Oh, someone’s been lyin’ over terror boss

SO Osama Bin Laden is dead and lies in a watery grave. But does he?
Is it more a case of So Someone’s Bin Lyin’ and that the death, like the piece of fiction that surrounded it, has been turned into fantasy to kick-start the fast-disappearing American president’s re-election campaign?

The first so-called official version is that Obama was firing at special forces soldiers when they broke into his home (and who wouldn’t be if he had a gun handy) and that he was hiding behind his wife who was shot dead before he, too, was killed.

Now the president’s press secretary tells us that Bin Laden was not armed and was not cowering behind his wife and that she didn’t die but was shot only in the leg and was taken into custody.

Oh, and there is then the assertion that the American authorities are 99.9 per cent certain that the body they flung into the ocean was that of the al-Qaida leader. On the other hand it could have been the ship’s cook.

Even the United Nations is expressing some doubt, its spokesman saying that there is no strong evidence to prove America’s claim. But good old David Cameron — he who has tried to convince us that we are all it together—says that the Americans have done enough to show “reasonable people that bin Laden was dead.”

That settles it, then. Osama is in the sea, probably swimming or dipping his toes in it while he holidays on some sun-kissed shore reading the latest Stieg Larsson or Jo Nesbo. Not as good as being entertained by a few dozen virgins and beard-combers, admittedly, but it does have its compensations, like a healthy suntan and no nagging.

Incidentally, the house where Osama (or some unlucky look-alike) was living has wild cannabis plants growing along its outer walls which could go some way to explaining the hallucinogenic ramblings of the first version of the demise of world’s most wanted man (assuming you are not one of the delusional nutters who thinks that is Prince William).



IT is difficult to imagine the thought process that went on behind the decision of Dr Ruth Jameson, medical director at the Pennine Acute Trust, to pull out of a major meeting with bereaved relatives and those who had grounds to believe that their nearest and dearest had not had the best possible treatment.


Dr Jameson withdrew at the eleventh hour because she felt it would be too confrontational.

And she’s right. Of course it was going to be confrontational that’s why a 50-strong body of patients and relatives were going to the meeting to confront NHS bosses with concerns about lack of care from nursing staff, mortality rates, and allegations that some patients were suffering from malnutrition. If that worry list doesn’t demand some kind of confrontation with those responsible then I don’t know what does.

Feelings were running high among all those who believed that they had a legitimate grievance with the way the local NHS Trust, which has the Royal Oldham in its care, had let them down.

It is right that those grievances were aired and it was right that senior NHS representatives should be there to respond and to give assurances about the quality of care available in what is the people’s health service.

Running and hiding away in a darkened corner does the NHS no favours and is certainly not fair on those who feel they have a legitimate grievance. They want answers and assurances not evasion.



FINAL WORD: Neighbourhood policing, pioneered in Oldham, has achieved outstanding success, making huge reductions in crime in several parts of the borough.


Congratulations are due to all concerned but we await with some trepidation, the politically-motivated wholesale release of prisoners, the growing numbers of people out of work and the rise in the number of those who cannot afford further or higher education and advise everyone to buy plenty of good strong locks.