Difference between revisions of "Ken Dornstein"

From Wikispooks
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(#Lockerbie-author @DrMoragKerr considers renewed focus on Libyan 'suspects' a ''smokescreen'')
(BBC Radio Scotland's programme ''Good Morning Scotland'')
Line 35: Line 35:
 
On 4 October 2015, in a review of Dornstein's film in the ''Sunday Herald'', [[John Ashton]] wrote:
 
On 4 October 2015, in a review of Dornstein's film in the ''Sunday Herald'', [[John Ashton]] wrote:
 
:Now it ([[Lockerbie Bombing/Official Narrative|the prosecution’s Lockerbie narrative]]) has been breathed new life into by a three-part documentary for the US Public Broadcasting Service’s ''Frontline'' series. Trailed by a lengthy article in the ''New Yorker'', the film suggests that [[Abdelbaset al-Megrahi|Megrahi]] was, after all, involved in the bombing as an accomplice to a man called [[Abu Agila Mas’ud]]. I was a paid consultant during the early stages of the film’s production, but I disagree with its conclusions.<ref>[http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/13802164._Linking_Megrahi_to_a_new_Lockerbie_bombing_suspect_won_t_work_____he_was_innocent_and_his_conviction_is_a_stain_on_Scottish_justice_/ "Linking Megrahi to a new Lockerbie bombing suspect won't work ... he was innocent and his conviction is a stain on Scottish justice"]</ref>
 
:Now it ([[Lockerbie Bombing/Official Narrative|the prosecution’s Lockerbie narrative]]) has been breathed new life into by a three-part documentary for the US Public Broadcasting Service’s ''Frontline'' series. Trailed by a lengthy article in the ''New Yorker'', the film suggests that [[Abdelbaset al-Megrahi|Megrahi]] was, after all, involved in the bombing as an accomplice to a man called [[Abu Agila Mas’ud]]. I was a paid consultant during the early stages of the film’s production, but I disagree with its conclusions.<ref>[http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/13802164._Linking_Megrahi_to_a_new_Lockerbie_bombing_suspect_won_t_work_____he_was_innocent_and_his_conviction_is_a_stain_on_Scottish_justice_/ "Linking Megrahi to a new Lockerbie bombing suspect won't work ... he was innocent and his conviction is a stain on Scottish justice"]</ref>
 +
 
:The fear is that the ''Frontline'' film’s claims will provide the [[Crown Office]] with a ''smokescreen'', from behind which it can brief that Megrahi was guilty all along and that its failures were therefore immaterial. They were anything but and, until it is held to account for them, they will remain a terrible stain on Scottish justice.<ref>[http://www.megrahiyouaremyjury.net/?tag=abu-agila-masud "Response to PBS Frontline ‘My Brother’s Bomber’"]</ref>
 
:The fear is that the ''Frontline'' film’s claims will provide the [[Crown Office]] with a ''smokescreen'', from behind which it can brief that Megrahi was guilty all along and that its failures were therefore immaterial. They were anything but and, until it is held to account for them, they will remain a terrible stain on Scottish justice.<ref>[http://www.megrahiyouaremyjury.net/?tag=abu-agila-masud "Response to PBS Frontline ‘My Brother’s Bomber’"]</ref>
  
On 17 October 2015, interviewed on BBC Radio Scotland's programme ''Good Morning Scotland'', [[Morag Kerr]] said she considers the renewed focus on the two Libyan "suspects" a ''smokescreen''.<ref>[https://twitter.com/Pietertwits/status/655430151526883329 "#Lockerbie-author @DrMoragKerr considers renewed focus on Libyan 'suspects' a ''smokescreen''"]</ref>
+
On 17 October 2015, interviewed by presenter Isobel Fraser on BBC Radio Scotland's programme ''Good Morning Scotland'', [[Morag Kerr]] said she also considers the renewed focus on the two Libyan suspects a ''smokescreen'':<ref>[https://twitter.com/Pietertwits/status/655430151526883329 "#Lockerbie-author @DrMoragKerr considers renewed focus on Libyan 'suspects' a ''smokescreen''"]</ref>
 +
 
 +
:Isobel Fraser (24’24’’): That was [[Jason Pack]] who is president of the website [http://www.libya-analysis.com/ www.libya-analysis.com]. Well listening to that is Dr Morag Kerr who wrote the book [http://www.troubador.co.uk/book_info.asp?bookid=2499''Adequately Explained by Stupidity: Lockerbie, Luggage and Lies'']. Good morning Dr Kerr. Can I first of all just get your reaction to the developments this week?
 +
 
 +
:Morag Kerr (24’43’’): Well, as your last interviewee said, this isn’t news. The two individuals that have been named were known to the police as far back as 1991. And this isn’t something that has just been discovered. What has just happened is that Ken Dornstein’s films have been shown in America. Unfortunately, I haven’t seen them because they are region-barred in Scotland. But these films have brought this matter to the attention of the public and it appears that our [[Crown Office]] feels that it has to be seen to be doing something as a result.
 +
 
 +
:IF (25’23’’): It’s really that simple: you think they need to be seen to be doing something rather than the fact that it’s taken the actions of a civilian investigator to move the [[FBI]] and the Crown Office into action?
 +
 
 +
:MK (25’31’’): Well of course the civilian investigator was given the information by the FBI and the Crown Office in the first place. But as I think he said himself he had somewhat more freedom than officials would have had to move around Libya. But, as far as I understand it, nothing new has come out of this. These individuals were always part of the original Lockerbie investigation. And since [[Abdelbaset al-Megrahi|Megrahi]]’s release there’s always been this subtext about ‘we want to find his accomplices’. In my personal view, that’s by and large a ''smokescreen'' because it takes attention away from the very serious doubts and disquiet that surround the original conviction of Megrahi.
 +
 
 +
:IF (26’24’’): So as far as you’re concerned this is a bit of a wild goose chase then? If Megrahi’s conviction wasn’t sound, and we’re looking at two suspects linked to him, then it’s a bit of a waste of time?
 +
 
 +
:MK (26’34’’): Well that’s exactly it. Any case against [[Abdullah al-Senussi|Senussi]] and [[Abu Agila Mas’ud|Mas’ud]] would be based on the same essential evidence that was used to convict Megrahi in the first place. But that evidence has been systematically dismantled and discredited over a number of years. If that were to be tested in court then against new suspects, I’m afraid I would be very doubtful it would even get to court.
 +
 
 +
:IF (27’01’’): So where, if they shouldn’t be looking in Libya, where should they be looking?
 +
 
 +
:MK (27’04’’): Well that’s…that’s not the question for now. Until we have the official recognition of what really happened here, the point is the ''modus operandi'' the original investigation became convinced the bomb was introduced on Malta. Everything they have done has been predicated on this Malta assumption. Until that Malta assumption is put to bed – because it’s frankly chasing red herrings down blind alleys – until they accept they missed the clear and obvious evidence of the bomb being introduced at Heathrow, then there is no possibility of being able to do a proper investigation and identify the real culprits.
 +
 
 +
:IF (27’50’’): Why do you think then that the authorities are so intent on keeping Malta the focus and keeping Libya as the prime suspect?
 +
 
 +
:MK (27’59’’): Well you only have to look at what happened over the past twenty five years. I mean there comes a point when mistakes are made that they have been set in stone. Hillsborough was an example. The scandal of Hillsborough became not so much the mistakes made at the time, but the subsequent cover-up. Because they are in blood-steeped so far that to go on where it leads – or whatever the quote is – it’s so far down the line. That so much has happened on the basis of the Malta assumption, that two people were indicted because they were in Malta that day, Libya itself was put under punitive sanctions which destroyed the country’s economy in the following eight years. We can see where that has led us. Millions and millions of pounds of taxpayers’ money were spent on a show trial at a specially constructed court in the Netherlands. We’ve had the whole carry-on with Megrahi’s compassionate release, then the vilification of Scotland as a result. All of this has happened as a result of the Malta assumption.
 +
 
 +
:IF (29’09’’): So they’re too embarrassed to admit they were wrong and go back: is that it? It’s all down to a cock-up rather than a cover-up?
 +
 
 +
:MK (29’11’’): Well I think there comes a point where cock-up turns into cover-up. And who actually understands how wrong they were and who are simply closing their eyes and ears to the evidence of how wrong they were. It’s not really for me to say. That’s for the people involved to say.
 +
 
 +
:IF (29’33’’): Dr Morag Kerr, thank you very for your time this morning. Morag wrote the book [http://www.troubador.co.uk/book_info.asp?bookid=2499 ''Adequately Explained by Stupidity: Lockerbie, Luggage and Lies'']. (29’37’’)<ref>[http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b06gxv4t "Transcript of BBC Radio Scotland programme ''Good Morning Scotland''," 17 October 2015, (17’20’’ to 29’37’’)</ref>
 +
 
 
{{SMWDocs}}
 
{{SMWDocs}}
  
 
==References==
 
==References==
 
<references/>
 
<references/>

Revision as of 10:52, 19 October 2015

Person.png Ken Dornstein IMDBRdf-entity.pngRdf-icon.png
(author, film producer)
Ken Dornstein.jpg
Born1969
USA
RelativesDavid Dornstein (Lockerbie victim)

Ken Dornstein is a television editor, television producer and an author. He lives with wife and two children near Boston, Massachusetts where he works for US Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) television.[1]

Ken Dornstein's elder brother David was killed on 21 December 1988 when Pan Am Flight 103 exploded over Lockerbie in Scotland. In 2006, he wrote a book about the Lockerbie bombing entitled "The Boy Who Fell Out of the Sky"[2] and in September 2015 produced the PBS Frontline film "My Brother's Bomber".[3]

"Getting away with murder"

When Abdelbaset al-Megrahi was granted compassionate release from prison in Scotland in August 2009 film producer Ken Dornstein "couldn’t suppress the feeling that Megrahi was literally getting away with murder." Dornstein suspected that other perpetrators remained at large in Libya. To assist Dornstein's investigation, former SIO Stuart Henderson gave him a list of Megrahi's eight “unindicted co-conspirators” who had never been put on trial.[4]

The Libya Dossier

First on Henderson's list was Abdullah Senussi, brother-in-law of Muammar Gaddafi. The remaining seven were:

Nasser Ali Ashour, the Armourer. A "smooth, cultured" spy who supplied Semtex and guns to the Provisional IRA for Gaddafi in the 1980s. Adrian Hopkins, the Irish skipper who helped smuggle the arms, told French police: "He spoke English with a very distinguished accent. He never looked you in the face, likes to parade, has small feet, wears Italian shoes, drinks whisky but does not smoke." He managed Libya's network of agents in the Mediterranean and hunted down Libyan dissidents throughout Europe. Now aged 68, his whereabouts are unknown.
Mohammed Abouagela Masud (aka Abu Agila Mas’ud), the Technician. Introduced to a CIA undercover agent as an airline technician, he worked with Megrahi and Fhimah in Malta where the bomb was allegedly planted on a feeder flight in an unaccompanied Samsonite suitcase. The evidence against Mas'ud is thought to have been the subject of secret court hearings held behind closed doors in Valletta in 2012, at the request of the Crown Office. His whereabouts are unknown.
Said Rashid, the Assassin. A former head of JSO's operations section and close friend of Gaddafi who went on to become a powerful government figure. He was killed in a shoot-out with rebels in February 2011 following a speech by the dictator's son, Saif. In 1983, Rashid was arrested in France in connection with the murders of Libyan dissidents in London, Bonn and Rome, but later released.
Ezzadin Hinshiri, the Diplomat. Another senior JSO figure who became a top official and one of Gaddafi's most loyal lieutenants. He was killed along with 52 other regime supporters in an infamous massacre at a seafront hotel in Sirte in the final days of the uprising in April 2011.
Badri Hussan, the Businessman. Set up a front company with Megrahi and rented an office in Zurich from Mebo, the Swiss firm linked to the timers used in the bombing. The firm's co-founder, Edwin Bollier, told the Lockerbie trial that he delivered a suitcase from Hussan to Hinshiri in Tripoli on December 17, 1988 - just days before the terror strike. Whereabouts unknown.
Mohamed Marzouk and Mansour Omran Saber, the Missing Links. Arrested at Dakar airport in Senegal in February 1988 with Semtex, TNT and bomb triggers. They were released without charge. In 1991, a "brilliant, young" CIA analyst realised the triggers matched those used in the Lockerbie bombing, changing the entire course of the investigation. Whereabouts unknown.[5]

Henderson told Dornstein that if he could get to Libya it might be possible to track down the men who could then be brought to trial. Over the course of three trips to Libya starting in 2011, Dornstein sought out the eight men on the list, finally revealing that Abu Agila Mas’ud was his main suspect.[6]

Smokescreen

On 4 October 2015, in a review of Dornstein's film in the Sunday Herald, John Ashton wrote:

Now it (the prosecution’s Lockerbie narrative) has been breathed new life into by a three-part documentary for the US Public Broadcasting Service’s Frontline series. Trailed by a lengthy article in the New Yorker, the film suggests that Megrahi was, after all, involved in the bombing as an accomplice to a man called Abu Agila Mas’ud. I was a paid consultant during the early stages of the film’s production, but I disagree with its conclusions.[7]
The fear is that the Frontline film’s claims will provide the Crown Office with a smokescreen, from behind which it can brief that Megrahi was guilty all along and that its failures were therefore immaterial. They were anything but and, until it is held to account for them, they will remain a terrible stain on Scottish justice.[8]

On 17 October 2015, interviewed by presenter Isobel Fraser on BBC Radio Scotland's programme Good Morning Scotland, Morag Kerr said she also considers the renewed focus on the two Libyan suspects a smokescreen:[9]

Isobel Fraser (24’24’’): That was Jason Pack who is president of the website www.libya-analysis.com. Well listening to that is Dr Morag Kerr who wrote the book Adequately Explained by Stupidity: Lockerbie, Luggage and Lies. Good morning Dr Kerr. Can I first of all just get your reaction to the developments this week?
Morag Kerr (24’43’’): Well, as your last interviewee said, this isn’t news. The two individuals that have been named were known to the police as far back as 1991. And this isn’t something that has just been discovered. What has just happened is that Ken Dornstein’s films have been shown in America. Unfortunately, I haven’t seen them because they are region-barred in Scotland. But these films have brought this matter to the attention of the public and it appears that our Crown Office feels that it has to be seen to be doing something as a result.
IF (25’23’’): It’s really that simple: you think they need to be seen to be doing something rather than the fact that it’s taken the actions of a civilian investigator to move the FBI and the Crown Office into action?
MK (25’31’’): Well of course the civilian investigator was given the information by the FBI and the Crown Office in the first place. But as I think he said himself he had somewhat more freedom than officials would have had to move around Libya. But, as far as I understand it, nothing new has come out of this. These individuals were always part of the original Lockerbie investigation. And since Megrahi’s release there’s always been this subtext about ‘we want to find his accomplices’. In my personal view, that’s by and large a smokescreen because it takes attention away from the very serious doubts and disquiet that surround the original conviction of Megrahi.
IF (26’24’’): So as far as you’re concerned this is a bit of a wild goose chase then? If Megrahi’s conviction wasn’t sound, and we’re looking at two suspects linked to him, then it’s a bit of a waste of time?
MK (26’34’’): Well that’s exactly it. Any case against Senussi and Mas’ud would be based on the same essential evidence that was used to convict Megrahi in the first place. But that evidence has been systematically dismantled and discredited over a number of years. If that were to be tested in court then against new suspects, I’m afraid I would be very doubtful it would even get to court.
IF (27’01’’): So where, if they shouldn’t be looking in Libya, where should they be looking?
MK (27’04’’): Well that’s…that’s not the question for now. Until we have the official recognition of what really happened here, the point is the modus operandi the original investigation became convinced the bomb was introduced on Malta. Everything they have done has been predicated on this Malta assumption. Until that Malta assumption is put to bed – because it’s frankly chasing red herrings down blind alleys – until they accept they missed the clear and obvious evidence of the bomb being introduced at Heathrow, then there is no possibility of being able to do a proper investigation and identify the real culprits.
IF (27’50’’): Why do you think then that the authorities are so intent on keeping Malta the focus and keeping Libya as the prime suspect?
MK (27’59’’): Well you only have to look at what happened over the past twenty five years. I mean there comes a point when mistakes are made that they have been set in stone. Hillsborough was an example. The scandal of Hillsborough became not so much the mistakes made at the time, but the subsequent cover-up. Because they are in blood-steeped so far that to go on where it leads – or whatever the quote is – it’s so far down the line. That so much has happened on the basis of the Malta assumption, that two people were indicted because they were in Malta that day, Libya itself was put under punitive sanctions which destroyed the country’s economy in the following eight years. We can see where that has led us. Millions and millions of pounds of taxpayers’ money were spent on a show trial at a specially constructed court in the Netherlands. We’ve had the whole carry-on with Megrahi’s compassionate release, then the vilification of Scotland as a result. All of this has happened as a result of the Malta assumption.
IF (29’09’’): So they’re too embarrassed to admit they were wrong and go back: is that it? It’s all down to a cock-up rather than a cover-up?
MK (29’11’’): Well I think there comes a point where cock-up turns into cover-up. And who actually understands how wrong they were and who are simply closing their eyes and ears to the evidence of how wrong they were. It’s not really for me to say. That’s for the people involved to say.
IF (29’33’’): Dr Morag Kerr, thank you very for your time this morning. Morag wrote the book Adequately Explained by Stupidity: Lockerbie, Luggage and Lies. (29’37’’)[10]


 

Related Document

TitleTypePublication dateAuthor(s)Description
Document:Call for US to give update on fourth Lockerbie suspectArticle18 December 2022Kathleen NuttFormer Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill: "Britain and America know everything. I want the UK and US to be more open. Libya have offered up Abu Agila Masud. But Masud is smaller beer. The Lord Advocate should find out what progress is being made on bringing Abdullah Senussi to court."
Many thanks to our Patrons who cover ~2/3 of our hosting bill. Please join them if you can.



References