Cheerio! Abu Hamza and four others extradited to the USA

Abu Hamza is to be extradited! With four others he will be extradited to the USA to stand trial for terrorism or charges relating to terrorism.

"The European Court of Human Rights this morning rejected claims that the men, Babar Ahmad, Syed Talha Ahsan, Adel Abdul Bary and Khaled Al-Fawwaz, would be subject to "ill treatment" if they are sent to the US to be tried for terrorist offences.
They have three months before today's ruling is made final, and will not be put on a plane until the Grand Chamber of the court has considered whether to allow an appeal."

And on the case against him:

"A decision on a sixth man, Haroon Aswat, alleged to be an aide to Hamza, was delayed after judges ruled they needed more information about him.
Of the cases, the charges against Hamza are the most serious. The former preacher of Finsbury Park mosque in north London, who was sentenced to seven years' imprisonment in Britain in 2006 for inciting hatred, is accused by US authorities of being in contact with Taliban and al-Qaeda terrorists, and of being involved in a plot to take 16 western tourists as hostages in Yemen in December 1998. Four people were killed during that incident.
He is also charged with attempting to set up a training camp for "violent jihad" in Oregon in 1999."

So my message to him is as follows:

"Cheerio!"

Yep, cheerio and don't let the door hit your ass on the way out.
  In all seriousness though it's about time this happened. It's only taken, what, eight years or so to get the scumbag deported. Meanwhile he's hardly lived a difficult life. Financed, as always, by the taxpayer. It's about time he was made to answer these charges one way or another so it's excellent news that he is being made to do so.
  I think we need to sometimes put things into perspective when talking about human rights. The term is banded around so much sometimes people are not held accountable for their actions (or alleged actions.) This was one such case, so it's good to see there finally has been some progress.

If he is found innocent, the next question is "should he be allowed back into the UK and allowed to stay?" But that's a debate for another day.


Sources:

http://www.channel4.com/news/abu-hamza-extradition-to-us-is-lawful

US Republican goes against the grain

In the US at the moment the competition for the Republican candidates is getting more competitive. Some candidates have already fallen by the wayside whilst others have steamed ahead.
  From almost the very beginning there have been two candidates who I have adamantly dismissed and hoped to fail. Those two were Michele Bachmann and Rick Santorum. Why? Because of their almost militant stance against gay marriage.
  Opposing it personally is one thing, but when you are in a position of power and influence you really have to ask, just how much should you impose your own views on the general public through influence and legislation? Especially when such views involve discrimination and frankly a rather backward view.
  Rick Santorum is against gay marriage because he believes marriage is for a man and a woman. His views on gay marriage may or may not be founded on Christian beliefs, I'm unsure.
  Michele Bachmann's beliefs definitely are founded on Christian beliefs. Not only does she oppose it but both she and her husband see it almost as some sort of illness that can be cured, which is why Mr Bachman has held "Straight camps."
     Call me narrow minded if you like (although that would be ironic) but if I oppose those two people simply because of their opposition to gay marriage and their opinions on homosexuality, then I think that would be justified.
  Opinions like that are backward and dangerous, not to mention counter-productive so it was refreshing to see a republican speaking out in favour of gay marriage.
   Watch this:

Her name is Maureen Walsh and she is a Republican State Representative in the Washington House of Representatives. She represents the 16th District of Walla Walla, Washington. As of 2012, she is serving her third term.
  Needless to say, she is completely in the right. Frankly there is little logical reason to oppose gay marriage at this point. There is little to no evidence that it would effect society negatively or effect the institution of marriage as we know it.
  It won't wreck marriage, that is nonsense. Do you know what is wrecking straight marriage? Straight people. Because of infidelity, drugs, alcohol, you name it, it's happened.
  The only thing that will happen if gay marriage is legalised is that two people who happen to be of the same sex and who love each other very much will be able to marry. And all the arguments against it frankly are nonsense because I haven't heard one argument that legitimately states one downside that would be exclusive to a gay married couple and that would never happen in a straight marriage. If you can think of one, please do say.
  Oh and if you oppose gay marriage or homosexuality for religious reasons, then maybe you need to pull your head out of your own arse and try joining the 21st Century, and certainly don't try and impose your backwards views on other people.

 I'm 100% for the legalisation of gay marriage and if you're not then you'd better have a good reason otherwise just it happen.


 Sources:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CbmbdWK6338&feature=player_embedded 


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maureen_Walsh

We all did it for oil you know......

This is a tweet made by American billionaire Donald Trump not one hour ago:

"Why did we spend billions of our money on Libya if we are not going to get any of the country's oil? What do we get out of this?"

So did the USA seek to help the Libyan rebels for the sole purpose of strengthening ties to secure oil deals? Or maybe was it to actually help the Libyans. Even if the USA did involve itself in the Libya conflict purely to strengthen oil deals, that would not send out the best impression. It would portray said country as selfish amongst other things.
  Likewise, by asking such questions it shows a certain selfish desire to put fuel and subsequent profit over the stability and future of a country.

Right now, in the aftermath of the death of Muammar Gaddafi, neither the UK nor the USA should be asking "how much oil can we get out of this?"  We should be asking, "What is the next step for Libya and it's people?"

Woman charged with murder for cutting fetus out of woman's body

A chilling story from the United States of America. A woman for whom the term "disturbed" isn't nearly enough is unable to have children.
   A quote from the news article:

"Morales-Rodriguez told detectives her boyfriend wanted a baby boy but she was unable to get pregnant, then feigned a pregnancy and panicked when it was time to have the baby, authorities said.
She drove around her neighborhood, locating the victim outside a public agency frequented by pregnant women, and offered her a ride to a local drug store, according to the complaint.
Morales-Rodriguez then told the pregnant woman she needed to stop at home to change her shoes. While the victim was inside using the bathroom, Morales-Rodriguez struck her in the head several times with a baseball bat, the complaint said.
Court documents said she then strangled her and taped her mouth, hands and feet with duct tape before trying to cut out the fetus.
"She cut at the bikini line attempting to duplicate the process she had seen on the Discovery Channel, depicting a caesarean section birth," the district attorney wrote in the complaint.
Morales-Rodriguez then called the paramedics to report that she had just given stillbirth to a child in the shower, the complaint said.
"She said that she had just given birth and the baby was not breathing," Police Chief Ed Flynn said during a news conference over the weekend.
The baby was pronounced dead at the scene and Morales-Rodriguez was taken to the hospital by paramedics.
Police later learned that the woman was not the mother of the child. Investigators returned to Morales-Rodriguez' home where they discovered the mother's body in the basement by the hot water heater."

Chilling, disturbed, disgusting, none of these do the story justice. To take not just one life but two and in such a gruesome and inhumane act is beyond belief.
  This goes beyond simply wanting a child, it's a psycotic unbalanced determination that is dangerous. There is of course a chance that she will simply plead insanity and be shipped off to a place that has padded cells. If so then it would be unlikely she will ever truly face consequences for those gruesome actions.

  I personally hope she is made to answer for the horrific crime. It would be somewhat of an injustice if she isn't.



Source:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/10/11/us-crime-wisconsin-fetus-idUSTRE79A0CR20111011

Trial or Error?

    Whilst watching the YouTube channel "The Young Turks" whose segments I often watch, I came across a video of theirs in which they discuss a conversation between Michael Moore and Elisabeth Hasselbank on a show called "The View."
   Now most of you might know who Michael Moore is but you might not know who Elisabeth Hasslebank is or what "The View" is.
  Elisabeth Hasslebank is a TV personality over in the US and general television presenter. She more often than not represents Conservative views and has been outspoken more often than not.
  "The View" is the USA's version of "Loose Women" except in the former they have proper debates and conversations with some fairly serious people as opposed to "Loose Women" which is mostly celebrities and celebrity chatter with a bit of debate on the side.

   Now that's out of the way, to the video itself.
The video is a debate on the TV show on which Michael Moore was a guest. They were discussing the death of Osama Bin Laden. As you are about to see, Michael Moore believes he should have been taken back to the USA and put on trial:

Now in this Moore compares such a trial to that of the Nazi's indicating it would have been the right and moral thing to do. He also claims that "we are no longer at war" (and by "we" he means the USA). This is obviously not true.

 The reason the comparison to the Nazi's and the Nuremberg trials doesn't fit is because that was the aftermath of a world war. The Germans had accepted defeat and the general consensus was that it was right and proper to try those who were responsible for war crimes. There was no real division over the decision to send those people to the Hague to face trial, and there certainly wasn't any objections least of all for religious reasons.

Had Osama Bin Laden gone to trial in New York it might well have caused a certain amount of religious tension and division and could have caused civil unrest in certain parts of the world. Furthermore, had he been captured alive and sent to New York to face trial it could have triggered a spree of kidnappings or murders of Americans in retaliations or in an effort by the supporters of Bin Laden to free him. Any dignitary or person in a position of power both in the USA and abroad (especially in countries where the population is considerably or mostly Muslim) could have been in danger of being taken and held to ransom.
   
   Another person on the panel makes a the valid point that Bin Laden was killed instead of captured alive because the USA did not want to make Bin Laden a Martyr to which Moore replied that putting the Nazi's on trial didn't make them martyrs. However the Nazi's weren't religious fanatics. They were fanatics but not driven by an insane religious brainwashing.

In conclusion, if a democracy puts a person like Bin Laden on trial nine times out of ten, just because they didn't do it once out of those ten times that doesn't make that country any less democratic. Furthermore, I think said countries are allowed to make exceptions, especially in a case like Bin Laden, because Bin Laden and all that surrounded him and 9/11 is no ordinary case.

I believe it was right to kill him, so that all nations effected by 9/11 and the familes can perhaps move on, if indeed that is possible.

Greyhound trainer held over mass cruelty

It's a sad fact of life these days that you don't have to look far to find shocking stories in the news, especially when it is on the subject of cruelty, whether it be cruelty to babies, children, or even animals.

So it is with great shock and disgust that I saw in the news a racing dog breeder in Florida is facing charges for the deaths of at least two dozen dogs.
Ronald Williams is under investigation for cruelty to and for the deaths of perhaps as many as thirty dogs.

Williams is (thankfully) in jail at the moment and is facing a $54,000 bond.

Here are a few quotes:

According to the emergency suspension order, the pari-mutuel wagering division launched an investigation into Williams shortly after he delivered eight underweight dogs with sores to Greyhound Pets of America’s Emerald Coast (GPAEC) chapter on Oct. 25. Four days later, investigators entered Williams’ kennel at Ebro and discovered 21 dead greyhounds that had “suffered from extreme neglect.” Several of the animals were housed two per cage.

The five surviving dogs were rescued from the same kennel. Three of the survivors and one of the dead dogs had duct tape tightly wrapped around their necks, according to the order.

And another rather more chilling quote:

Five more carcasses were discovered in the freezer of the Building 7 kennels, and one more was found in the freezer of Building 5, where Williams also kept kennels.

Investigators also found six large plastic garbage bags that contained remains of an unknown number of animals. Investigators reported the rotting parts could not be safely inspected.

It's all rather disturbing, that a man could to this to an animal which is entrusted into his care and which relies on him for safe keeping and good company. It is truly disgusting

I have to say though, rather it happened over in the USA rather than here in the UK because I do sometimes feel they take justice more seriously in the USA especially when it comes to animal cruelty. Here in the UK there are some abhorrent crimes against animals and yet the person(s) involved get away with a fine and a pathetic excuse for a criminal sentence.

Hopefully over there in the United States their laws on animal cruelty are more defined and hopefully if found guilty/found to be guilty, they will go to prison for a long time.

It is the least that can be done for the animals that suffered and were killed, not least all the ones that may have been hurt and killed that we don't yet know about.

It astounds and disgusts me that as of yet the punishment for animal cruelty is not as strong as it perhaps should be.

Anyway, I will keep you updated on the latest with this when I hear it.

Until next time,
Ciao!

Sources:

http://www.waltonsun.com/news/license-88279-newsherald-suspect-suspended.html


http://www.wjhg.com/home/headlines/Ronnie_Williams_Could_Be_Linked_To_More_Greyhound_Deaths_106577273.html

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2010/10/31/Trainer-cited-in-Florida-greyhound-deaths/UPI-57951288565122/

http://weblogs.sun-sentinel.com/news/specials/weirdflorida/blog/2010/11/at_least_7_dead_dogs_believed_1.html

http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/299787

Angie Jackson Live-Tweets Her Abortion on Twitter

http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/angie-jackson-live-tweets-abortion/story?id=9937689&page=1

"But Jackson, who said she's always spoken about controversial topics online -- she is a self-professed atheist who says she grew up in a fundamentalist cult and survived sexual abuse -- never expected her abortion tweets to garner such attention.

"I don't feel like I'm doing anything different from what I do every day," said Jackson. "But now I have people calling me a killer; it's surreal."

So despite the fact she publicly admitted to having a procedure that is still very much in debate, very much a hot topic, and very much controversial especially in America, where there are still a lot of people who feel very strongly about it one way or another, she thinks it's surreal and is surprised that some people are reacting the way they are?

Either she is a fool, misguided, or just very stupid. What was she expecting, a round of applause?

I am still very much on the fence about abortion and I think I will be still for some time, however as I said there are many who are not and who actively express their feelings especially in America. If you openly admit on somewhere very public like Twitter how can you not expect some backlash and critique?

In some way's she just brought it on herself.
That may sound harsh and unfair, however the reality of it is that she could have kept this quiet and to herself but she chose not to.

Sacre bleu!