The Lockerbie Incident – Pan Am flight 103, Part IV

Part IV – Lockerbie bombing – what kind of bombing exactly?

I left a few photos for this part IV as candies within this story. As it happened, I was entering Pan Am 103 flight subject totally unprepared for such a deep rabbit hole as it turned to be. I admit, it caught me by surprise with so many things to un-spin, see through, with a task to find some proper imagery to help myself while trying to uncover what might have happened to Clipper Maid (the pictures available on the internet on Lockerbie subject are found only in mediocre quality of low resolution, strangely, so it makes me wonder where are all “normal” resolution pictures stored at, I’m pretty sure we are not allowed to view those in particular). Or at least, I want to have a confirmation of another hoax forced down our throats although with no final answer to how exactly it was perpetrated.

I’d like to begin with another and obvious anomaly, for which we’ll take a look already posted picture and analyze it again, bringing forward yet another detail :

panam1

Notice the white house just above at the end of half-tunnel , looking at its roof, it is more or less with all tiles in place (with a small opening in the lower left section of it). It is as well visible on this picture:

lockerbie8

The white house’s roof seems in similar shape as it was/is in the first picture, pretty much intact, so I wonder what happened to the roof / tiles here:

lockerbie7

It is now partially stripped of tiles, most noticeable in the left lower roof’s corner, with tiles missing on other sections of the roof as well. Such obvious color difference where tiles are missing should be clearly visible in the previous aerial picture, but it can not be noticed as such.

lockerbie5

I find it very strange, just what might be the official explanation for it? Roof with all its tiles survives the blast of 91.000 kg of kerosene in near proximity almost intact, but then mysteriously its roof is partially unpatched within hours/days, with tiles missing because of what exactly ? That hurricane-like winds? Suddenly Scotland seems even more dangerous place to live in, first there are airplanes falling from the sky, but if you survive them somehow you might get blown away to the east coast of England, that’s how strong these winds are over there.

Another noticed detail – this particular white house was obviously populated at the time of this event, as the first aerial picture posted shows different shutters’ position than it may be seen in the last two pictures above, which makes me believe it was actually occupied. What a spectacle it has been to observe an exploding fireball behind a meteorite-proof glass from the first row seats! Just priceless.

Then there are a couple of items in that first aerial picture above worth mentioning, four red cars and a mystery man’s figure, found in the middle upper section of the picture, next to a corner of brick wall. Just what is he doing there? Taking a leak? Is it a suggestion ? The story of Manneken Pis is for sure an interesting angle to look at the pissing man in Sherwood Crescent corner – Manneken Pis a famous Brussel’s status, where a legend states that in the 14th century, Brussels was under siege by a foreign power. The city had held its ground for some time, so the attackers conceived of a plan to place explosive charges at the city walls. A little boy named Julianske happened to be spying on them as they were preparing. He urinated on the burning fuse and thus saved the city. As there is no definite answer to whether that mysterious man in the picture is actually urinating, it may be suggesting that Lockerbie was not as lucky as Brussels, brought down by an explosion… I’m wildly speculating here, but it crossed my mind so I was happy to share it here. As for the red cars, Sherwood Cresecent seems to be cummunaly keen on red colored vehicles, intersting enough by itself.

Let’s look at another picture, a nice detail with a close-up picture of the red car that can be seen in the first aerial picture, at the low middle section, in close proximity to the explosion :

burnt car.png

Looking at that first aerial picture and focusing on this red car in particular while at it gives me a strange feeling. It looks somehow artificial, with lack of proper details to it regardless of its poor resolution. I wonder whether for photographic purposes, the crash-scene at Lockerbie could have been fabricated as a scale-model ? Whether modelled in whole or just partially. If latter is the case then we might be looking at a scale-model of the wrecked buildings and the half-tunnel in the front, with a couple of red cars around. Pasted on top of a genuine photograph of the intact houses behind / around them? Was that beyond the technical limitations of image (and video?) compositing back in the day (1988)? After all, in the year 1988[i] Photoshop was first publicly introduced and made available so it could mark the beginning of a new era in hoax / fake spectacles[ii].

Although this one did not have that meteorite-proof glass add-on, there should be visible marks of excess heat produced by the explosion of 91.000 kg of kerosene. I can remember seeing devastated cars in similar illogical condition when looking at 9/11 event’s pictures, let me refresh our memories of such:

9-11-burnt-car1

Cars were damaged / burnt in 9/11 event with no logic or evidence to the source of severe heat/fire their damage suggested, which made me wonder where all heat / fire came from (as nothing around the cars was / is suggesting proximity of extreme heat). To make it reasonable, were such cars brought in to the scenery or was there something we are not supposed to know and question about? It depends at which event we are looking at, I guess.

With Lockerbie car, we have signs of some damage done most probably by mechanical force, however with Lockerbie story I would expect to see this red car completely obliterated due to air blast and fireball following the explosion. So it’s a bit different in both compared cases, but equally illogical and inconsistent to the noticed surrounding damage.

This is an interesting picture with details of one of more damaged houses, a close-up of roof covered with moss. As well, one and only picture of normal resolution:

moss-covered-roof

The roof of the damaged house is heavily covered in moss, it even seems airbrushed green. And yet roofs of other houses, with identical position and similar inclination towards the sun remain moss-free and still slate-grey. Moss is always growing while facing north, but northern parts of other houses’ roofs are seen clear of it so position of the roof is clearly not the reason for it. How can that be?

moss

I’m fairly sure these house damage photos are composite fakes. In the picture above, the roof line is dropping implausibly below the guttering level just underneath the top line of the upstairs windows. At the same time it shows no signs of roof slipping down anywhere else.These are standard-design council houses, built throughout Scotland/UK. Was this picture maybe taken from routine demolitions of identical houses elsewhere and just copy-pasted to suit here?

Now, what I was keeping for the very end was very hard for me to persist withholding from you, is a single sentence found within the Official report, page #31, paragraph #3 when describing a wing section impact and fire, report nonchalantly admits:

»A gas main had also been ruptured during the impact

If necessary, re-read it a couple of times. What it suggests is two points a) there was a gas pipeline in proximity, which would perfectly explain the prolonged and half-tunnel like shape of the crater and b) gas was aiding the explosion force of kerosene if it actually occurred.  Associating the enormous amount of fuel with the notion of fuel-bomb, we can learn at  Wickedpedia about all this as:

»A thermobaric weapon is a type of explosive that utilizes oxygen from the surrounding air to generate an intense, high-temperature explosion, and in practice the blast wave typically produced by such a weapon is of a significantly longer duration than a conventional condensed explosive. The fuel-air bomb is one of the most well-known types of thermobaric weapons.

Most conventional explosives consist of a fuel-oxidizer premix (gunpowder, for example, contains 25% fuel and 75% oxidizer), whereas thermobaric weapons are almost 100% fuel, so thermobaric weapons are significantly more energetic than conventional condensed explosives of equal weight.

A fuel-air explosive (FAE) device consists of a container of fuel and two separate explosive charges. After the munition is dropped or fired, the first explosive charge bursts open the container at a predetermined height and disperses the fuel in a cloud that mixes with atmospheric oxygen (the size of the cloud varies with the size of the munition). The cloud of fuel flows around objects and into structures. The second charge then detonates the cloud, creating a massive blast wave. The blast wave destroys reinforced buildings and equipment and kills and injures people.«

Although in that wing section no charge burst happened and there was no second charge to detonate it neither, the force of impact would be of equal effect as the disperse of a charge blast (maybe even more effective in our case), igniting from the heat of compression effect at the impact at the same time. But such explosion, considering the 91.000 kg of kerosene stored within the wings and enforced effect of such thermobaric mechanism (mix of fuel and air ignited) would tear Sherwood Crescent to pieces not just in relative proximity as pictures of the site suggest, but at large-scale. We should in my opinion see no intact houses, window glass, tiles and cars at least couple 100 meters (if not a couple of 1.000 meters) from the epicenter of such explosion. It’s mostly because of such thesis might have high probability , I would suggest that in Lockerbie bombing there was no kerosene involved , the damage seen in the pictures was produced by exploding the gas from the nearby gas pipeline. Maybe even by using the conventional type of explosives, where only thorough analysis of samples from the site would reveal what actually caused the explosion (that would be particularly interesting analysis to learn the truth about the stories of exploding individual houses coming from alleged witnesses of the event and Lockerbie event in general).

As much as this whole picture analysis is able to show quite some issues worth doubting, questioning and scrutinizing, there is a conclusion to this which makes me so eager to finally get to the part where we’ll look into some of the listed victims, what witnesses said when interviewed and just try to finally answer ourselves – was this for real on any level at all? For what it seems, we may find mostly fictional characters as victims, as much as most of shown up to here seems fictional in many cases.

To be continued…

[i] It seems as Photoshop started in 1987 under different brand name made only for MAC OS , and then made publicly available under Photoshop brand name in 1988 .

[ii] A remark found at Fakeologist , with my gratitude for such suggestion

Advertisements

12 thoughts on “The Lockerbie Incident – Pan Am flight 103, Part IV

  1. Thanks Vex, I enjoyed reading this. It seems the world is rich with fake events, so if you enjoyed this, there is no shortage of future subjects. I sure have the impression, though you don’t give voice, that this whole event was fabricated. The crash site in Lockerbie did it for me – to leave an impact hole like that required the debris landing on jello-like earth that conformed to the shape of the plane. More likely the earth would yield somewhat but the debris, mostly aluminum, would shatter on impact, flatten, ricochet for hundreds of yards around, the the earth would be impacted, but not leave a crater. I don’t understand the behavior of kerosine, however. I know it explodes in orange balls in movies, but I don’t know about real life. If, as you say, it detonated on impact, again, I doubt the ground would have born the brunt of the force, as there is much less resistance behind and around, so that it would result in an explosion and a shock wave that would diminish exponentially, so that by the time you’re fifty yards away, it is harmless.

    But I’ve no math to back that up. I am sure about the exponential reduction in the impact of a shock wave, but not the refined distances. Maybe at fifty yards you get knocked down.

    Anyway, welcome to rabbit hole life, keep at it!

    Like

  2. You’re welcome 🙂 Just a thought on calling this Lockerbie event as hoax – I’m yet at the biggest challenge within it. I already strongly doubt victims are real for I’ve seen enough as well to call it what it is – a hoax, but then there are alleged 270 victims who need to be properly (un)covered. I’m piling up the content about the victims and will soon publish part V to show what I found there. I expect to see/find fictional victims, but don’t want to rush calling them fake before I can do so justified with findings. I’m no expert on bombs and explosives neither, but I do think that much of kerosene would make a hell of a blast, digging a much bigger crater if exploded in reality. Don’t know how the power of explosion diminishes with distance travelled, I’m sure though that exploding 91t of kerosene would more or less flatten Lockerbie, leaving behind a huge crater.

    Like

  3. Yep – I am no expert either. I know when I played with firecrackers as a kid, that they did not behave as we wanted unless we took pains to be sure the explosion was directed. We could put one under a beer can and set it off, and nothing. But if we put a hole in the bottom of the beer can, stuck the firecracker in it, lit it, and then put it in a puddle of water, all of the force of the explosion was directed in driving the beer can into the air – we could get them thirty feet up if we did it right.

    And it has to be the same with kerosene, that if you just ignite it on the ground, all of its force will be directed to where there is no resistance. It will not dig a hole in the ground, but rather will dissipate in the atmosphere above, where’s there is less resistance.

    I know about bomb craters, but that is directed energy. They are set to ignite on impact, and a considerable amount of force is directed forward by the weight of the casing and direction and speed of the missile. I don’t see those dynamics in a falling aircraft with a wide fuselodge of aluminum. I don’t see it digging a crater.

    Like

    1. Ha! I already wanted to reply philosophizing about the mechanism of such kerosene bomb, but it is not worth additional words on it in my opinion. Crater or no crater left behind such blast, I really wish I didn’t have to learn about it even a single bit. Since there was no additional earth/dirt analysis to back it with, we may assume they are hiding something from us about what was the actual cause. That is there with the reason to obfuscate, like many other details of this story. That prolonged crater, if real at all, was made by an explosion of the gas pipeline beneath the ground, dissipating dirt on the eastern side and upward, being a directed blast, similar to what you’ve described doing as a teenager. If any blasts were there at all in the night of 21st Dec 1988, those where done as a diversion to remove inhabitants of Sherwood Crescent away from the scenery, giving them 10h-12h of full night’s darkness to set the scene properly. But since two days ago, I’m leaning toward the possibility, that it was pictured as a scale-model as being exploded, with stories of bomb and kerosene explosions as mind control/programming tool not to question craters, exploding houses and all the rest. While in fact they made it look as such explosion by according set-up of the scenery. To make it short – this crater dilemma is in my opinion another diversion subject, where we loose countless hours analyzing and debating something that is simply not real. Let’s instead i.e. debate on whether Cinderella’s hair color was blond or brown 🙂 that may be answered with less effort and more sense to it, I guess.

      Like

      1. In my defense, my firecracker experiments were before age ten, and not as a teenager.

        The gas pipeline scenario is equally troublesome, as at any given time there is not enough gas in a pipeline to cause a major disruption like that. At best there will be a small explosion and then a flare, or just an escape of gas that can be extremely volatile if bottled up, like our firecrackers inside the beercan and submerged in a puddle. Meth houses that explode are the result of gas with nowhere to escape too. But I have a hard time building this model with an aircraft hitting a gas pipeline. The gas would naturally flee to the atmosphere.

        My guess for the cause of the impact crater: Bulldozers.

        I hope we read each other’s tones correctly. I am not a harsh critic, not even a critic. I love this sort of work and the associated Sherlock-type puzzles to solve. It appears you do as well.

        Like

        1. My guess for the cause of the impact crater: Bulldozers.

          I had a good laugh there. 🙂

          Mark, don’t get me wrong here, I like your input and shared thoughts. It would be easier to communicate and see gestures and face expressions, all my previous comment was not “subtitled” so it would be clear enough, that we aim for the same. So yes, we do read each other’s tones correctly. We may not agree sometimes, but I do convey with all respect.

          You seem to have been a prodigy child…that’s something that connects us there. I didn’t mean to insinuate any kind of experience with bombs, just to be clear. We used to do same “directed explosion” experiments as children, with carbide. There is a weird custom over here, at Easter holidays many people use all kinds of apparatus to make loud explosions, usually with carbide. I never understood the symbolic of such “celebration”, but anyway, it was fun to observe large oil canisters fly up some 20m, we could occasionally even mildly feel a blast on our bodies.

          Like

        2. On more relevant issue here, you may be right about the crater as the time window to excavate such with bulldozers was big enough, with whole night in front of them to do it properly. Then again, as I already mentioned, the pictures of such crater may be simple scale-up model, where in reality it was not even as big as they want us to believe. It all seems fabricated at least at some level. If you look at this YT video about Lockerbie (made of official TV news flash), there is plenty of weird things to notice. I.e. at mark 1:10 there is a witness apparently talking, but his voice is overdubbed for some reason. I believe it was aired as such, which is a huge red flag in my opinion. Then a bit later in the video, at mark 6:23 the same witness talks about the scenario of that night, I really wonder who gave him such role as he is totally unconvincing. The next witness at 7:02 has some super X-ray set of eyes, as he was allegedly with his son, hiding under a roof, yet he was able to see “sky lit up” and connecting it to an airplane immediately. He confirms everybody being evacuated immediately after the alleged explosion, though. Then at mark 8:59 there is a local hospital’s chief surgeon, with some kind of revers masonic sign, as he appears on the TV with his left hand held in his suit, like a Napoleon, just with the opposite hand. Well, I’ve never seen anybody appearing on TV with such a strange suggestive gesture, I just don’t know what to think of it. Anyway, I want to suggest that fabricating the setup was most probably something completely else then we were allowed to see on the pictures and video content. I’d join you at speculation to say as well that it were bulldozers that made that crater in reality. Btw, in case you don’t feel like watching that video, they chose a set of awful actors, like some naturalized local PR representatives, completely untouched by the event.

          Like

        3. I want to watch teh video, as in skimming through it there was precious few shots of wreckage and lots of personal testimony. I’ll bet there’s lots of stuff to unearth there.

          Like

        4. I watched the video – a couple of things – from 14:30 forward, I was thinking “those stoic Brits!” Not one shed a tear. Then there is the very conveeeenient witness at 18:00 who saw an Arab acting nervous on the German end, but was seemingly non-flustered by having gotten off a plane where everyone who stayed on was murdered. I don’t think these people are credible. All of the non-talking head footage to me is suspect, including the fires and wreckage. Lockerbie itself, there could have been some blazes set, and then you have a situation where everyone there assumes the events are real, but happened to someone else.

          (You’ll have fun with this), the phone number for people to call: 01-897-6333.

          Like

          1. Ha! Quintuplets of 3’s, 6333, 3 3 333, just what is their fetish with it? At your blog, Calgacus made an interesting comment about one particular book, Steganographia, written 500 years ago by a spook called Johannes Trithemius. As Wickedpedia says, the book is a treatise on cryptography and steganography, disguised as a book on magic.Generally, the hidden messages appear to be (or be part of) something else: images, articles, shopping lists, or some other cover text. . I’ve never heard about the author and can hardly wait to finish of this Lockerbie section and try to find&read that book. Maybe, but just maybe I’ll be able to find what is all the fuss about triplets, quadruplets and quintuplets of 3’s, 5’s, 7’s and 9’s.

            Thanks for your other remarks as well. I’ve read and watched so much of this that I’m hardly managing to remember where I found some things. I wish I could link here the source where I read about the alleged witness, who said that as the airplane’s section fell in the field, there was a couple of airplane’s seats, with 2 victims fastened in, still holding their arms around each other, fingers of their hands intertwind, but then some victims could not have been recognized as human remains. It’s just beyond my imagination to come up with such a silly story and have guts to publish it. Or this Guardian article, which says i.e. : 10 years after the catastrophe, the chief pathologist reported that two of the passengers had suffered serious but not fatal wounds. Possibly they froze to death on the ground before the search teams found them in a forest four days later. Yeah, right. Or this, same article when talking about Sherwood ground victims: Eleven people were decimated; nothing remained later to identify them aside from the artificial knee of 81-year-old Mary Lancaster, the oldest of the victims. You just have to laugh at it…

            Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s