This either shows that we have a compassionate, caring government or they are a bunch of idiots.

New York Post:

We're giving this hatemonger a hand - and probably two.

Taxpayers will foot the bill to replace radical Islamic preacher Abu Hamza al-Masri's infamous hooks, The Post has learned.

And the cost - while not quite an arm and a leg - is expected to run up to $16,000 so the one-eyed, terror-loving thug can feed and clean himself in the slammer.

Al-Masri's metal hooks were removed from his forearm stumps Friday night after he was handed over by the Brits to face terror-related charges in Manhattan federal court.

The move capped an eight-year extradition battle during which al-Masri whined repeatedly about the "oppressive" conditions he expected to face behind bars in America.

Although al-Masri's lawyer demanded on Saturday that prison officials immediately return his signature hooks, sources said they're considered a security risk and there's "no way" he's getting them back.

But because depriving al-Masri of a "reasonable standard" of medical care in jail would violate his civil rights - and provide grounds for an appeal - he's expected to be outfitted with a pair of no-frills, cable-operated rubber hands.

"We have people on contract. We'd have someone come in and do it," a federal law-enforcement source said.

"The rule is you give the guy what they had before. Not anything better."

According to prosthetics maker Arimed, any replacement hands would have to be custom-fitted to what's left of al-Masri's upper limbs.

"Passive," non-electronic prosthetics retail for between $5,000 and $8,000 each, while higher-tech models that feature electronics and sensors can cost up to $50,000 each, depending on how many fingers are functional.

But the federal Bureau of Prisons' official policy states that while inmates "deserve medically necessary health care," all of their services "will be obtained at the lowest possible cost."

This fellow could care less about my civil rights, why should I care about his?

Because it doesn't work that way. The law is for all, or for none - there is no in between. Ergo, a terrorist thug needs hands, we supply them. Besides, as the article points out, the terrorist mouthpiece could have used our denial of medical care as basis for an appeal. As a practical matter, it makes sense to give him what he needs.

You don't have to like it - just understand it.