For what purpose the prosecution at the "Lockerbie Trial" - (the court in Kamp van Zeist 1999) - intentionally specify that Edwin Bollier/MEBO Ltd, visited the 'Institut für Technische Untersuchung' (ITU) at Bernau, DDR, as "IM", an unofficial employee of the State Security Service (STASI) on 5th January 1989? The company ITU belonged to the STASI. I was doing legal business with ITU but not aware that STASI listed me as am “IM” > (Unofficial employee).

Did somebody deliberately intended to anchor that Bollier had received the order from the 'STASI' - to send a letter via the US embassy in Vienna - to the CIA in the USA, with the allegation that LIBYA is responsible for the bombing on PanAm103 ?
(US sources confirmed later that Bollier, was not in East Berlin on the above date 5th January 1989)!
When Bollier was by FBI in Quantico-Virginia, between the 11th of the 15th of February of 1991, he gave permission as a witness to be connected to a lie detector. The result was clearly-no lies - so in favor of Edwin Bollier.
See excerpt *part 1


On the 30th December 1988, unknown visitor met Bollier and compelled him to write a letter to the US Consulate in Zurich - about my stay in Libya (18th December 1988) and Malta (20th December) until the return flight (21st December 1988) via Malta to Zurich - because Libya had carried out the attack on the Boeing 747 PanAm 103)...
This strange order I (Bollier) received from the unknown visitor at the Mebo office, was possibly from an "Intelligence Insider".
I was wondering why he did not know the fact that I did not travel via MALTA, as booked (air ticked Tripoli > Malta 20th > Malta Zurich, 21st Dez) but instead with a flight by Swissair - directly (20th Dec.) Tripoli to Zurich.

This was crucial as a flight via Malta and overnight stay in Malta could have put me into serious troubles and possibly leading to the allegation of preparing the bombing.
Notabene: Mr Abdelbaset Al Megrahi was on the same flight as Bollier was booked to Malta on this date (20th Dec).
Threats were attempted, by the unknown visitor, but I was driven only by curiosity to know who possibly was manipulating me into blaming Libya ?

I was anxious to find out who is behind this mysterious visitor and his ultimate request to write a letter to the CIA. Therefore I followed his instructions but I wrote a so-called "catch letter" with fictional Content. I brought the letter personally to the US embassy in Vienna on 19th January 1989. Shortly after handing over my letter to the embassy, a shortwave radio communication between a US authority and Mebo started on 27th Friday 16:00.
See excerpt *part 2

NB: Since the beginning of 1991, the FBI, Scottish Police and BUPO/CH, have been informed about the "catch letter" by Bollier/MEBO Ltd.


Excerpt process 'Lockerbie-PanAm103': *Part 1

Q - Let's just pause and consider the mystery man for a moment. The latest version of the mystery man you gave us in court, Mr. Bollier, involved him approaching you near to MEBO's offices; is that right?

A - That is correct. Yes. He was walking back and forth in the corridor.

Q - Right. So he was waiting. And he stepped out to meet you, did he, this mystery man?

A - I went towards our office, and I saw this man.

Q - Was he wearing a mackintosh, by any chance, Mr. Bollier?

A - Yes, that is correct. A light-coloured mackintosh.

Q - He didn't happen to have a trilby pulled down over his eyes, did he, Mr. Bollier?

A - No. He didn't.

Q - No trilby. Do you recall hearing zither music when he approached you, Mr. Bollier.

A - [Microphone override] -- music?

Q - There was no zither music?

A - No.

Q - Could you see a Ferris wheel in the distance, perhaps?

A - No.

Q - So it was just a plain mysterious man in a mack?

A - Yes. What you say is correct. Presumably it was somebody from the intelligence people.

Q - You see, you indulged in yet this further mystery at a very early stage of your investigation by the authorities, again, to disguise your links with the Stasi, didn't you?

A - No. I reject that. It's not true. In this Lockerbie matter, there are only very odd things.

Q - In your evidence on the Lockerbie matter, there are only very odd things, Mr. Bollier; would that be more accurate?

A - I am here in order to help solve the case. And if you don't take me seriously, that's your matter. I take this matter very seriously. I've been working on this case for eight years, and I know where one has to seek. One has to look at the fragment and the container. And what you are doing is trying to make me an insincere witness. You are trying to water down my testimony, and that is a great pity.

Q - Perhaps, Mr. Bollier, you are the great pity. But let us move on to the 19th of January when you went to East Berlin by way of Vienna. And you remember on the 19th of January you went into the United States embassy in Vienna and deposited there a letter?

A - That is correct. I think it was at 8.00 in the evening. That's when I wanted to hand in the letter.

Q - You weren't approached by any chance, were you, by some mysterious man in a light mack while you were in Vienna on the 19th of January 1989, were you, Mr. Bollier.

A - No. I went up the stairs and --

Q - Before you go up the stairs, I just want to stay with the mysterious man for a moment longer. Because only a week ago, when you gave a further interview about this matter, you suggested, did you not, that you were approached by a mysterious man in Vienna wearing a light mack. Do you not remember that?

A - No. That is wrong. That is wrong.

Q - All right. Well, let's have on the screen in front of you, so that we can consider it in a little detail, Production 323. And I think if we begin with page 1 on the screen. And stay first of all at the top of the page.
Do you recognise the letter, Mr. Bollier, as the letter which you delivered to the United States embassy in Vienna on 19th January 1989? Yes or no?

A - That is correct. I handed the letter in. I didn't send it.

Q - I appreciate that, Mr. Bollier. Thank you. Now, you say you drafted this letter in Zurich and then took it with you en route back to East Berlin; is that right?

A - I drafted it in Zurich, but I didn't take it to East Berlin. I took it to the U.S. embassy in Vienna.

Q - Try and listen to the question, Mr. Bollier. You were travelling from Zurich to East Berlin by way of Vienna and en route to East Berlin to see the members of the Stasi. You stopped in Vienna and deposited this letter at the United States embassy. That is correct, is it not?

A - That is correct. Yes.


Excerpt process 'Lockerbie-PanAm103': *Part 2

Q - Well, Mr. Bollier, you say that the letter was not only to implicate the Libyans but to divert the investigators from the wrong track. And I have to suggest to you that an ordinary legitimate Swiss businessman would not have known by 19th January 1989 that the investigators were on the track of any particular party but that a legitimate Swiss businessman who was a Stasi collaborator could have been advised by the Stasi at a meeting in East Berlin on 5th January 1989 that the BKA were on the track of the PFLP General Command.
Now, what do you say about that, Mr. Bollier?

A - I must reject that. What you are telling me is not true. It is not true.

Q - Well, with respect, Mr. Bollier, there was no press report by 19th January 1989 which put the investigators on a specific track relating to the PFLP General Command.

LORD MACLEAN: Mr. Keen, I am slightly bothered about your reference to "the wrong track." Now, our translation is "tracks," plural. Throughout, you've used the word -- the singular, "wrong track." I take it our translation is correct, is it? Are you using it anyway?

Mr. KEEN: I am using the translation, My Lord.


MR. KEEN: And I am quite happy to use the word "tracks," rather than "track."

Q - Now, what you said was that you were not only putting the investigators on the track of the Libyans but diverting them from the wrong tracks. Do you see that, Mr. Bollier?

A - Well, yes, I signed the text, and this is what I testified at the time. But, well ...

Q - You weren't just lying again, were you, Mr. Bollier?

A - I never lie.

Q - Well, in that event, you must have been told by the 19th of January 1989 that the investigators were on certain tracks which did not include the Libyans; is that not correct?

A - That is not correct. Nobody has told me anything of the sort. This man, who showed up on the 30th of December, said that the Libyans had done it. And it is from him that I got onto these tracks. And I wrote the letter on the order of this Secret Service man.

Q - Mr. Bollier, you were instructed by your masters in East Germany on about 5th January 1989 to write a letter implicating the Libyans because they were concerned that the investigators were on different tracks of inquiry with regard to the Pan Am bombing. Is that not the case?

A - That is not correct. And on the 5th of January, I was not in East Germany. I was in Zurich.

Q - Well, we'll just check your recollection on that now, I think, Mr. Bollier. Do you recall that at the beginning of 1989, contact was made with you over the radio frequencies that you'd specified in the letter deposited at the United States embassy?

A - That is correct. Yes. The CIA established radio contact with me.

Q - And you and the CIA maintained contact during the early part of 1989, didn't you?

A - That is correct.

Q - Now, do you recollect that this contact involved the sending of various signals to Washington -- or to the United States, at least -- by you?

A - That is correct. It was telegraphy.

Q - [Microphone override] -- and that is because you were in fact provided with various coded telex, phone, and other numbers, in the United States?

A - That is correct.

Q - And when you went eventually in 1991 to the United States for an interview, there were available transcriptions of the communications between you and the CIA, were there not?

A - That is correct.

Q - Now, I just want to remind you of your interview at that point. And could we have on the screen Production 1532, page 1. I don't know if My Lords have been provided with hard copy. If that is not included in the bundle, then I will take this slowly, appreciating that My Lords are working from the screen.

LORD SUTHERLAND: Yes. This is not included in the bundle etc...


Edwin Bollier, MEBO Ltd Telecommunication Switzerland