Dr Aafia Siddiqui sentenced 86 years.

Hangout GupShup Cafe
21

Re: Dr Aafia Siddiqui sentenced 76 years.

Loving Pakistan, doesn't mean i should close my eyes and bury my head under the sand. Accept it we have problems of Talibanism and we are the exporter of Jihadi ideology worldwide.

Now one way or other, what do you think of US justice system? better then Talibanic gay courts & Pakistani corrupt courts right? It's that simple.

22

Re: Dr Aafia Siddiqui sentenced 76 years.

Now if you are coming back with the argument that she was a good lady and how she end up in Afghanistan.. and all the mysteries around her.

I have one simple answer for this question: i just can't understand what Good US or (infidel Zionist control west) is getting from her trial, if she didn't do anything wrong. No body is free enough to spend their energies if she is a normal human which all the Pakistani is trying to portray.

23

Re: Dr Aafia Siddiqui sentenced 76 years.

No. US justice system doesn't look any better when it comes to dealing with muslims and Pakistanis. Sorry to say.

Also, you too shouldn't close your eyes and bury your head in the sand when people talk about the torture she has had to go through during the interrogation process. At least condemn the Americans for this much.

24

Re: Dr Aafia Siddiqui sentenced 76 years.

how many cases you can quote, eh ?

25

Re: Dr Aafia Siddiqui sentenced 76 years.

One case is more than enough when its about someone's life n death.

26

Re: Dr Aafia Siddiqui sentenced 76 years.

America just want to label themselves right for whatever they do.. You can read this for the reference of the allegation under which she has been sentenced to:

This week the trial of Aafia Siddiqui, once one of the most wanted women in the war on terrorism, begins in a federal courtroom in Manhattan. Siddiqui, 37, an MIT-educated neuroscientist and suspected al-Qaeda operative, is charged with attempted murder for allegedly shooting at a group of U.S. soldiers and FBI agents in Afghanistan. The incident occurred in the city of Ghazni in July 2008, after she was detained by local police near one of the city’s mosques on suspicion that she was a suicide bomber. At the time of her arrest, she allegedly had with her a flash drive with references to specific “cells” and “enemies” and various chemicals in cold-cream jars, including a quantity of sodium cyanide. Prosecutors say that the following day, as a contingent of U.S. soldiers and FBI agents prepared to question her at a nearby police station, Siddiqui grabbed an unsecured M-4 automatic rifle from one of the soldiers and opened fire. She hit no one but was herself shot twice in the abdomen by a U.S. warrant officer.
What jurors will not hear when opening statements begin on Tuesday, however, are the strange events leading up to Siddiqui’s arrest, which have made her case one of the most baffling in the war on terrorism. For over a decade, Siddiqui lived and studied in the U.S., but shortly after the Sept. 11 attacks, she was linked by law enforcement to a number of terrorism suspects. Among them is Majid Khan, a former resident of Baltimore who was allegedly tasked by 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed to plan terrorist attacks in the U.S. In March 2003, Khan was picked up by Pakistani intelligence, who eventually handed him over to the CIA. Just two weeks later, the FBI issued an urgent alert seeking Siddiqui for questioning. But Siddiqui, who by then had moved back to her native Pakistan, vanished without a trace. Khan, who is now a high-value detainee at Guantánamo Bay, has never been formally charged with a crime.
Human-rights groups, however, believe Siddiqui is no extremist and that she, along with her three young children (two of whom are American-born), was illegally detained and interrogated by Pakistani intelligence, likely at the behest of the U.S. In 2007 she was named a missing person in a briefing paper on U.S. responsibility for what is called “enforced disappearances” that was authored by six leading human-rights groups, including Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International.
Siddiqui has done little to clarify the mystery of her disappearance. After resurfacing in Ghazni in 2008, she gave conflicting accounts of her absence. According to court records filed by the government, she allegedly told FBI agents who questioned her in Afghanistan that she was the wife of Ammar al-Baluchi, a nephew of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. Al-Baluchi is one of the five accused 9/11 plotters who are expected to face trial in the same courthouse as Siddiqui. She has also alternately claimed that she was kidnapped by U.S. intelligence, kidnapped by Pakistani intelligence and that she was working as an agent for Pakistani intelligence. She has shed little light on the whereabouts of two of her children, who remain missing.
Adding to the confusion are questions over Siddiqui’s mental state, which psychiatrists who examined her said could be the result of posttraumatic stress. She was initially ruled mentally incompetent to stand trial last year, a decision that was reversed after she underwent an extensive psychological evaluation at a federal prison in Carswell, Texas — where psychiatrists were divided over whether she was delusional and possibly psychotic or merely faking her symptoms.
While Siddiqui’s trial has been highly anticipated, especially in Pakistan, it is unlikely to resolve any of the bigger mysteries surrounding her disappearance. Prosecutors have tailored the case narrowly to the shooting incident in Ghazni and told Judge Richard Berman last week they will avoid any mention of her suspected ties to al-Qaeda. The government’s scenario of the shooting in Ghazni has been vigorously disputed by her defense attorneys, who at a pretrial hearing last week offered a preview of their case, saying there were no fingerprints or forensic evidence on the gun that would indicate Siddiqui ever even held it. “We’re saying she simply didn’t do it,” said attorney Linda Moreno. But, in what could be a serious blow for the defense, the judge ruled that some of the suspicious documents found on Siddiqui at the time of her arrest could be introduced to show her alleged intent. According to the indictment, Siddiqui was found with documents that referred to a “mass casualty attack,” and listed potential targets like the Empire State Building, alongside notes that mention “dirty bombs” and attacks using gliders.
Siddiqui, who has been held in the U.S. as she awaits trial, has appeared unstable during her court appearances and seems intent on sabotaging her own defense. During two days of jury selection last week, she announced that she would boycott the trial and reiterated her desire to dismiss the U.S. attorneys who were hired for her by the Pakistani government. “I’ve fired them many times,” she said. She then told the judge she didn’t want any Jews on the jury “if they have a Zionist or Israeli background,” adding, “I have a feeling everyone here is them, subject to genetic testing.”
By keeping the focus on Ghazni, the trial will avoid becoming, as human-rights groups had hoped, a referendum on the issue of enforced disappearances. Siddiqui has achieved cult status in much of the Muslim world, where she is a symbol of hundreds of individuals believed to have been “disappeared” in connection with the war on terrorism. Groups like the British-based Reprieve have argued that the practice of enforced disappearances begun under George W. Bush has continued apace under the Obama Administration, and that the use of foreign intelligence to detain and interrogate suspects has in the worst instances amounted to nothing less than torture by proxy. For Siddiqui this means that whether she is found guilty or not, the most serious question raised by her case will not be answered: whether she is, as one of her former attorneys described her, “the ultimate victim of the American dark side.”

Source: http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1954598,00.html

About other things. i.e. relating to Al-Qaeda or producing “dangerous material”. Anyone can do that by linking them to me or to you too while you are in custody.

27

Re: Dr Aafia Siddiqui sentenced 76 years.

I always believe that her case was highly mishandled by her lawyer, Pakistani administration and herself. The case was originally weak, and weaker cases are dealt with very very strong arguments, wit and all the possible tactics that one can use to save their ass. In this case, the arguments presented were weak, pakistani govt couldnt provide any sufficient evidences that could help her and she herself had a wild attitude as much as that neither the jury nor the judges could establish any trust on her. Even she was asked to leave the court at one time.

But I dont blame her that much. Her mental condition was definitely way deteriorated. It was her lawyer's responsibility to assure how she behaves and responds to the questions from prosecuter.

Stlll I was thinking that judges might give her any benefit of doubt or consider the case on humanitarian grounds.. but the decision shows they didnt give her any room at all.

I'd consider her very very unfortunate in this sense.

28

Re: Dr Aafia Siddiqui sentenced 76 years.

Isnt it ‘86’ rather than 76 :smack:

I think no one really knows the truth behind all this ever since it began .. its all theories and stories .. and ppl involved are high ranked ppl .. they cant be touched ..

plus shes all possitve about it ..and even chose her own sentence … and isnt willing to appeal ..so why all the ‘shor sharaba’ no ones gona listen to you ..end of.

29

Re: Dr Aafia Siddiqui sentenced 76 years.

One..Its 86 for all 7 cases.

Two.. Its another bad decision not to appeal. She should appeal.

When the convict of massive killing in locker-bee case can go back to libya on humanitarion ground due to his severe illness, she can get it too.

30

Re: Dr Aafia Siddiqui sentenced 76 years.

I find it odd that a neuroscientist has to carry around a list of NY landmarks...I mean, I imagine she could remember them, don't you think? And whatever happened to people memorizing instructions and then destroying them? Didn't these terrorists learn anything from WWII Hollywood films??

31

Re: Dr Aafia Siddiqui sentenced 76 years.

Somehow the complete story about her:

Pakistani neuroscientist Aafia Siddiqui went on trial in a federal courtroom in New York City on January 19, charged with the attempted murder of US personnel in Afghanistan’s Ghazni Province in 2008. The case against Dr. Siddiqui, 37, is rapidly unraveling due to lack of evidence and discordant testimony from witnesses.
It is becoming increasingly evident that the charges amount to a frame-up that has been staged to cover up the fact that Siddiqui, along with her eldest son, had been held without charges in the US military’s notorious Bagram prison in Afghanistan between 2003 and 2008, where they were subjected to torture. Two of Dr. Siddiqui’s younger children are still missing.
According to the account given by US authorities, Aafia Siddiqui was taken into custody by Afghan security services in July of 2008 after they alleged having found a list of US targets for terrorist attacks as well as bomb-making instructions and assorted chemicals.
Despite these claims, Siddiqui is not charged with any terror-related offenses. Instead, she is indicted for allegedly having seized an automatic weapon and fired on her Afghan and American captors when a group of FBI agents and US Army officers arrived to collect her. The most serious charge against her is using a firearm in committing a felony, the gun in question being a US soldier’s rifle.
Siddiqui was shot twice in the stomach and barely survived after medics at Bagram air field had to make an incision from her breastbone to her bellybutton to remove the bullets. It was reported that part of her intestines had to be removed to save her life.
The accusations against Siddiqui strain credulity and have been fervently denied by her relatives, her defense attorneys, and human rights organizations, all of whom claim that she had been held in secret US detention facilities where she was physically and sexually abused ever since she disappeared off the streets of Karachi in the spring of 2003 with her three children, then seven, five, and six months old.
According to the German weekly Der Spiegel, just a few days before she disappeared Affia Siddiqui had contacted her former professor, Robert Sekuler, at Brandeis University in search of a job, complaining that there weren’t any job opportunities in Pakistan for a woman of her educational background.
Dr. Siddiqui is a Pakistani national who was educated at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Brandeis University. In July of 2001, she and her husband at the time were scrutinized by the FBI for their alleged association with Islamic charities. Following the events of September 11, 2001 the couple returned to Pakistan at a time when hundreds of Pakistanis and other Muslims were rounded up for questioning across the US. The family resided in Karachi where Aafia Siddiqui was employed at Aga Khan University.
According to the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan, Aafia Siddiqui and her children were kidnapped by Pakistani intelligence agents on their way to the airport in Karachi. Their whereabouts remained unknown until Aafia Siddiqui and her eldest son, Ahmed, were reported detained in Afghanistan in July of 2008, several years after their disappearance. While the Pakistani Interior Ministry had initially confirmed that the abduction had taken place, it later claimed to have been mistaken and stated that Siddiqui was not in Pakistani custody. This about-face was an attempt to conceal the complicity of Pakistani intelligence services in the US government’s rendition of Siddiqui to Afghanistan and her subsequent ordeal.
Aafia Siddiqui’s sister, Dr. Fauzia Siddiqui, had informed the press that she and her mother had journeyed to the US in 2003 to meet with FBI officials, who had claimed that Aafia Siddiqui would soon be released. In Pakistan, Siddiqui’s family was repeatedly harassed and received numerous death threats from sinister forces within the Pakistani ruling elite. The family was ordered not to make any public appeals in support of Aafia and her three children.
Between 2003 and 2008, when Siddiqui’s whereabouts were still unknown, the US claimed she was working on behalf of Al Qaeda. In May of 2004, she was listed by US officials as one of the seven “most wanted” Al Qaeda fugitives. The US has also spuriously claimed that she is married to Ammar al-Baluchi, who is reported to be the nephew of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the so-called “mastermind” behind the 9/11 attacks. The claim that Siddiqui was married to al-Baluchi was based solely on coerced statements made by Mohammed, who has been repeatedly tortured.
The US military and the FBI have consistently denied that Siddiqui had been in US custody prior to her arrest in 2008. In reality, Aafia Siddiqui spent the years between 2003 and 2008 at the detention facility at Bagram air base, where many referred to her as the “Grey Lady of Bagram.”
Around the same time as her staged arrest, the British journalist, Yvonne Ridley, had been bringing attention to an unknown female detainee in Bagram prison who was known as Prisoner No. 650. In his book Enemy Combatant, Moazzam Begg recalled hearing the woman’s piercing screams as she was being tortured while he was imprisoned in the same facility. According to Ridley, in 2005 male prisoners at the facility were so disturbed by her screams and sobs that they staged a hunger strike that lasted for six days.
When she was arrested in 2008, her then-11 year-old son Ahmed, a US citizen, was by her side. The traumatized boy has since been repatriated to Pakistan, where he is now living with his aunt, Dr. Fawzia Siddiqui. According to his aunt, Pakistani authorities have forbidden Ahmed from speaking to the news media.
Siddiqui’s appearance has changed markedly since 2002, according to her lawyers. She has suffered a broken nose, is deathly pale, and extremely frail, weighing about 100 pounds. When she arrived in the US, she was suffering from acute trauma, according to her lawyers, who were outraged that she did not immediately receive urgently needed medical attention. Siddiqui had been suffering from agonizing pain from the wounds she had sustained in Afghanistan and was slumped over in her wheelchair when she arrived in court in August of 2008.
Her trial was delayed as her lawyers argued that she was mentally unfit to participate in her own defense. However, prosecutors eventually found mental health experts to allege that she was faking her condition to escape punishment. Judge Richard Berman ruled that she was mentally fit for trial.
The paucity of media attention given to the trial is noteworthy, particularly given that Siddiqui was listed as a top Al Qaeda suspect. The tabloid press in New York City, where the proceedings have received limited attention, has taken her guilt for granted, cynically dubbing her “Lady Al Qaeda.” The trial is being closely watched in Pakistan, where Siddiqui’s ordeal has outraged many and has sparked protests around the country.
From its beginning, the trial has been marked by irregularities, and the judge has gone out of his way to accommodate the prosecutors. Not a single Pakistani journalist was granted press credentials for the opening statements last Tuesday. Defense attorneys protested the robust security measures put in place during the trial, which obviously reinforces the notion that Siddiqui poses a security threat to the US.
In a clear violation of her rights, Judge Berman has repeatedly thrown Siddiqui out of the courtroom for what he called her “outbursts.” The “outbursts” were Siddiqui’s anguished claims of innocence and protests that she was tortured.
“Since I’ll never get a chance to speak,” she had told the court. “If you were in a secret prison, or your children were tortured…Give me a little credit, this is not a list of targets of New York. I was never planning to bomb it. You’re lying.”
The trial has also been marked by contradictory testimony from prosecution witnesses, which has undermined the case against Siddiqui.
On the third day of the trial, Assistant US Attorney Jenna Dabbs displayed several photographs of the room where the prosecution claims the shooting occurred. However, Carlo Rosatti, an FBI firearms expert who investigated the case, acknowledged last Friday that he had found “no shell casings, no bullets, no bullet fragments, no evidence the gun [the soldier’s M-4 rifle] was fired.” The only shell casing from the scene was from a 9-milllimeter pistol with which Siddiqui was shot. On the fourth day of the trial, another FBI agent testified that the FBI never found Aafia Siddiqui’s fingerprints on the M-4 rifle.
The warrant officer who shot Siddiqui also took the stand, recounting the version of events laid out by the prosecution. He claimed that on the day he and his colleagues went to collect Siddiqui, she suddenly got a hold of his rifle and aimed it at US personnel, at which point he opened fire with his 9-millimeter pistol.
When Siddiqui yelled out, “I never shot it,” she was tossed out of the courtroom for the remainder of the day.
The unnamed warrant officer, who had hobbled to the stand using a cane, was also permitted to recount how he was wounded in a recent and totally unrelated roadside bombing in Afghanistan, shedding tears as he did so. While having absolutely no relevance to the trial, the soldier’s wounds were invoked as part of a brazen attempt by prosecutors to sway the jury. Judge Berman’s allowing the testimony demonstrates the rigged character of the trial.
Sensing that Siddiqui was indeed emotionally unstable, prosecutors moved to force her to testify in the hopes that she would incriminate herself. Defense attorneys argued that she wasn’t mentally fit to take the stand. Once again, Judge Berman sided with the prosecution.
Berman warned Aafia Siddiqui that she is not permitted to speak about events prior to her arrest in July of 2008. Nevertheless, on Thursday Siddiqui repeatedly told the jury that she was held in secret prisons by US authorities, according to the Associated Press of Pakistan. She told the jury how she was shot just after she peeked through a curtain in search of an escape route. She added that it would be ludicrous to believe that a soldier would leave his gun where an allegedly dangerous suspect could get a hold of it.
“It’s too crazy,” she said. “It’s just ridiculous. I didn’t do that.”
When asked by a US attorney about the contents of her purse, which allegedly contained chemicals, bomb-making instructions and a list of US targets, Siddiqui said, “I can’t testify to that, the bag was not mine, so I didn’t necessarily go through everything.” Siddiqui’s lawyers have claimed the bag and its contents were planted evidence. Her attorney, Elaine Whitfield Sharp, said back in 2008 that Siddiqui had been carrying what amounted to “conveniently incriminating evidence.”
“Of course they found all this stuff on her. It was planted on her. She is the ultimate victim of the American dark side,” another one of her attorneys had told the Associated Press in 2008.
Siddiqui also told the jury that her children were constantly on her mind and that she was disoriented at the time of her arrest in 2008.
On Friday, the prosecution called Gary Woodworth of Braintree Rifle and Pistol Club in Massachusetts to testify. Woodworth claimed that Siddiqui had taken a 12-hour pistol course at some point in the early 1990s. The Associated Press of Pakistan reported that Woodworth was noticeably distressed when the defense team demanded to know how it was possible for him to recall a specific individual from two decades earlier, when he’d had hundreds of students. Woodworth admitted that he had no records or documentation to back up his assertions, insisting that he was good at remembering faces.
Also on Friday, FBI Special Agent Bruce Kamerman testified that Siddiqui grabbed the assault rifle in a fit of rage. However, he appeared to be flustered when one of Siddiqui’s attorneys produced his hand-written notes in which there was no mention of her grabbing the gun.
In spite of the obviously fabricated character of the prosecution’s case, there is no guarantee of an acquittal.
Even if she is found not guilty, the fate of Aafia’s Siddiqui’s other two children, Mariam and Suleman, remains unknown. Siddiqui recounts that, while she was held in solitary confinement for five years, she was endlessly forced to listen to recordings of her screaming, terrified children. Her baby, Suleman, she said, was taken away from her immediately, never to be seen again. She said her daughter Mariam was occasionally shown to her, but only as an obscure figure behind a sheet of opaque glass.
The horrifying case of Aafia Siddiqui and her three children is but one example of the criminal and inhuman practices of US imperialism and its ally, the Pakistani bourgeoisie. Hundreds if not thousands of Pakistanis have been kidnapped by Pakistani intelligence services and handed over to US personnel to be dispatched to Bagram, Guantanamo and other “black site” torture chambers around the globe. While the Pakistani government now claims to be doing everything in its power to bring Siddiqui back to Pakistan, its supposed efforts are little more than damage control.

Source: US frame-up of Aafia Siddiqui begins to unravel - World Socialist Web Site

32

Re: Dr Aafia Siddiqui sentenced 76 years.

I feel extremely sad for her. She is a brilliant woman, but I think her mental condition has worsened over the years. Plus, she made a blunder by demanding jewish people to be removed from the jury. How can you even make such a stupid demand.

33

Re: Dr Aafia Siddiqui sentenced 76 years.

^ It is a fair demand if bias is feared in the jury. In the past, trials have been started all over again just because one person in the jury was suspected of being biased.

34

Re: Dr Aafia Siddiqui sentenced 76 years.

your post is just fill with hatred & discrimination.

You can't blame others for your problems.

35

Re: Dr Aafia Siddiqui sentenced 76 years.

umm ok.

Work away.

36

Re: Dr Aafia Siddiqui sentenced 76 years.

Well the same judicial system found Jhon Brown guilty and hung him for treason even though his cause was just.

What were we thinking they would do if they got a Muslim in thier hands... release the person... they should on such scant evidence, but alas we are talking about Americans here thier not the best of Gods creations when it comes to justice.

37

Re: Dr Aafia Siddiqui sentenced 76 years.

This is heart breaking and sad. Injustice not justice is being served. I'll pray for her family and her.

38

Re: Dr Aafia Siddiqui sentenced 76 years.

I agree, it is a fair demand to ask of change in jury if one person was biased, but she categorized whole jewish community as biased, which cannot be tolerated in United States. She should know that she is not sitting in some Jirga in NWFP

Tommorow, jews can start behaving like her, what would you say, if jews on trial will demand all muslims to be removed from jury duty.

39

Re: Dr Aafia Siddiqui sentenced 86 years.

I received a txt msg from a friend informing me about the vigil outside the US embassy. and it went on to say how she was raped, beaten, strip searched, forcibly given injections and forced to walk over the Quran whilst naked.

40

Re: Dr Aafia Siddiqui sentenced 86 years.

Theres a distinction your muddling my friend, BBC was not reffering to the faith of the individual but that persons political views.

If i had to sit in a trial and believed some among the jury were baised then even if they were Muslim i would ask for retrial.