Osama’s Body
By Dave Hitt on May 2, 2011 in Politics, Religion
We’re always lectured that it’s wrong to celebrate anyone’s death, even the death of evil people. Â I disagree. Â The world is far better off without him, and that’s worth celebrating.
I predict Muslims all over the world will riot over this. Â I also predict Seattle will get a lot of rain this summer and Paris Hilton will get even more skanky.
While this is an emotional release of almost orgasmic proportions for Americans, it won’t make much difference in the long term.  We’ve already done a pretty good job of messing up his network, as evidenced by the lack of terrorism on US soil.  After their initial outrage Muslims will consider him a martyr, and treat him the way Catholics treat their saints.
But we can extend our own jubilation just a bit longer by carefully disposing of his body in the most insulting way possible. You’ve probably received some variation of this e-mail a few times:
HOW TO STOP ISLAMIC TERRORISTS . . . it worked once in our History
Once in US history an episode of Islamic terrorism was very quickly stopped. It happened in the Philippines about 1911, when Gen. John J. Pershing was in command of the garrison. There had been numerous Islamic terrorist attacks, so “Black Jack” told his boys to catch the perps and teach them a lesson.
Forced to dig their own graves, the terrorists were all tied to posts, execution style. The US soldiers then brought in pigs and slaughtered them, rubbing their bullets in the blood and fat. Thus, the terrorists were terrorized; they saw that they would be contaminated with hogs’ blood. This would mean that they could not enter Heaven, even if they died as terrorist martyrs.
All but one was shot, their bodies dumped into the grave, and the hog guts dumped atop the bodies. The lone survivor was allowed to escape back to the terrorist camp and tell his brethren what happened to the others. This brought a stop to terrorism in the Philippines for the next 50 years.
Pointing a gun into the face of Islamic terrorists won’t make them flinch. They welcome the chance to die for Allah. Like Gen. Pershing, we must show them that they won’t get to Muslim heaven (which they believe has an endless supply of virgins) but instead will die with the hated pigs of the devil.
It’s a great story, but it probably never happened. Â There’s no record of it, but more importantly Pershing’s record indicates he’s not the kind of guy who would do that sort of thing.
But we can, and we should. Â We should sew up the body in a pigskin suit, dump it in a vat of pig entrails, and then give all the people who lost loved ones in 9/11 an opportunity to relieve themselves on it. Â Then we should bring it to an unmarked location, somewhere in the Mohave, perhaps, dump it in a deep hole and pile more pig guts on top of it.
Before covering and concealing the grave forever we’ll throw in pictures of 72 really ugly virgins.  And then, as a final insult, a life-size pork rind sculpture of Rosie O’Donnell, completing the pig theme.
Update: Right after I posted this I saw the news that he was buriend at sea. Time quotes an official as saying, “”We are ensuring that it is handled in accordance with Islamic practice and tradition.  This is something that we take very seriously. And so therefore this is being handled in an appropriate manner.”
So they not only blew an perfect opertunity for more closure, they aquesed to the Islamic superstisions.
Idiots.
I sort of wish they treated his body like the Stanley Cup. Every person on the winning team gets it for a day.
Michael | May 2, 2011 | Reply
Meh. He’s dead and that’s good enough for me.
Harley | May 2, 2011 | Reply
they should have quartered him and sent the pieces the the areas of highest terrorist activity, thats what they did in the old days and it worked then, the man(rather a coward) had no respect for human life so theres no reason his death should be treated with a courtesy he didnt afford the living
Josh | May 2, 2011 | Reply
They should have dragged his body through the streets the way they did with the bodies of our service men. Of course the US Navy should make a point of sailing past the location where he was buried at sea and let all the marines piss off the deck as they go by.
Brian Riley | May 2, 2011 | Reply
How about chopping it into a dozen pieces and putting them in bottom of porta potties at ground zero? Charge people a buck to relieve themselves on him. Then use that money to by ham sandwiches for the homeless.
Can you imagine the lines
Hittman | May 2, 2011 | Reply
I have an idea, several really, please tell me what you think.
We have been told that OBL is dead.
We have been told that his body was buried at sea very soon after his death.
We have been told that copious amounts of data has been retrieved from the house regarding the whereabouts of AQ terrorists.
We have no proof of these things other than having been told by the US Government who are delaying releasing pictures of his body. This is how any information, TV, net or newspapers, gets to us normally, that is fair enough. The thing is, if you had 10 years, and possibly more, to decide what you would do with the most dangerous man in the world who masterminds an enormous network of dangerous people when you eventually found him, would you kill him? I don’t believe you would. If you did, the fate of thousands of people could be decided by one bullet, fired by one person.
I think that you would keep him alive, torture the shit out of him without any regard for his welfare other than maintaining his ability to articulate, until you had the information you needed to go and deal with all the other crazy mothers out there. Would you miss that, the ultimate opportunity to finish AQ? I think not.
That scenario would not go down very well with his sympathizers, which are not all going to be Islamics or indeed crazy Islamics. So you would have to say he was shot through the eye to apease those out there who wanted the worst possible things to happen to him, to apease the Islamics who might want to look at his apparent death as a martyrdom and to cover up for the fact that he was actually drugged up, in a box being transported to some bunker in the Nevada desert etc. Saying that his body was buried at sea would remove the possibility of it having to be produced or a shrine being created. In addition, to say that masses of information was collected from the scene, would, if he was dead or not, panic the people out there that are involved in AQ. The probability being if he was alive and being interrogated that he would be made to talk, but the information can’t seem to have appeared from nowhere, he is supposed to be dead.
Well these are my theories, none of them are impossible but as is always the case, you can never put your hand on your heart and say you believe what any government says without question, but I do expect the US Government to have got it right this time.
Tamber | May 5, 2011 | Reply
Hi Dave,
Here is a link to awesome interview with General Musharaff, by Karan Thaphar an Indian Devils advocate.
http://ibnlive.in.com/news/osama-in-pak-was-our-incompetence-musharraf/151635-2.html
He has nailed general Musharaff in an awesome way, with some excellent questions.
Which would probably raise ones eyebrows, wheather Musharaff was complicit or incompetent.
Ashish Patil | May 8, 2011 | Reply
You can watch entire interview by clicking on the video link
Ashish Patil | May 8, 2011 | Reply
I like what Pat Condell had to say on the subject:
They should have brought his body to New York, pickled it in alcohol and erected it on top of the ground zero mosque with a pork chop in his mouth and a fireman’s axe up his arse.
Brian | May 9, 2011 | Reply
From the safety of your lofty position as an American, you can say these things with impunity. Whether this type of talk goes to inflame anyone out there who happens to be a good muslim is of scant regard to you. As long as you are free to express yourself in an unfettered manner, you and the likes of you will continue to abuse that privilege by talking in such a way. You have neither the intelligence or the common decency to differentiate between an Islamic and a terrorist who is Islamic. There is no doubt that Al Quaeda are fanatical and ruthless, but no less than the IRA(bet you don’t know who they are)who slaughtered men, women and children in the UK for 40 years of my life. Not once did anyone think of condeming all Roman Catholics because of the IRA.
It is obvious that the civilized world is angry and bitter about 911, and the underground bombings in London, 7/7(funny I never hear Americans mention that, it was a monstrosity and happened since 911)the terroris bombings in Asian countries(that also get little attention from the USA)but what is the point in blaming all Islamics, surely it should be the terrorists?
The depth of the ignorance in the US is as widespread as it is in the Asian countries where these animals come from.
BTW, before you suggest otherwise, I am 51, white, middle class, English, Christian and am married to an American from Michigan.
Tamber | May 10, 2011 | Reply
Tamber, did you know that 25% of young Muslims in America believe it is acceptable to commit acts of violence in the name of Islam? 25%
Violent, jihadist Muslims are not a fringe minority. They are not a majority, granted, but they are a large enough minority to be concerned about. Every single muslim-run theocracy is a notorious human rights abuser. And these people aren’t misinterpreting the Quran. They’re not getting it wrong.
The difference between Muslims who commit violence in the name of their religion and Christians is that Christians are quickly defamed by their bretheren for those actions. As a Christian you can’t distance yourself from the Westboro Baptist Church fast enough, yet when they killed Bin Laden they were afraid of his grave becoming a shrine.
The facts are that Islam has a violence problem. There are extremists and so-called “moderates” who give the extremists behavior a nod and a wink. When these religiously-motivated attacks are carried out by muslims, they receive no condemnation from Muslim leaders. The more serious about Islam someone gets, the more likely they are to hurt someone. That’s why we have a problem with it. Neither Dave nor anyone else is condemning all Muslims, but we are condemning Islam itself, the religion, because it’s an unfounded belief that does massive amounts of measurable harm to the world.
Brian | May 10, 2011 | Reply
How many 25%, or 25% of the people asked, or did you ask all of them?
Tell me, how many, as a percentage, young Christians in America believe it is acceptable to commit acts of violence in the name of America? How many?
Do people in America carry guns? What for? Sport?
In my mind anyone who talks of retribution on the scale of your suggestion, or someone who carries a FUCKING GUN!!! has a violent disposition, and they don’t have to be Muslim.
You belittle yourself with the hatred you display, no less than anyone else who displays hatred and can give their justification for it.
Tamber | May 10, 2011 | Reply
\When these religiously-motivated attacks are carried out by muslims, they receive no condemnation from Muslim leaders.\ That is, except for all the Muslim leaders who condemn them. Muslim leaders usually respond a lot faster because, unlike with Christians (usually), Muslims face the public perception that the violent minority represents the group.
Also, Muslims speaking out against violence rarely makes for good infotainment.
Regarding the torture, the bulk of the evidence suggests that torture is not a good source of reliable information. If you wanted to torture him just out of revenge or masochism or whatever, that’s a totally different argument.
Dan the Man | May 26, 2011 | Reply