Posted on 04/11/2018 12:42:17 PM PDT by Kaslin
The Airbus A300 was supposed to be on a short flight across the water to an affluent tourism center.
There were 290 people on board.
In the first few minutes of the flight, a Defense Department report would later explain, the Airbus followed a regular commercial air corridor, climbing toward an assigned altitude of 14,000 feet.
But at 13,500 feet there was an explosion -- and the plane fell into sea. All on board were killed.
President Ronald Reagan, as the Associated Press reported that Fourth of July weekend in 1988, soon issued a written statement.
"This is a terrible human tragedy," Reagan said. "Our sympathy and condolences go out to the passengers, crew and their families."
But that did not placate the Iranians.
The USS Vincennes -- operating in the Strait of Hormuz at the foot of the Persian Gulf -- had fired two missiles at Iran Air Flight 655, while also engaged with a number of Iranian gunboats. The captain of the Vincennes mistakenly believed he was taking down an Iranian F-14.
Tehran Radio, as reported by Reuters, broadcasted Iran's immediate reaction.
"We will not leave the crimes of America unanswered," it said. "We will resist the plots of the Great Satan and avenge the blood of our martyrs from criminal mercenaries."
Five months later, Pan Am Flight 103, a 747 packed with Americans heading home for Christmas, took off from London's Heathrow Airport heading toward New York.
As it flew over southern Scotland, a bomb exploded in its cargo hold. A Scottish court later concluded this "explosive device" had been "contained within a Toshiba radio cassette player in a brown Samsonite suitcase along with various items of clothing."
The 747 dropped 31,000 feet to the ground. All 259 people on board were killed. So, too, were 11 more in the Scottish town of Lockerbie.
Did the Iranians do it? Was this their murderous revenge for the accidental downing of Flight 655? Did their Syrian allies help them?
On Nov. 15, 1991, The New York Times retrospectively summarized the initial thinking on the attack: "For more than a year investigators had pursued a theory that the bombing was ordered by Iran and carried out by a Syrian-based terrorist group in retaliation for the mistaken downing of an Iranian airliner by a Navy warship in the Persian Gulf in 1988."
But meticulous investigators did not stop seeking the truth.
A posting on the CIA's online museum explains how a crucial piece of evidence discovered on the ground in Scotland helped prove that Libya -- not Syria and/or Iran -- was responsible for the attack.
"In 1989, months after the plane crash and end of the formal recovery effort, a piece of scorched shirt was discovered," says the CIA posting. "The piece contained a fragment of circuit board that the heat of the explosion had fused into the shirt's polyester fabric.
"The Scots photographed the circuit-board fragment and gave a photo to the FBI," it says, "who passed a copy to the CIA where a Directorate of Science & Technology (DS&T) electronics expert observed two things that reminded him of a device he had seen before -- a timer from an earlier Libyan terrorist attack. Further analysis confirmed that the fragment exactly matched part of a timer circuit manufactured specifically for the Libyans."
In November 1991, the United States and Scotland indicted alleged Libyan agents for the attack on Pan Am 103.
"I want to make some things clear from the outset," State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said the day the indictments came out. "The bombers were Libyan government intelligence operatives. This was a Libyan government operation from start to finish."
When President George H.W. Bush was asked by reporters about the Libyans being indicted for the Pan Am 103 attack, he said: "Syria has taken a bum rap on this, it appears."
In response to the attack on Pan Am 103 -- an indisputable act of war against the United States -- Congress would have been justified in authorizing the use of force to overthrow the regime of Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi. Instead, the U.S. worked to isolate Gadhafi and encircle him with sanctions.
After the U.S. invaded Iraq in 2003, Gadhafi gave up his weapons of mass destruction programs, paid reparations to the families of Pan Am 103 victims, restored normal relations with the United States and recognized we had a common enemy in al-Qaida.
Then President Obama used military force -- not authorized by Congress -- to help rebels overthrow Gadhafi.
After Gadhafi fell, the Islamic State established a foothold in Libya.
The moral in this chain of events? Look before you shoot.
There was a curious incident a few years ago involving a relative of Andy Card and her friendship with some Iraqi spies. This relative had an interesting story to tell about the Lockerbie bombing...remember?
I'll agree with that, however, he does not make his case that Syria did not do it.
I’m guessing the Amish did it.
Don’t forget that the arabs are experienced in staging false flag operations. Even the downtrodden “Palestinians”.
“After the U.S. invaded Iraq in 2003, Gadhafi gave up his weapons of mass destruction programs, paid reparations to the families of Pan Am 103 victims, restored normal relations with the United States and recognized we had a common enemy in al-Qaida.
Then President Obama used military force — not authorized by Congress — to help rebels overthrow Gadhafi.
After Gadhafi fell, the Islamic State established a foothold in Libya.
The moral in this chain of events?”
Don’t trust the United States if we ask you to give up your nukes.
Susan Lindhauer ...that’s the gal.
Are we 100% certain a chemical attack even happened?
Yeah, she supposedly had something to do with a former CIA guy named Dr. Richard Fuisz who blamed Syria for the attack.
A month after meeting with her- don’t recall if she was a journalist then or still a congressional staffer- President Clinton put a gag order on Fuisz.
That 0bama has always been on the side of ISIS. ISIS's enemies (such as Khaddafy) are his enemies.
And I read a long time ago that ACORN (yes, ACORN) was on the ground in Egypt for a couple of years before Morsi came to power.
I can only speak for myself, and the answer is no. The answer wold be the same if the question was: Do we know it didn’t happen? But the author of this piece said that Syria didn’t do it, and that was what my comment was based upon. If he is going to make that claim, then he should provide proof to back up that definitive assertion.
I said what I said because the US also promised to provide security to Ukraine in exchange for them giving up their nukes in 1995. We broke our promise when Russia invaded in 2014.
And then the US and others coerced Iraq into giving up their nuke program and then the US and others invaded Iraq in 2003.
That said, I can appreciate why the North Koreans aren’t so keen on giving up their nukes because once they do the US is more likely to invade.
Dont trust the United States if we ask you to give up your nukes.
At the time I brushed her off as a nut but then I had no idea that a few years later we’d be seeing an all-out attempt at a coup against a future US president...that’s even crazier.
I don’t believe anything from Obama’s CIA, FBI.
Anyone who does is a fool
There was also an Iranian intel officer who defected and claimed Iran was behind it... on the orders of Khomeini.... he also fingered Mugniyeh for the bombing of the Israeli embassy in Argentina... guy named Abolghassem Mesbahi.
Nobody seems to want to consider that Russia really needs the US to be caught somewhere in the middle of this issue. They would have one hell of a time making Assad and Iran make nice in the sandbox without the Great Satan to keep them otherwise occupied. While Obama’s militants might be desperate enough to stage this there are other players who have interests in keeping this dance going.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.