funk de fino
Dreaming of unicorns
You think anyone cares what you think is approriate? He was treated the same way as other murderers and criminals is the same situation were. Or do you think we should have treated him differently?
Merged Lockerbie bomber alive after 9 months
- Thread starter Caustic Logic
- Start date
You think anyone cares what you think is approriate? He was treated the same way as other murderers and criminals is the same situation were. Or do you think we should have treated him differently?
Alt+F4
diabolical globalist
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2006
- Messages
- 10,017
I made no false claim. Abiraterone was known to have great potential in the treatment of prostate cancer at the time of al-Megrahi's release.
Huh? I never said abiraterone was approved in Scotland, UK or EU. Try reading my post again, I said information regarding the success of the clinical trials was well known when the Scottish government said there was no hope for al-Megrahi. Just repeat after me, "Alt never claimed that abiraterone was approved for use anywhere except in the U.S."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...ng-the-Lockerbie-Bomber-Al-Megrahi-alive.html
So it wasn't available for him to be treated with it, then?
Alt+F4
diabolical globalist
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2006
- Messages
- 10,017
I do. It's called mitigating and aggravating circumstances.
Last edited:
Alt+F4
diabolical globalist
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2006
- Messages
- 10,017
Might have been. He fit the criteria for the trials, end-stage prostate cancer that was no longer responding to available treatment. Of course there may be some law that prisoners aren't allowed to participate in clinical trials (which would be reasonable) but then why not just say that?
Rolfe
Adult human female
You totally don't get it.
Megrahi had an appeal before the court at the time of his release. If he hadn't been released, that appeal would have continued and been concluded by now. Even if he had died before it was concluded, it could and would have continued if he had not explicitly withdrawn it.
If the three-month prognosis hadn't been made, there would have been no reason at all to consider compassionate release, and the appeal would have continued. The appeal was a shoo-in for success.
Now that would have been awfully embarrassing for a lot of people, not to mention awfully expensive as regards re-opening a 20-year-old cold case of 270 murders. So maybe we just fix it so that getting released before you die looks better than dying in jail while your appeal is still dragging on its glacial course.
Oh fine, no appeal. That's OK Mr al-Megrahi you can go home. And by the way, thanks for admitting you were guilty, that's very very convenient....
If there's any CT about his release, that's approximately how it goes. He no more bombed that plane than I did, and he's got a better alibi. That was the stitch-up job from hell, nice and convenient for almost everybody involved apart from the guy who got life imprisonment for something he didn't do.
Rolfe.
Megrahi had an appeal before the court at the time of his release. If he hadn't been released, that appeal would have continued and been concluded by now. Even if he had died before it was concluded, it could and would have continued if he had not explicitly withdrawn it.
If the three-month prognosis hadn't been made, there would have been no reason at all to consider compassionate release, and the appeal would have continued. The appeal was a shoo-in for success.
Now that would have been awfully embarrassing for a lot of people, not to mention awfully expensive as regards re-opening a 20-year-old cold case of 270 murders. So maybe we just fix it so that getting released before you die looks better than dying in jail while your appeal is still dragging on its glacial course.
Oh fine, no appeal. That's OK Mr al-Megrahi you can go home. And by the way, thanks for admitting you were guilty, that's very very convenient....
If there's any CT about his release, that's approximately how it goes. He no more bombed that plane than I did, and he's got a better alibi. That was the stitch-up job from hell, nice and convenient for almost everybody involved apart from the guy who got life imprisonment for something he didn't do.
Rolfe.
Alt+F4
diabolical globalist
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2006
- Messages
- 10,017
The three month prognosis leading to the compassionate release was a sham so the appeal wouldn't go forward. All I've done is presented further evidence that the Scottish government and or doctors knew that he had a far longer life expectancy than 3 months.
In post #209, on July 12, 2010 you posted:
Rolfe said:
You didn't know then that by that date abiraterone had been through two successful clinical trials in England. I wouldn't expect you to know that unless you had a family member/friend with advanced prostate cancer. The point is that those involved in al-Mergrahi's release must have known this information and they still went with the lie that there was no hope for him.
So what is it I don't get?
Last edited:
Rolfe
Adult human female
I don't know whether that is factually true or not. Nobody ever suggested that he was 100% sure to die in three months. If you listen to Kenny MacAskill's vomit-inducing speech, you'll hear him say, "he may live longer, he may die sooner." Also in the mix was that the prognosis was based on him remaining in prison. This is not exactly the best environment for battling aggressive cancer, and Megrahi's mental state was very low at the time. MacAskill did refer to the possibility that he might simply turn his face to the wall and die. I don't know whether the three-month prognosis was a knowing sham or not. I think they were just mighty relieved when the doctors decided it was a reasonable estimate under the circumstances.
Megrahi was entitled to all the treatment that was available on the NHS in Scotland for his condition. You seem to be suggesting that politicians should have been advised that new drugs were coming on-stream which were not available to ordinary NHS patients in Scotland, but that these should have been obtained for Megrahi at vast expense in order to keep him behind bars.
That would have caused an interesting little political furore, I think. I also suspect the clinical response might have been less than optimum, if the patient had remained locked in jail a thousand miles from home and family, in an alien culture and climate.
No, I didn't know. And I don't really see why it was relevant. If the drug wasn't available to NHS patients in Scotland, then he wouldn't have been given it in Scotland. And it would have been a howling scandal if he had been under these circumstances.
Pretty much everything, in relation to this case, I think. Mainly, that it was in nobody's interests to keep Megrahi in jail in 2009. Nobody at all was interested in trawling through clinical trials to find some way to refuse the compassionate release. Some people wanted him returned in order to facilitate the improving diplomatic situation with Libya, at a time when "normalising" relations with the Gaddaffi regime was seen as the way forward for the region. Some people wanted him returned in order to stifle the appeal, because they wanted to avoid the embarrassment of the revelations that the Scottish investigation into the Lockerbie disaster was a screw-up from the very beginning, and to avoid having to spend a shed-load of money on re-opening the investigation.
The only people who didn't want him to go home were those who, in their ignorance, swallowed the lie that he was an evil terrorist responsible for 270 deaths. And not even all of these.
Rolfe.
Last edited:
funk de fino
Dreaming of unicorns
You claimed it had not been approved by the NHS because it was too expensive. This is a false claim. Or did someone else post this?
Alt+F4 said:
Just admit it.
You claimed it had not been aproved because of the expense. If it not approved then they could not give it to Megrahi eh? Not to difficult to make that leap eh?
funk de fino
Dreaming of unicorns
Or because he is a muslim? Not how it works in our system.
funk de fino
Dreaming of unicorns
Rolfe
Adult human female
I do feel desperately sorry for al-Megrahi.
When I began looking at the Lockerbie case in detail, I assumed he was indeed a Libyan security officer, some sort of spy, a Gadaffi henchman, complicit in atrocities carried out by the Libyan government, all that sort of stuff. After all, it's so much easier to frame someone with a record. And then, he was travelling on a passport in a false name that day. What more could you want, as regards suspicion?
Except - the passport was legally issued to him by the Libyan passport office, to aid him in his negotiations for purchases required to circumvent the sanctions that were in place on Libya at the time. It wasn't much of a disguise. And he stayed in his usual hotel and frequented his usual haunts, and he was travelling with a friend who became his co-accused, who didn't even have a false passport.
And he didn't do anything suspicious at all. He visited tradesmen, and bought goods, and had a meeting with people who wanted him to invest in their business. If he had stepped on a crack in the pavement, the investigation would have found out about it. They had nothing.
Still, I thought, JSO member, security operative, probably a nasty piece of work. I'm pretty mad we didn't get the right culprits, and completely fubared the investigation, but it's hardly on a par with jailing an innocent passer-by.
That was until Bunntamas started. The more I asked her to substantiate her reasons for believing Megrahi was guilty by presenting evidence linking him to the crime, the more she said that was irrelevant, he was a bad guy!! So he must have done it. She produced the best she had, from her intimate knowledge of the case, to support her view that he was a bad guy.
There was nothing in it. No connection at all to any of the atrocities of the Gadaffi regime. No terrorist history. No history of bomb-making or explosives expertise. No connection to any other incidents. Nothing but baseless innuendo sprinkled with a bit of stuff that was obviously invented post-1991 by lowlifes trying to get in on a piece of the widely-publicised $4 million reward advertised by the DoJ for anyone who could provide evidence against either Megrahi or Fhimah (who were already indicted by then!).
Gradually, I have come to realise I have seen absolutely nothing at all to contradict Megrahi's own version of his life story or what he was doing on Malta that day.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/aug/18/lockerbie-bomber-megrahi-libyan-conflict
He seems to have been an ordinary guy on ordinary mundane business in Malta that day, and just happened to be checking in at the next counter to the flight the Lockerbie investigation had become convinced (on approximately bugger-all evidence) the bomb had travelled on.
He was indicted for the atrocity, and placed under house arrest for eight years. He lost his job. Libya suffered enormously from the UN sanctions that were put in place at that point to try to induce Gadaffi to extradite both accused, and finally Megrahi agreed to be tried for the murders. Some people warned him he was unlikely to get a fair trial, but others pointed out that there was no actual evidence against him, and they expected an acquittal.
In spite of the lack of evidence, the judges decided to convict. A lot of that was down to the incompetence of his defence advocate, who was frankly a complete pillock. And a lot was down to imponderables, such as the possible reluctance of the judges to brand the three-year Lockerbie investigation for the shambles it was, and admit that Libya had suffered under eight years of punitive sanctions, unjustly. To add more injury to injury, the pillock of a defence advocate appealled under the wrong grounds, and the first appeal was denied on a technicality.
He was chucked in jail in a country he had never even visited, in an alien culture and climate. He started trying to work for a second appeal. It took five years for him to be granted leave to appeal a second time, and another two years before the appeal came to court. Before it came to court he was diagnosed with aggressive prostate cancer.
The court set a long timetable for the appeal hearing, which took the verdict date to well beyond his then-estimated life expectancy. Desperate to return to his family and his native country, he agreed to drop the appeal which he had been told he would not live to see completed, in order to expedite this process. He continued to assert his innocence.
All and sundry vested interests promptly insisted that the dropping of the appeal was in fact an admission of guilt. He was vilified and monstered in the international press. His relatively muted welcome home, as the man who had sacrificed his freedom to end the sanctions, was spun into a picture of a blood-soaked terrorist being lauded for killing Americans.
He was given gold-star medical treatment, and improved. Repeated lies were spun about his living conditions (luxury mansion, Lamborghini sports car and so on), but he was with his family, and his condition had stabilised.
Then somebody decided to start a revolution, and he found himself on the losing side.
Now what? Nobody seems willing to leave the poor man alone and let him write his book and die in peace.
Megrahi aged 46, shortly before surrendering to Scottish custody.
http://plane-truth.com/Aoude/geocities/megrahi1998.jpg
Megrahi aged 57, after over ten years in jail for a crime he didn't commit.
http://www.independent.co.uk/multimedia/dynamic/00235/37grahemegetty_235884s.jpg
What have we done, here?
Rolfe.
When I began looking at the Lockerbie case in detail, I assumed he was indeed a Libyan security officer, some sort of spy, a Gadaffi henchman, complicit in atrocities carried out by the Libyan government, all that sort of stuff. After all, it's so much easier to frame someone with a record. And then, he was travelling on a passport in a false name that day. What more could you want, as regards suspicion?
Except - the passport was legally issued to him by the Libyan passport office, to aid him in his negotiations for purchases required to circumvent the sanctions that were in place on Libya at the time. It wasn't much of a disguise. And he stayed in his usual hotel and frequented his usual haunts, and he was travelling with a friend who became his co-accused, who didn't even have a false passport.
And he didn't do anything suspicious at all. He visited tradesmen, and bought goods, and had a meeting with people who wanted him to invest in their business. If he had stepped on a crack in the pavement, the investigation would have found out about it. They had nothing.
Still, I thought, JSO member, security operative, probably a nasty piece of work. I'm pretty mad we didn't get the right culprits, and completely fubared the investigation, but it's hardly on a par with jailing an innocent passer-by.
That was until Bunntamas started. The more I asked her to substantiate her reasons for believing Megrahi was guilty by presenting evidence linking him to the crime, the more she said that was irrelevant, he was a bad guy!! So he must have done it. She produced the best she had, from her intimate knowledge of the case, to support her view that he was a bad guy.
There was nothing in it. No connection at all to any of the atrocities of the Gadaffi regime. No terrorist history. No history of bomb-making or explosives expertise. No connection to any other incidents. Nothing but baseless innuendo sprinkled with a bit of stuff that was obviously invented post-1991 by lowlifes trying to get in on a piece of the widely-publicised $4 million reward advertised by the DoJ for anyone who could provide evidence against either Megrahi or Fhimah (who were already indicted by then!).
Gradually, I have come to realise I have seen absolutely nothing at all to contradict Megrahi's own version of his life story or what he was doing on Malta that day.
John Ashton said:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/aug/18/lockerbie-bomber-megrahi-libyan-conflict
He seems to have been an ordinary guy on ordinary mundane business in Malta that day, and just happened to be checking in at the next counter to the flight the Lockerbie investigation had become convinced (on approximately bugger-all evidence) the bomb had travelled on.
He was indicted for the atrocity, and placed under house arrest for eight years. He lost his job. Libya suffered enormously from the UN sanctions that were put in place at that point to try to induce Gadaffi to extradite both accused, and finally Megrahi agreed to be tried for the murders. Some people warned him he was unlikely to get a fair trial, but others pointed out that there was no actual evidence against him, and they expected an acquittal.
In spite of the lack of evidence, the judges decided to convict. A lot of that was down to the incompetence of his defence advocate, who was frankly a complete pillock. And a lot was down to imponderables, such as the possible reluctance of the judges to brand the three-year Lockerbie investigation for the shambles it was, and admit that Libya had suffered under eight years of punitive sanctions, unjustly. To add more injury to injury, the pillock of a defence advocate appealled under the wrong grounds, and the first appeal was denied on a technicality.
He was chucked in jail in a country he had never even visited, in an alien culture and climate. He started trying to work for a second appeal. It took five years for him to be granted leave to appeal a second time, and another two years before the appeal came to court. Before it came to court he was diagnosed with aggressive prostate cancer.
The court set a long timetable for the appeal hearing, which took the verdict date to well beyond his then-estimated life expectancy. Desperate to return to his family and his native country, he agreed to drop the appeal which he had been told he would not live to see completed, in order to expedite this process. He continued to assert his innocence.
All and sundry vested interests promptly insisted that the dropping of the appeal was in fact an admission of guilt. He was vilified and monstered in the international press. His relatively muted welcome home, as the man who had sacrificed his freedom to end the sanctions, was spun into a picture of a blood-soaked terrorist being lauded for killing Americans.
He was given gold-star medical treatment, and improved. Repeated lies were spun about his living conditions (luxury mansion, Lamborghini sports car and so on), but he was with his family, and his condition had stabilised.
Then somebody decided to start a revolution, and he found himself on the losing side.
Now what? Nobody seems willing to leave the poor man alone and let him write his book and die in peace.
Megrahi aged 46, shortly before surrendering to Scottish custody.
http://plane-truth.com/Aoude/geocities/megrahi1998.jpg
Megrahi aged 57, after over ten years in jail for a crime he didn't commit.
http://www.independent.co.uk/multimedia/dynamic/00235/37grahemegetty_235884s.jpg
What have we done, here?
Rolfe.
Last edited:
Alt+F4
diabolical globalist
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2006
- Messages
- 10,017
Oh, give me a break...worst straw man ever. In my over 7,000 post in almost 5 years of posting on the JREF forums please show even one post where I ever said anything negative against Muslims or Islam. That's right you can't. Your government got it wrong, making up lies about me won't change that.
Yes, your system which uses "compassionate release" as a subsistution for justice. If your government got it wrong and al-Megrahi is indeed innocent then your government should just say so and take their lumps. Instead your government continues with the rubbish that while al-Megrahi is the biggest mass murderer in Scottish history we're gonna free anyway because we are more compassionate to a dying man than those blood-thirsty Brits and Americans.
Also interesting to know that your system doesn't consider aggravating or mitigating circumstances in criminal cases. So a woman who was physically and mentally abused by her husband for many years and then murders him in self-defense him will get the same punishment as a woman who wasn't abused and murdered her husband for insurance money. Got it.
Last edited:
Alt+F4
diabolical globalist
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2006
- Messages
- 10,017
Alt+F4
diabolical globalist
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2006
- Messages
- 10,017
No, even if al-Mergrahi were a perfect candidate for these trials it would have been politically impossible for him to participate. My point is since the "experts" who advised the Scottish governemnt on the "3 months to live" had to have known that abiraterone was very promising and that more than likely al-Mergrahi would be able to obtain it after leaving Scotland....which he did.
Alt+F4
diabolical globalist
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2006
- Messages
- 10,017
I feel sorry for the 10,000 men in the UK that will (or have already) died of prostate cancer in 2011.
Rolfe
Adult human female
Yes, our government has behaved badly in this context. Particularly strange, as neither the botched investigation nor the kangaroo-court trial happened on their watch.
That is hardly Megrahi's fault, however.
Wrong again. The nature of the offence is not a factor in the granting of compassionate release. That's rather different from the question of sentencing, and I'm sure you know that.
Now, has anyone observed recently that Ronnie Biggs was released on compassionate grounds with three months to go, more than two years ago, and hey, I haven't seen any obituaries for him yet either.
Rolfe.
Alt+F4
diabolical globalist
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2006
- Messages
- 10,017
Even more of a reason to not continue with this farce.
Doesn't that make you want to reconsider the compassionate release, both men in these cases are still alive and in al-Megrahi's case, compassionate release was used to hopefully sweep the whole thing under the rug. At the very least, get some better doctors or doctors that aren't on someone's payroll.
Rolfe
Adult human female
I'm not concerned about either release, and I can't for the life of me see why you are so aerated about it. Biggs is in a nursing home. Megrahi was getting some time with his family, until all this mess happened.
My complaint is that Megrahi seems to have been pressurised into abandoning his appeal, which could legally have been continued even after he was released, and more so that the entire Lockerbie investigation was a shambles that went after the wrong modus operandi and in the end convicted an uninvolved passer-by.
How you think any of that would be improved by forcing the victim of the miscarriage of justice to die in jail far from home, I have no freaking idea.
Rolfe.
My complaint is that Megrahi seems to have been pressurised into abandoning his appeal, which could legally have been continued even after he was released, and more so that the entire Lockerbie investigation was a shambles that went after the wrong modus operandi and in the end convicted an uninvolved passer-by.
How you think any of that would be improved by forcing the victim of the miscarriage of justice to die in jail far from home, I have no freaking idea.
Rolfe.