His name's Abu-*jihaad*.
In the words of jury member in Black Adder ('Witch Hunter Persuivant'), "THAT PROVES IT!"
The trial of ex-Navy signalman Hassan Abu-jihaad took merely a week, ending with the bang of a one-day deliberation in which Connecticut jurors found the man guilty, sending him over for providing material support to terrorists. The prosecution employed a strategy in which the jury was shown videotapes Abu-jihaad was said to …
This is typical of the U.S. law-enforcement agencies. Everybody is trying to look good, so they are (and have been for some time) playing up every loser they can to make them look like super-terrorists. There was a case in Florida where a group of anti-government losers were manipulated by an FBI plant into planning a stupicide bombing of something. Of course once they agreed to everything the plant told them, they were arrested, tried, and convicted.
It's great that someone is taking a seriously look at this sort of thing, and of course I have nothing but praise for The Register in publishing this story.
However the problem is this is a UK tech news website. That's not a criticism, rather I'm pointing out the unfortunate obvious, i.e. no one in the US that can bring this to the attention of the general public will see it.
Again, not a criticism. The Register is doing its part by bringing this sort of thing to the attention of the world, I just think it would be great if a major news organisation in the US itself would pick up this story.
Because besides the necessity to get innocent people released from jail, it's incredibly important that future juries give short thrift to wild claims and unsubstantiated accusations.
It's important that the people who's job it is to investigate terrorism are aware that they themselves are being watched, and that they understand bringing patsies to trial will likely end in embarrassment.
Unfortunately over the last decade the US press corp has pretty much lost its backbone. They appear willing to accept anything they're told, and even if someone does have the guts to challenge a statement, will back down immediately when given the scripted response.
Part of what makes the press important is their willingness to challenge authority. We need more of it, and pretty damn soon if something is to be done.
We just need to sow a seed of doubt. It doesn't matter if the stories are dismissed out of hand by those who can't believe their heroes in the White House would perpetrate such crimes. People are funny this way. They may fervently deny and be ludicrously loyal, but if you plant that doubt in their minds it will have an effect when needed.
‘Caution - FBI fit-ups of Muslim patsies in progress’
I stared and stared at this title for a couple of minutes wondering wtf does that mean? Does "fit-up" mean setup? As in the FBI is setting up muslim patsies? Had to click on the damn story just to find out.
Evidently I need a Brit translator.... and I've been reading El Reg for years with no translation issues.
Paris because she doesn't know what's going on either...
It's similar to set-up. George actually suggested set-up in his original headline, but I changed that to fit-up as it seemed to me that the latter was maybe more appropriate. Set-up is maybe more about entrapment, while fit-up maybe better covers the essentially presentational factors that got Abu-jihaad.
That's what I thought at the time, anyway. The possibility that the expression was meaningless in the US escaped me entirely. (-:
"....A race element is also in play. The outsider other - anyone not white, Muslim and not well to do - is viewed as an enemy....." Of course! All the FBI must be racist, white, bigots! Forget the black, asian and latino G-men, they're just they're for window-dressing, right? I suppose all their informants are actually paid-up KKK members blacked up with shoe polish too, then?
Honestly, "George", you actually sounded like you might have a (weak) case until you started on the standard nutjob "They're-all-racist-Big-Brothers" bleating. Please go back to Indymedia where your antiestablishmentarianism will be appreciated. Here's the simple test - if it was 1942, and Paul Hall had changed his name to Blitz Hitler, was an American happily running with other known Nazi sympathisers, and then sent info on an Allied fleet to someone he knew was a provider of materials and support to the Germans, do you seriously think he wouldn't have been locked up as a traitor? And would you be so quick to question the FBI if they caught him at it? I think not. It wasn't trendy to be anti-FBI in those days.
Paris, as I'm sure she'd listen to your "arguments" if someone told her they were fashionable. Now, can we please get back to some technical articles?
Could this mean that 'terrorists' really are a minority in the world, that ~99% of the population (including Muslums) are normal people trying to get on with their lives?
Seems the authorities have created a huge scarey underground network that is turning out to be not as bad as they say.
Is it just me, or is it that almost every accident reported on the news ends with 'Authorities don't believe terrorism was a factor'. No sh!t, accidents happen all the time, and we never 'suspected terrorism' before.
*gets off soap box and sits back in corner*
Thanks El Reg for publishing this news, a bit of reality is nice to see.
Alternatively take a quick walk through history and see if you can find out what happened to an extremely large number of US citizens who were unfortunate enough to have Japanese parents during WWII.
The US (and the UK for that matter) has a long and exemplary history of locking up or killing completely innocent people in the name of national security.
Witch hunts are certainly nothing new, as a number of people living through the Nixon era can probably confirm.
The fact is we're "at war" with a few louts from Afghanistan and Pakistan. Astonishingly we continue to hand the ill-equipped yobbos victory after victory. Apparently they hate us for our freedom. So to combat this, we'll attempt to appease them by removing those freedoms and shitting on the Constitution. Every time an innocent person is put away, another freedom is removed or another warrantless wiretap approved we give "the terrorists" another victory.
You see that's the whole point of terrorism. The idea is to create fear, suspicion and injustice. The idea is to have everyone so paranoid they start giving handing over their freedoms in the cowardly hope that they'll be safe from imaginary threats.
Now one thing has had me puzzled for about 3 years or so. Apparently we're fighting them "over there" so we don't have to fight them "over here". If that's the case, and for the moment we shall ignore the fact "over there" happens to be the wrong country, how come the need to persecute and spy on US citizens and innocent legal immigrants? Why do we need to expand FISA to wiretap without warrants even more people from this country and allow corporates that blatantly broke the law to get away with it?
It's a crock of shit. All these laws are created to hand crony-run businesses huge government contracts, and to help give the more paranoid as false sense of security.
Dick Cheney firmly believes there are Hezbollah cells operating in the US, waiting for Iranians to mail them nuclear weapons. He's fucking nuts, and unfortunately in complete control of a moron we call President.
So instead of criticizing a legitimate attempt to bring gross injustice to light, why not ask your own paid-and-bought-by-lobbyist politicians what the fuck they're thinking. Last I heard, being foreign, unpopular and poor were not crimes and did not warrant entrapment by the FBI.
This sucks. I really believed that honesty and justice would prevail in this case. Again I'm disappointed. This reminds me of the injustices of the McCarthy period in the 50s, "are you or have you ever been, a member of the Communist party?". This is again the Inquisition and the witch-hunts in a "modern" context.
So Abu-Jihaad buys some videos from a man who has never been convicted of a crime in his country (Babar in UK). He leaves some change - 5 quid as a donation. And he never commits any act of violence against anyone in his country. And you think Muslims do not notice the difference in their treatment to others? Are these videos any different from US/UK videos of their wonderful "smart-bombs" hitting some target. "Whoops, sorry about the collateral damage. Just a few women and children - you've got plenty more of those!"
If we assume and you better believe we should, that our decisions and actions are 90% based on how we *feel* then you should start to feel pretty uncomfortable yourselves. In the Qu'ran it says that "oppression is worse than murder". With murder you are dead. That's it. With oppression, a person, a community or a nation are ground down, suppressed and insulted. Before the physical explosion comes the explosion of the heart. Does that not make sense to you?
We Muslims are not invading your countries or breaking down your doors in the night. Haven't you figured it out yet - you are the Terrorist.
Like many bureaucratic entities, the FBI encourages 'productivity' ratings for promotional consideration. The threat of terrorism has provided a circus for the inept agents to create lots of suspects. When a paid informant, working to avoid re-arrest, cultivates an 'innocent', the results are as has been described. The FBI and all national 'intelligence' agencies have a small number of good people using their skills to aid their employers, and an unfortunately LARGE number of dip-shits manufacturing circumstance to promote their careers. Just like other private and government managers.
@My perspective - as a Muslim
I thought I should add a little bit. The "You" in my response is leveled at the governments of the enlightened free world eg USA, UK, Aust etc, NOT at any readers of this e-rag nor of citizens of said countries, in general.
I was feeling peeved and forgot to add this bit.
this has been going on for years, pick a colour or race and blam him as the cause of all ills.
My grate grandfather a Hungarian escaped from the jewish pogrom to make a new life in the UK. Unfortunatly for him the 1st world war happened.
Being a Jjew at the time was bad enough, but being a hungarian Jew was even worse. He was interned in harsh conditions in Armly jail in Leeds. His crime escaping persicution, but he could undermine state security so lock him up was the cry.
That was almost 100 years ago. And nothing has changed except the race and colour of skin.
First it was the witches then the Jews and now it is the Muslims who are blamed and persicuted. What a great society we live in.
Thanks reg For publishing.
"We Muslims are not invading your countries or breaking down your doors in the night. Haven't you figured it out yet - you are the Terrorist."
Yup, the smarter minority of the UK population know this fine well, which is why we find our government's actions so abhorent.
We kinda figured this out many years back, and set about dismantling the empire we'd built up, but then promptly forgot and started over again.
Actually, I personally knew a German Jew whom escaped the Nazis in '38 and moved to the UK. In 1939 he was one of many people in the UK of German origin that voluntarily game themselves up at Police stations at HMG's request, and was locked up for the next five years. His brother, sister and parents didn't make it out of Germany, they ended up at Auschwitz. He told me he never argued with the decision to lock him up, despite his willingness to fight against the Nazis, as it was a far better fate than many of those left behind in Germany faced.
Suppose the FBI had arrested the 9/11 bombers before they struck on the suspicion that people that didn't want to learn how to land a commercial airliner, just how to take off and fly it, I presume you and Mr Smith would be calling them "Muslim patsies" too? One of the ironies of preventative security is you never know how many peoples' lives you've saved, whereas when the bad guys get through you will often know immediately exactly how bad your failure is. If the arrest of people like Abu-Jihaad make jihadi-sympathisers less inclined to mingle and discuss their moronic views or plans then all the better.
RE: Patrick Ernst - very Muslim name, Patrick, are you embarrassed of your religion, or just not a Muslim at all? Instead of the McCarthy Commission (always a fave with the lefties), why not compare it to the Stalinist purges, where many a "good" communist, Jew, Muslim and many others died. Then you might get a real idea of persecution. Muslims in the UK (and US) sprout a load of male bovine manure about being persecuted when they often have far better freedoms and treatment than any Muslim country.
"Suppose the FBI had arrested the 9/11 bombers before they struck on the suspicion that people that didn't want to learn how to land a commercial airliner, just how to take off and fly it, I presume you and Mr Smith would be calling them "Muslim patsies" too?"
If they hadn't actually committed a crime, that's EXACTLY what they'd be. I think you should look up the definition of "patsy".
Then you should go and look up things like "the law", etc. and reflect upon how this dupe ended up in the slammer without actually committing a crime, possibly using search terms like "Gillian Gibbons" for comparison.
Tux, because in your World, he'd be sent down for being a commie sympathiser.
Actually, Luis, I can safely assume you're just so uninteresting that nobody is watching you.
Here's another test to annoy the human-righties here. Suppose Hilary Clinton attends a Jewish event to help her pick up a few votes. The FBI find an interesting Arab nutjob who has a diary entry saying "Clinton must die before the election". What would you want the FBI to do? I'm guessing the human-righties would scream the same stuff about patsies, free speech, etc, etc. Of course, Sirhan Sirhan was a very "Amercianised" Arab immigrant when he wrote "Robert F. Kennedy must die before June 5th" in his diary, and he went on to shoot and kill Kennedy on June 5th 1968, stopping him winning the Democratic nomination. All because RFK had attended an event that praised Israel. Your choice, lefties - do the FBI arrest on suspicion, or do you prefer to wait until one of your own gets killed?
Actually, the definition of a patsy is someone duped into or framed to take the blame for a crime, the conspiracy-theorists' fave being Lee Harvey Oswald. Why don't you try looking it up? Mr Smith's article is basicly insinuating that the FBI are framing innocent and easily-led Muslims by the use of crooked informers, which of course presumes that all such accused must actually commit a full-blown terrorist act before they can be arrested and charged, otherwise it's all just a matter of free speech.
And no, the jihadi sympathisers don't have to actually commit the act to be arrested and charged. Going back to the example of what if the FBI had arrested the 9/11 plotters befor the actual attack, in the UK they would have been arrested on charges of preparation to commit an act of terror - in the US they could simply have been arrested on conspiracy charges. I suggest you read up on law, too. That might have to wait until you develop the capability of independent thought, though.
And if anything, ol' Tux would be hated by the old commies 'cos he embraces three concepts they detest - independent throught, intellectual sharing and capitalist business. If you bothered to check, you would have realised that there is nothing in Linux or the OSS community that prohibits the making of money through the contribution to or use of Linux, which is of course anathema to the old commies. I'm getting bored with telling you what you need to read up on and I suspect we've merely scraped the surface so far.
As for Gillian Gibbons of the infamous Muhamed teddybear, what bearing does it have on Abu-Jihaad being convicted of sending secret information to someone likely to use it to harm his fellow countrymen? Are you trying to look deep and intellectual? Or was it just the only human rights case you could think of? Read more, and try a lot harder.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019