A Glorious Victory

Abu Hamza Masri is being held in a supermax facility in Manhattan while he awaits trial on terrorism charges. Meanwhile, the metal hooks he uses for hands have been taken away as a security risk. Hamza lost his hands when a Soviet mine exploded n Afghanistan in the 80’s. Since then he has used metal hooks in place of his hands. While in British jail, he was allowed to keep his hooks and his cell was specially fitted to permit their use. However, in the US, prison officials quickly deemed them a risk and took them away. Without hooks or hands, Abu Hamza is being forced to eat through a straw. Prison officials are not going to feed him, so he has no choice but to consume his food, blended.

12 Comments. Leave new

  • USA FUBAR.

  • Barbaric

  • Reading the comments on gocomics, almost all of them agree that the US has been far too lenient with Abu Hamza, that this monster who killed thousands of Americans is being coddled.

    Of COURSE he can’t have his prostheses, the suggestion is absurd. I notice that gocomics deleted all the comments I made today, for reasons that escape me. I pointed out there, as I do here, that most Americans think Mr Rall is a left-wing nutcase: the US President has classified information, so he knows who is guilty and who is not, and he wouldn’t have demanded Abu Hamza’s extradition if he were not a mass murderer of Americans. (As evidence that most Americans consider Mr Rall a nutcase, I present all the comments on gocomics.)

    In the trial, conviction, and execution of terrorists (not necessarily in that order) ‘Proof’ and ‘Evidence’ are just archaic 20th century concepts. For some reason, the US didn’t keep the British Star Chamber from 1776 until the 21st century, a serious lacuna in the US legal system that has finally been corrected. And the US Constitution must be suspended for the duration of the War on Terror, which is forever.

    All the commenters at gocomics ‘know’ that the US is the greatest nation that ever existed, that the punishments it metes out are all justified, and that the US President has not killed or incarcerated or subjected to ‘enhanced interrogation’ or confiscated the prostheses from anyone who didn’t deserve it.

    The only disagreement is between the Obamabots who know that Obama has killed far more terrorists than Bush, Jr, and the Tea types who know that President Obama is a Kenyan national, so the US military refused to accept him as CinC and has killed all those terrorists over President Obama’s vehement objections (and then he tries to take all the credit).

    But that everyone killed, incarcerated, subjected to ‘enhanced interrogation’, or denied their prostheses was guilty and deserved it, that is not subject to debate.

    And when those who want a revolution represent less than 1% of the population, it’s hard to see that revolution re-establishing anything that bears a modicum of resemblance to justice.

  • Actually, there are some of us who don’t really give a crap how many people Obama has “killed”, because we understand that you do your country an incredible disservice when you reduce something as complex as an election down to a single issue.

  • Anyone familiar enough with British law to know if that this guy so much had scratched another convict/guard with those hooks that the relatives of said scrtached convict/guard could sue the prison?

    Because I know they could here in good old America, and I’d wager THAT’S the primary reason he’s not being allowed his hooks.

  • alex_the_tired
    October 15, 2012 7:44 PM

    The hooks are not being kept back for fear of litigation by one of the guards. That might be the “for show” excuse, but it falls apart pretty quickly. Why? Because the same argument can be made about pretty much anything. A prisoner could make a garrote out of dental floss, so no more dental floss. An episode of Mythbusters showed that a lethal bow and arrow could be constructed with the elastic waistband of some underwear, so everyone’s going commando. A pencil? A pen? Think of all the eyes those could gouged out. A bar of soap and a sock? You’ve got yourself a cosh. Fingernails? Don’t tell me people don’t realize how dangerous a fingernail can be.

    The reality of it is that there is no way to render a prisoner non-dangerous by external methods. The prisoner remains non-lethal either because most prisoners in the United States are not lethal to begin with, or because many of the “lethal” ones are/were only lethal in a specific set of circumstances (e.g., John comes home early, finds his wife and the mailman in bed going at it, kills wife and mailman. John is not likely to kill again.)

    How useful could a guard possibly be if he didn’t know how to handle a prisoner with metal hooks for hands? It’s hardly a concealed weapon, is it?

    With many of the Republicans, I understand that their world view is narrow. They see the world as a John Wayne/Clint Eastwood pastiche in which all moral conflicts are simple: good v. evil. It’s a very comforting position to take. Osama bin Laden is evil. Every person who died on 9/11 was a saint. No wife beaters, no jerks, just saint after saint. And I realize that they simply can’t go any further in the thought process. It’s too hard, or too painful, or they just don’t want to take the time.

    A while back, there was a video of a New York Times photographer trying to get a shot of something unflattering to the police (it may have been an OWS arrest), and one officer in particular kept deliberately inserting himself between the photographer’s lens and the action, and the photographer kept saying something like, “I’m trying to get this shot. I’m trying to do my job as a journalist.” And the cop, with a frightening smirk, kept blocking the shot. For him, it was the same narrow worldview: Us v. Them. And if you ain’t Us, we’ll do whatever we want to you to teach you a lesson, and when we go home at night, we sleep like babies.

    And I realize that if that grotesque police officer had died on 9/11, we’d all have to listen to what a perfect human being he was. How gentle, how kind, how wonderful, even if, in reality, he was a grunting, brutal thug of an ass in life.

    And like I said a few paragraphs ago, I understand that that’s the limitation those sort of people labor under. They — genuinely — cannot comprehend the details that say that even a Jerry Sandusky has rights.

    But when the lefties do this sort of shit? It’s far more monstrous because they do understand the enormity of their actions. But they set that aside for the sake of scoring political points. Ronald Reagan, even at his mental peak, couldn’t comprehend that there was anything wrong about having brown people butchered by troops trained by the CIA. But Barack Obama talks a lot about these high-minded notions that make it sound like he understands about fundamental human rights. Ariana Huffington sure sounded liberal too, until she screwed over a bunch of fools and made $300 million off their sweaty labor.

    That’s the problem. I don’t mind having Archie Bunker as a neighbor. I know where I stand with him. But a neighbor who talks about the Rights of Man while blowing men into hamburger? Christ Almighty, that’s a lunatic, by definition.

  • @Whimsical said: Actually, there are some of us who don’t really give a crap how many people Obama has killed”.

    And there is is folks. I warned you about this scumbag. Now it’s there for all to see. The filthy piece-of-shit Whimsical shows his true colors. Or should I say, color. White. Male. Privileged. You see, when you’re a privileged white male like Retarded Whimsical, nothing matters but maintaining your own status. Killing innocent brown people? Doesn’t matter. Probably terrorists anyway. That’s the logic of the scumbag Whimsicals of this world.

  • As usual, the plant displays a level of thinking and analysis consistent with his emotional maturity; i.e. none at all.

    How many overseas people Obama has kiled is a complete non-issue, because Mitt Romney will kill just as many, if not more. And in addition to killing as many people over seas, Romney will destroy millions more at home.

    To allow millions of your own countrymen to be destroyed because of some overhyped deaths in a foreign country- without taking action that will reduce those deaths in the slightest? That’s MY definition of a lunatic.

    And as always, the plant fills the bill quite nicely.

    • @Whimsical: “How many overseas people Obama has kiled is a complete non-issue, because Mitt Romney will kill just as many, if not more. And in addition to killing as many people over seas, Romney will destroy millions more at home.”

      Proof, please.

      “To allow millions of your own countrymen to be destroyed because of some overhyped deaths in a foreign country- without taking action that will reduce those deaths in the slightest?”

      “Overhyped deaths”? Wow. Just wow. Monstrous.

      Have you read at all about how Obama has pushed the drone wars to unforeseen extremes? It’s gotten so bad that many pilots no longer bother training to fly actual planes, because there’s no USAF demand anymore. Have you heard Obama joke about the predator drone strikes? Have you read about how he invites Pelosi over to watch the drone snuff movies?

  • This is OT.

    In the interest of actual data, instead of incessant jaw flapping, the electoral vote projection before the first debate was Obama 324 Willard 206 with 8 “ties.”

    Before the second debate it is Obama 277, Willard 239, “ties” 22.

    Polling has documented flips in favor of Willard in FL, IN, NC and NH
    There were no changes in favor of Obama

    http://www.electoral-vote.com/

  • «Whimsical». I must confess myself bemused to those scare quotes you placed around the verb «killed» in «Actually, there are some of us who don’t really give a crap how many people Obama has “killed”» – are you trying to say that these people didn’t die and that it’s all like being at the cinema ? In any event, I now better understand your sobriquet – whimsical, indeed !…

    Henri

  • @Ted

    Seriously? Mitt Romney opposes ending the wars in Iraq and Afaghanistan and is a guarantee of the US starting a war in Iran. You’re letting your blinders keep you from paying attention, apparently, which is dangerous.

    None of the rest of your point is relavant to the choice you face: someone who will kill a handful of brown people unjustly versus someone who will kill even MORE people and destroy your own country to boot.

    Your call.

    Oh, and by the way, if caring more about my own country than other countries makes me a “monster”, I’ll wear that label with pride. But have that label maker handy, because you’re going to have to slap it on everybody, cause anyone who tells you they care more about other countries than their own is lying- to you and quite possibly to themselves.

    Mhenri-

    I belive both the impact of and Obama’s responsiblity for those deaths is vastly overstated. Hence the quotes.

You must be logged in to post a comment.
Menu
css.php