#lockerbie bomber

If there's one thing you can be sure of with the SNP, they've always got Independence at the heart of any conversation. Salmond and hit motley crew of bandits have launched the 'Yes' campaign to try and sway voters to vote that Scotland breaks off from the UK. Of course, he had to do this to an over the top fan fare, and that he did. Along of course with washed up actor Brian Cox and Boris from Goldeneye.

Apparently Alex 'Twenty chins' Salmond will be going around the country with his band of merry men to knock on doors to persuade people to throw all common sense out of the window and vote for them. Rest assured, if any of the SNP idiots come knocking on my door, they'll be having it slammed in their face.

Interestingly, out of all the members of the SNP, only 58% of them want to break away from the UK. Surely if they were all as supportive as Salmond says they are, they would all be behind him? Clearly this isn't the case. Even better, only one in three voters actually want to break away from the UK highlighting that the people of Scotland don't believe the BS that's being spun by the SNP.

Of course, the biggest worry is that if Scotland does manage to go it alone, it'll end up in the same state as Greece is just now in terms of finance. Can we really gamble it all just for a chip on the shoulders of those that push for Independence? No, we can't. It's an idiotic proposal by Nationalists that have the crazy idea in their heads that the English are the big bad, when they're clearly not.

Convicted Lockerbie bomber Abdel Basset al-Megrahi dies at 60

According to the Associated Press, Abdelbaset Ali al Megrahi has died well over three years after he was released from Scottish prison with supposedly "less than three months to live" as he was suffering from terminal cancer. 

East Renfrewshire Council is supposed to receive updates about his health, but is currently saying that there is no official confirmation of his death, whilst the FCO is currently investigating the accuracy of the reports. There have been reports in the past that he has died that were later proven to be false.

David Ben-Ayreah is a spokesman for the victims of the Lockerbie families and has told Sky News that "very good sources in Tripoli" has told him that Megrahi had been "slipping in and out of quite deep comas."

The Lockerbie bomber Abdelbaset Al Megrahi has finally died of the cancer that was supposedly going to finish him off in three months, back in 2009.

He was responsible for killing 270 innocent civilians after planting a bomb on an aeroplane back in 1988. Despite such an atrocious crime, he was released from jail by Kenny MacAskill in 2009 on 'compassionate' grounds. He supposedly only had 3 months left to live from his terminal prostate cancer. This claim was made in August 2009, and yet it took another 33 months to finish it off.

Of course, it may be the case that foul play was involved and that strings were pulled so that he could be released early, perhaps in exchange for money, oil or both. It brings us back to the issue that the SNP cannot be trusted, and are a terrible political party.

No other honourable party would have thought to release a terrorist on compassionate grounds. It's just another example of how out of touch the SNP are with the country, and yet they feel that they can make Scotland independent and better off as a whole.

With the constant back and forth between Westminister and Holyrood over when the Independence Referendum will be, it does raise the question of who'll ultimately win the vote.

Clearly, it's the SNP against every one else and in all honesty, if the SNP do win, it will be detrimental to Scotland as a whole. Now, I'll be the first to admit that I am not a supporter of David Cameron, BUT, I do agree with him on the stance that Scotland breaking away from the UK would be disastrous for all parties involved.

Time and time again, the nodding Alex Salmond, and his nodding dogs Nicola Sturgeon and also Kenny MacAskill state that it's the best route for Scotland. How though? If we do end up breaking away from the UK, we would still be using the GBP, and wouldn't have control of our own interest rate.

It seems as though the entire SNP have a major chip on their shoulder that the English 'stole' Scotland from them, and as such they feel that they're defending Scotland's honour by trying to take it back. I think it's time to drop that historical nonsense. Can we really complain that we've had a rough time of it when we've been in the Union (Maggie Thatcher aside)?

All Alex seems to be interested in is getting all the money from the oil. Think back to your days at school though, where you were told that the oil is slowly but surely running out. What's the plans for Scotland then once the oil does run out? Granted, Amazon have set up a base here, and we've got a booming whiskey trade, but that's it.  Nothings made in Scotland, and Mr Salmond hasn't made any pledge to start a new industry up here.

Couple this with his promise for the re-election when he assured the people that he would not cut jobs in the NHS. That promise didn't last long, and the budget has been cut something rotten. From my own personal experience of trying to contact Mr Salmond over the NHS issue, he refused to take my calls, or even directly answer my emails. Instead, he had a cheeky email sent from his secretary to myself pretty much telling me to sling my hook and not to look in the public sector for a job, but to focus on the private sector instead since in his opinion, the public sector (with regards to the NHS) will be hiring less and less.

Apparently, he doesn't even know what the NHS spends the money on, he just throws them a few million and they get to spend it on whatever he wants.  This certainly doesn't sound like an excellent leader, especially when all leaders should be enforcing the public sector ethic over the private sector. Would you seriously want him doing such a shoddy job?

Lastly, let us not forget the incident with the Lockerbie bomber. A terrorist who brutally killed so many innocent people. Mr Megrahi was released under compassionate grounds by Kenny MacAskill after it being alleged that he only had a few months to live. However, those three months have turned into nearly three years. There is no way that the doctors involved in his care, nor the lab results could be that far off. Speculation has been rife ever since this date that oil was given as a trade off in return for Megrahi, although this is a fact that we'll probably never know.

It is however a slap in the face to the victims families that he was released. He surely didn't think about them when he committed his crime, so why should he have been released? The answer is, he shouldn't have been. Surely we can't trust a party that released a terrorist? In my eyes, that is one of the worst things you can support, and any party affiliated with such a decision shouldn't be given the light of day.

In my opinion, it strongly affected our relationship with the USA, and rightly so. When they think of Scotland now, they're drawn to the SNP who released a terrorist, which in itself should be a crime.

PRICK

Up your ears. Eyes forward. Stop chewing your tongues just because I took away your gum.

Yes, Abdelbaset al-Megrahi is still alive, but this simple fact does not warrant the Daily Record’s front page headline:

“BITTER PILL

Lockerbie bomber kept alive by drug  YOU  cannot get”

(August 20th, 2011)

I don't have the time to discuss pharmaceutical ethics, legislation or regulation, as they are not relevent to the topic at hand, but suffice to say, YOU cannot get this drug because it is not yet approved in this country, evidence from clinical trials is extremely promising and there is a fast-track procedure to try and get it licensed as soon as possible, but rushing medication through trials isn't just a question of saving lives, it can cost them too. But I digress.

‘Almost certainly’. That’s what the article goes on to say, in weasely invommas, thereby attributing the quote to no-one in particular, but raising the piece beyond the vague realms of speculation. The BBC is guilty on this one too, though to a lesser extent, and in a less deliberately provocative manner.  Though the headline of their piece declares “Lockerbie bomber Megrahi’s survival attributed to pills”, the sub-headline clarifies that a leading specialist said it was ‘likely’. The leading specialist in question, who is cited in both these pieces, is Professor Roger S Kirby Ma MD FRCS (Urol) FEBU, Consultant Urologist & Director of The Prostate Centre, not exactly a dubious source and seemingly a very decent man. Indeed, it's worth noting that Prof. Kirby also remarked that "The silver lining to this story is that other patients with similarly advanced disease should not give up hope and should ask their doctor about the possibility of having these new treatments” -no-one seems to care much about reporting that though.

So, what's my issue? I agree with Prof. Kirby, he, unlike many others is capable of seeing the bigger picture and I don't have any groundbreaking exclusive details of Megrahi's treatment. Unless I do. Which I don't, and neither does Roger Kirby. Roger is a clinician and surgeon, but he is not Megrahi's clinician or surgeon. He does not, as far as I'm aware, have any details of Megrahi's day-to-today health or his treatment course which means he can do nothing other than speculate. There's nothing wrong with that in and of itself, this piece is rife with it, but when his speculation is presented as the bastard child of credible fact and moral indignation we have an issue.

Axial to this story is the prediction, made by Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill, based on the advice on director and health and care of the Scottish Prison Service, Dr Andrew Fraser, that Megrahi had three months to live. Kirby claimed this was "flawed medical advice" - you don't need to be accredited by the European Board of Urology to see that. First Minister Alex Salmond responded that "it is quite clear that the three month thing could never be definitive, and was never incidentally meant to be definitive", and how could it be? Doctor's powers of prediction, often assumed by the general public to border on precognition, fall abysmally short of the scientific standards that other medical advice is held to. Research into the area has revealed that physicians are often overly optimistic in estimating survival rates. A survey of 468 patients prognoses in hospice programs, which led to cessation of treatment to prolong life had a 20 percent rate of accuracy, 63 percent were too optimistic. Another study of patients receiving hospice care reported a median survival of 24 days, despite a median survival estimate of 90 days.

I return to the realms of speculation now, but it seems congrous that an opposite effect may have applied to the case of Megrahi. Speculation is rife over the underlying motives for Megrahi's compassionate release, but whether for unspecified reasons, or simply because he is responsible for the deaths of 207 people, doctors may have given an inaccurately pessimistic prediction in place of the usual inaccurately optimistic one. It may even be that for unknown reasons, Megrahi will defy all expectations and live on. Steven Hawking will be 70 in January, meaning he has lived with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis for 48 years. Prior to this, the longest documented durations of this condition are 32 and 39 years, and in each case the ALS was classified as 'benign' due to a lack of the typical progressive course. (Hitsumoto & Munsat, 2001)

That said, the Guardian is currently reporting that Megrahi is comatose and sustained only by oxygen and an IV drip, based on a CNN correspondent's report that he is 'at death's door'.  His medication has also apparently been stolen by looters, whether or not this included abiraterone is unknown. The Panic Office does not endorse the thievery of medical supplies otherwise unavailable to the general public, the Daily Record’s stance on this is unknown. Maybe he'll pull through, maybe not. I don't know, and neither does anyone else, pretending otherwise can only cause damage, and distress , whilst breeding distrust of medical science.

References