
It is significant that your area of interest hinges upon the housekeeping of
such high tech matters rather than the technology concerned.
Ah! Well! To each his own.
--
Auld Bob
Robert Peffers
Do you actually think there is no evidence?
In the first place there is ample proof the U.S. Navy's guided missile
cruiser USS Vincennes had a helecopter illegally within Iranian airspace.
This was flying far too high for any weapons on the Iranian gunboats to
reach.
Remember these gunboats were within their own territory and, as the
helecopter was there illegally, they were well within their rights to shoot
down that helecopter if they could.
They opened fire but there was no way they were going to be able to hit the
illegal invader.
It reply U.S. Navy's guided missile cruiser USS Vincennes took up the chase
and sailed across the border into Iran, now she too was an illegal alien and
a legal target for Iranian forces. In taking his ship into Iranian waters
the skipper was either guilty of endangering his ship and crew or he had
higher permission to invade foreign territory. The fact that he was not
court marchalled but decorated for the action signifies he had official
sanction to invade Iran.
At that point he then failed to identify a civilian aircraft, that every
other craft in the area correctly identified, and instead identified it as a
military target. Even if it had been a military target, he then, while
invading a foreign power, opened fire upon the craft and brought it down.
The civilian aircraft was not only identifying itself as a civilian craft
but was flying an upward path away from U.S. Navy's guided missile cruiser
USS Vincennes.
Now, as to the Lockerbie matter. The evidence shows that USA government
officials were prevented, at very short notice, not to fly on that
particular flight. To date no satisfactory explanation of why this was done
has been given.
So, yes, there is much evidence there was USA involvement, or at least prior
information, about the Lockerbie bombing.
By the way a Boeing 747-131 jetliner, TWA's flight 800, with 230 people on
board was about 11 minutes into flight. It was flying at 13,700 feet above
sea leve and was over the Atlantic ocean south of Long Island, New York. The
plane exloded without warning. Thousands of pounds of kerosene, dumped from
the center and wing tanks, vaporized and ignited, creating a fireball seen
all along the coastline of Long Island. Under the orange glow of the
fireball, sections of the 747 tumbled into the ocean. So completely had the
plane broken up that weather radar confused the expanding bubble of debris
for a cloud. This plane is also suspected to have suffered a missile
attack. Go read up on that one too.
--
Auld Bob
Robert Peffers
On Dec 16, 8:03 pm, "Robert Peffers" <peffer...@btinternet.com> wrote:
> "Mel Rowing" <mel.row...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
> > > I do not suppose we will ever get the truth but the evidence certainly
> > > points to USA Government involvement in Lockerbie's tragic
> > > involvement.
>
> > What evidence?
>
> WHAT EVIDENCE ?
WHAT EVIDENCE of "USA Government involvement in Lockerbie's tragic
involvement" (Your words not mine!) ?
Not only are you claiming that a US warship deliberately and knowingly
targeted a civil airliner,
I'm not claiming. I'm proving that they did.
>
a decision that would need to have been
taken much higher than the commander of the vessel concerned, but that
the US authorities somehow connived in the destruction of Pan Am 103.
Rubbish!
There is no boubt whatsoever that the attach took place. There is no doubt
that the attacking ship was in Iranian territory. There is no doubt that the
ship had instigated the entire incident by flying a helecopter into Iranian
airspace and was interfereing in them doing their legal duty within their
own waters. There is no doubt that they shot down the civilian aircraft and
as they were in Iranian waters they did not even have the right to ask the
aircraft to identify itself.
As to the rest of your utterly stupid accusations - the fact that the
skipper and officers of the ship were not court marcxhalled is proof enough
they were sanctioned in their actions but if further proof was needed they
were also, the entire ship's company, decorated for murdering innocent
civilians.
--
Auld Bob
soupdragon
> On Dec 16, 4:08�pm, soupdragon <m...@privacy.com> wrote:
>> Mel Rowing <mel.row...@btinternet.com> wrote
>> innews:a3b97217-6b43-4f78-96
> a6-f6e5...@t42g2000vba.googlegroups.com:
>
>> It was already identifying itself on civilian IFF. The Vincennes
>> didn't have the neccessary equipment on board to monitor civilian
>> frequencies. It was also following the standard internationally
>> agreed scheduled airliner flightpath and it was climbing.
>
> That would surprise me!
Why?
> She was brand new state of the art for her day.
She was not a new ship, but she had been fitted with the Aegis system,
a system totally unsuited to dealing with small ships. The crew were
poorly trained in the use of the equipment and it had an IFF system that
required manual setting. It was geared for military targets.
Umm no. But thanks for the link anyway.
>
> Whilst there's nothing particularly wrong in that, I use Wiki myself,
> there is always the problem of seperating fact from agenda. The source
> should never be taken for granted.
>
> For instance:
>
> Find the details of the above quoted citation in the cited source:
>
> http://www.history.com/content/militaryblunders/iran-air-shot-down
Erm no. The full quote follows. It is taken from Robert Fisk's book
on the subject, in which he interviewed Carlson.
Captain David Carlson, commander of the USS Sides, a warship stationed
nearby the Vincennes at the time of the incident, is reported to have
said that the destruction of the aircraft "marked the horrifying climax
to Captain Rogers' aggressiveness, first seen four weeks ago" - that
referring to incidents on the 2nd June when Rogers' had sailed the
Vincennes too close to an Iranian frigate undertaking a lawful search of
a bulk carrier; launched a helicopter within 2-3 miles of an Iranian
small craft despite rules of engagement requiring a 4 mile separation;
and opened fire on a number of small Iranian military boats. Of those
incidents, Carlson commented "Why do you want an Aegis cruiser out there
shooting up boats? It wasn't a smart thing to do". At the time of
Rogers' announcement to higher command that he was going to shoot down
the plane, Carlson is reported to have been thunderstruck: "I said to
folks around me, 'why, what the hell is he doing?'".
''The Great War for Civilisation - The Conquest of the Middle East".
Robert Fisk, Fourth Estate, October 2005 pp318-328. ISBN 184115007X
That's a primary source.
>> At the end of the day, The US stumped up $140M in compensation to
>> pursued the Iranians to stop the case the Iranians had raised against
>> them in the International Justice Court.
>
> Well they had to didn't they?
Of course. They were guilty as charged, despite the laughable attempt
at a whitewash by the US Navy.
>
> The alternative explanation to the claim that the shooting down of
> IR655 was inadvertent is that it was deliberate and that would beg the
> question why.
>
> The major point you miss.
There are no major points to miss. US was running a proxy war against
Iran by using Iraq following the fall of the US/UK puppet, the Shah.
It turned a blind eye to the use of chemical weapons by Iraq against
Iran (and Kurds) trying to claim it was Iran - until the victims were
flown out to Sweden for treatment. It sent its own ships to stop Iran
retaliating pretending to 'protect' oil tankers which, for some reason
thought it ok to sail through a full scale war zone.
The Vincennes itself was acting in a reckless manner sending helicopters
in to spy on on Iranian gunboats in there own waters and used the
Iranian retaliation as an excuse to mount an attack using a weapons
system that was wholly unsuited to the task and a crew inadequately
trained.
> into conflict with each other. So you generally get the situation
> where one side respects law the other doesn't One side treats the
> other's prisoners according to the Geneva convention.
And you think the US treats prisoners in accordance with the Geneva
Convention? So tell us about 'rendition' flights and Guantanamo Bay.
You need to get your head out the sand and waken up.
chingang
>pursued the Iranians to stop the case the Iranians had raised against
>them in the International Justice Court.
That's odd! The US had frozen all Iranian assets in the US since they
severed diplomatic relations with Iran after the invasion of the US
Embassy by Iranian agent provocateurs - President Aboudinejad was one
of those "students".
Its not likely the US would offer anything to Iran in the from of
compensation. Why didn't the Iranians pursue the matter legally?
The Straits of Hormuz is international waters and it is approx. seven
miles wide and the US mission was to stop the disruption of tanker
flow being harrassed by Iranian gunboats. The fact that the Iranians
had gunboats invites the onset of "gunboat diplomacy" that resulted in
the loss of the airliner that by all intents and purposes could have
been in use by the Iranian military, who were at present involved in a
war of attrition and used "nerve gas" after Saddam had used it on
them. So alls fair in love and war, especially when there is no
diplomacy on either end.
By the way, Iran test-fired a missile today that claims it can reach
Israel. They must be getting ready for the inevitable attack on their
facilities as they near the deadline to accept an IAEA proposal to
enrich fuel. They walked away from the negotiations and why do you
think the US so urgently needs to beef up troops in Afghanistan?
Surely its not the "Taliban" threat! The new year brings down their
nuclear facilities buried inder the sands. There is no more "moral"
issues of right and wrong if indeed Iran has a nuclear weapon of some
kind. They will be flattened if they don't cooperate. Obama has taken
alot of flak for sending troops to Afghanistan, but he can't say what
the real mission is. Wait and see boys, all of this discussion will
become moot in the following weeks.
HardySpicer
> "Mystery surrounded the Lockerbie bomber last night after he could not be
> reached at his home or in hospital.
>
> Libyan officials could say nothing about the whereabouts of Abdul Baset Ali
> al-Megrahi, and his Scottish monitors could not contact him by telephone.
> They will try again to speak to him today but if they fail to reach him, the
> Scottish government could face a new crisis.
>
> address or leave Tripoli, and must keep in regular communication with East
> Renfrewshire Council."
>
> http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article695829...
Wasn't there a clause somewhere that if he didn't die in 3 months then
we could shoot him?
HardySpicer
> "aracari" <spamtrap@váilable.here.com> wrote in message
>
> news:65d3a6537e78a2c1...@aracari.127.0.0.1...
>
> > Rotfl. As if the Scottish legal system has any power to enforce
> > such conditions on a man in Tripoli.
>
> East Renfrewshire Social Services must have a branch office in Libya.
Yes, they have a heavy influence in the Arab world does Renfrewshire
cooncil
The Highlander
wrote:
> The Highlander wrote:
> > On Dec 16, 3:39 am, William Black <william.bl...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
> >> DVH wrote:
> >>>news:65d3a6537e78a2c1...@aracari.127.0.0.1...
> >>>> Rotfl. As if the Scottish legal system has any power to enforce
> >>>> such conditions on a man in Tripoli.
> >>> East Renfrewshire Social Services must have a branch office in Libya.
> >> I'd be prepared to bet that someone from the local probation office gets
> >> a trip to the nice warm Libyan desert now and again...
>
> >> At our expense...
> >> Not at your expense. At the expence of the Scottish government.
>
> 1. Learn to configure a newsreader.
>
> 2. Who do you think pays for Scotland's parasitic talking shop?
>
> --
James Silverton
> On Dec 16, 12:39 pm, William Black <william.bl...@hotmail.co.uk>
> wrote:
>> The Highlander wrote:
> >> On Dec 16, 3:39 am, William Black
> >> <william.bl...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
> >>> DVH wrote:
> >>>> "aracari" <spamtrap@v�ilable.here.com> wrote in message
> >>>> news:65d3a6537e78a2c1...@aracari.127.0.0.1...
> >>>>> Rotfl. As if the Scottish legal system has any power to
> >>>>> enforce such conditions on a man in Tripoli.
> >>>> East Renfrewshire Social Services must have a branch
> >>>> office in Libya.
> >>> I'd be prepared to bet that someone from the local
> >>> probation office gets a trip to the nice warm Libyan
> >>> desert now and again...
>>
> >>> At our expense...
> >>> Not at your expense. At the expence of the Scottish
> >>> government.
>>
>> 1. Learn to configure a newsreader.
>>
>> 2. Who do you think pays for Scotland's parasitic talking
>> shop?
>>
>> --
>> Why, William Black of course! Why should we pay our way when
>> we already have a bunch of suckers on the hook?
>Why, William Black of course! Why should we pay our way when we already
>have a bunch >of suckers on the hook?
I might agree with your sentiments but what is this "we" from someone
posting from Canada?
--
James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland
Email, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not
William Black
> On Dec 16, 12:39 pm, William Black <william.bl...@hotmail.co.uk>
> wrote:
>> The Highlander wrote:
>>> On Dec 16, 3:39 am, William Black <william.bl...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> DVH wrote:
>>>>> news:65d3a6537e78a2c1...@aracari.127.0.0.1...
>>>>>> Rotfl. As if the Scottish legal system has any power to enforce
>>>>>> such conditions on a man in Tripoli.
>>>>> East Renfrewshire Social Services must have a branch office in Libya.
>>>> I'd be prepared to bet that someone from the local probation office gets
>>>> a trip to the nice warm Libyan desert now and again...
>>>> At our expense...
>>>> Not at your expense. At the expence of the Scottish government.
>> 1. Learn to configure a newsreader.
>>
>> 2. Who do you think pays for Scotland's parasitic talking shop?
>>
>> --
>> Why, William Black of course! Why should we pay our way when we already have a bunch of suckers on the hook?
>
>
>
Who's this 'we'?
You don't live there, you ran away, remember...