One Day We’ll All Be Terrorists!

Nur · January 21, 2010

One Day We’ll All Be Terrorists

By Chris Hedges

December 28, 2009 "Truthdig" -- Syed Fahad Hashmi can tell you about the dark heart of America. He knows that our First Amendment rights have become a joke, that habeas corpus no longer exists and that we torture, not only in black sites such as those at Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan or at Guantánamo Bay, but also at the federal Metropolitan Correctional Center (MCC) in Lower Manhattan. Hashmi is a U.S. citizen of Muslim descent imprisoned on two counts of providing and conspiring to provide material support and two counts of making and conspiring to make a contribution of goods or services to al-Qaida. As his case prepares for trial, his plight illustrates that the gravest threat we face is not from Islamic extremists, but the codification of draconian procedures that deny Americans basic civil liberties and due process. Hashmi would be a better person to tell you this, but he is not allowed to speak.

This corruption of our legal system, if history is any guide, will not be reserved by the state for suspected terrorists, or even Muslim Americans. In the coming turmoil and economic collapse, it will be used to silence all who are branded as disruptive or subversive. Hashmi endures what many others, who are not Muslim, will endure later. Radical activists in the environmental, globalization, anti-nuclear, sustainable agriculture and anarchist movements—who are already being placed by the state in special detention facilities with Muslims charged with terrorism—have discovered that his fate is their fate. Courageous groups have organized protests, including vigils outside the Manhattan detention facility. They can be found at www.educatorsforcivilliberties.org or www.freefahad.com. On Martin Luther King Day, this Jan. 18 at 6 p.m. EST, protesters will hold a large vigil in front of the MCC on 150 Park Row in Lower Manhattan to call for a return of our constitutional rights. Join them if you can.

The case against Hashmi, like most of the terrorist cases launched by the Bush administration, is appallingly weak and built on flimsy circumstantial evidence. This may be the reason the state has set up parallel legal and penal codes to railroad those it charges with links to terrorism. If it were a matter of evidence, activists like Hashmi, who is accused of facilitating the delivery of socks to al-Qaida, would probably never be brought to trial.

Hashmi, who if convicted could face up to 70 years in prison, has been held in solitary confinement for more than 2½ years. Special administrative measures, known as SAMs, have been imposed by the attorney general to prevent or severely restrict communication with other prisoners, attorneys, family, the media and people outside the jail. He also is denied access to the news and other reading material. Hashmi is not allowed to attend group prayer. He is subject to 24-hour electronic monitoring and 23-hour lockdown. He must shower and go to the bathroom on camera. He can write one letter a week to a single member of his family, but he cannot use more than three pieces of paper. He has no access to fresh air and must take his one hour of daily recreation in a cage. His “proclivity for violence” is cited as the reason for these measures although he has never been charged or convicted with committing an act of violence.

“My brother was an activist,” Hashmi’s brother, Faisal, told me by phone from his home in Queens. “He spoke out on Muslim issues, especially those dealing with the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. His arrest and torture have nothing to do with providing ponchos and socks to al-Qaida, as has been charged, but the manipulation of the law to suppress activists and scare the Muslim American community. My brother is an example. His treatment is meant to show Muslims what will happen to them if they speak about the plight of Muslims. We have lost every single motion to preserve my brother’s humanity and remove the special administrative measures. These measures are designed solely to break the psyche of prisoners and terrorize the Muslim community. These measures exemplify the malice towards Muslims at home and the malice towards the millions of Muslims who are considered as non-humans in Iraq and Afghanistan.”

The extreme sensory deprivation used on Hashmi is a form of psychological torture, far more effective in breaking and disorienting detainees. It is torture as science. In Germany, the Gestapo broke bones while its successor, the communist East German Stasi, broke souls. We are like the Stasi. We have refined the art of psychological disintegration and drag bewildered suspects into secretive courts when they no longer have the mental and psychological capability to defend themselves.

“Hashmi’s right to a fair trial has been abridged,” said Michael Ratner, the president of the Center for Constitutional Rights. “Much of the evidence in the case has been classified under CIPA, and thus Hashmi has not been allowed to review it. The prosecution only recently turned over a significant portion of evidence to the defense. Hashmi may not communicate with the news media, either directly or through his attorneys. The conditions of his detention have impacted his mental state and ability to participate in his own defense.

“The prosecution’s case against Hashmi, an outspoken activist within the Muslim community, abridges his First Amendment rights and threatens the First Amendment rights of others,” Ratner added. “While Hashmi’s political and religious beliefs, speech and associations are constitutionally protected, the government has been given wide latitude by the court to use them as evidence of his frame of mind and, by extension, intent. The material support charges against him depend on criminalization of association. This could have a chilling effect on the First Amendment rights of others, particularly in activist and Muslim communities.”

Constitutionally protected statements, beliefs and associations can now become a crime. Dissidents, even those who break no laws, can be stripped of their rights and imprisoned without due process. It is the legal equivalent of preemptive war. The state can detain and prosecute people not for what they have done, or even for what they are planning to do, but for holding religious or political beliefs that the state deems seditious. The first of those targeted have been observant Muslims, but they will not be the last.

“Most of the evidence is classified,” Jeanne Theoharis, an associate professor of political science at Brooklyn College who taught Hashmi, told me, “but Hashmi is not allowed to see it. He is an American citizen. But in America you can now go to trial and all the evidence collected against you cannot be reviewed. You can spend 2½ years in solitary confinement before you are convicted of anything. There has been attention paid to extraordinary rendition, Guantánamo and Abu Ghraib with this false idea that if people are tried in the United States things will be fair. But what allowed Guantánamo to happen was the devolution of the rule of law here at home, and this is not only happening to Hashmi.”

Hashmi was, like so many of those arrested during the Bush years, briefly a poster child in the “war on terror.” He was apprehended in Britain on June 6, 2006, on a U.S. warrant. His arrest was the top story on the CBS and NBC nightly news programs, which used graphics that read “Terror Trail” and “Web of Terror.” He was held for 11 months at Belmarsh Prison in London and then became the first U.S. citizen to be extradited by Britain. The year before his arrest, Hashmi, a graduate of Brooklyn College, had completed his master’s degree in international relations at London Metropolitan University. His case has no more substance than the one against the seven men arrested on suspicion of plotting to blow up the Sears Tower, a case where, even though there were five convictions after two mistrials, an FBI deputy director acknowledged that the plan was more “aspirational rather than operational.” And it mirrors the older case of the Palestinian activist Sami Al-Arian, now under house arrest in Virginia, who has been hounded by the Justice Department although he should legally have been freed. Judge Leonie Brinkema, currently handling the Al-Arian case, in early March, questioned the U.S. attorney’s actions in Al-Arian’s plea agreement saying curtly: “I think there’s something more important here, and that’s the integrity of the Justice Department.”

The case against Hashmi revolves around the testimony of Junaid Babar, also an American citizen. Babar, in early 2004, stayed with Hashmi at his London apartment for two weeks. In his luggage, the government alleges, Babar had raincoats, ponchos and waterproof socks, which Babar later delivered to a member of al-Qaida in south Waziristan, Pakistan. It was alleged that Hashmi allowed Babar to use his cell phone to call conspirators in other terror plots.

“Hashmi grew up here, was well known here, was very outspoken, very charismatic and very political,” said Theoharis. “This is really a message being sent to American Muslims about the cost of being politically active. It is not about delivering alleged socks and ponchos and rain gear. Do you think al-Qaida can’t get socks and ponchos in Pakistan? The government is planning to introduce tapes of Hashmi’s political talks while he was at Brooklyn College at the trial. Why are we willing to let this happen? Is it because they are Muslims, and we think it will not affect us? People who care about First Amendment rights should be terrified. This is one of the crucial civil rights issues of our time. We ignore this at our own peril.”

Babar, who was arrested in 2004 and has pleaded guilty to five counts of material support for al-Qaida, also faces up to 70 years in prison. But he has agreed to serve as a government witness and has already testified for the government in terror trials in Britain and Canada. Babar will receive a reduced sentence for his services, and many speculate he will be set free after the Hashmi trial. Since there is very little evidence to link Hashmi to terrorist activity, the government will rely on Babar to prove intent. This intent will revolve around alleged conversations and statements Hashmi made in Babar’s presence. Hashmi, who was a member of the New York political group Al Muhajiroun as a student at Brooklyn College, has made provocative statements, including calling America “the biggest terrorist in the world,” but Al Muhajiroun is not defined by the government as a terrorist organization. Membership in the group is not illegal. And our complicity in acts of state terror is a historical fact.

There will be more Hashmis, and the Justice Department, planning for future detentions, set up in 2006 a segregated facility, the Communication Management Unit, at the federal prison in Terre Haute, Ind. Nearly all the inmates transferred to Terre Haute are Muslims. A second facility has been set up at Marion, Ill., where the inmates again are mostly Muslim but also include a sprinkling of animal rights and environmental activists, among them Daniel McGowan, who was charged with two arsons at logging operations in Oregon. His sentence was given “terrorism enhancements” under the Patriot Act. Amnesty International has called the Marion prison facility “inhumane.” All calls and mail—although communication customarily is off-limits to prison officials—are monitored in these two Communication Management Units. Communication among prisoners is required to be only in English. The highest-level terrorists are housed at the Penitentiary Administrative Maximum Facility, known as Supermax, in Florence, Colo., where prisoners have almost no human interaction, physical exercise or mental stimulation, replicating the conditions for most of those held at Guantánamo. If detainees are transferred from Guantánamo to the prison in in Thomson, Ill., they will find little change. They will endure Guantánamo-like conditions in colder weather.

Our descent is the familiar disease of decaying empires. The tyranny we impose on others we finally impose on ourselves. The influx of non-Muslim American activists into these facilities is another ominous development. It presages the continued dismantling of the rule of law, the widening of a system where prisoners are psychologically broken by sensory deprivation, extreme isolation and secretive kangaroo courts where suspects are sentenced on rumors and innuendo and denied the right to view the evidence against them. Dissent is no longer the duty of the engaged citizen but is becoming an act of terrorism.

Chris Hedges, whose column is published on Truthdig every Monday, spent two decades as a foreign reporter covering wars in Latin America, Africa, Europe and the Middle East. He has written nine books, including “Empire of Illusion: The End of Literacy and the Triumph of Spectacle” (2009) and “War Is a Force That Gives Us Meaning” (2003).

Nur · January 21, 2010

My Children Were Tortured, This Trial is a Sham: Aafia

By Press TV

January 20, 2010 "Press TV" -- Pakistani citizen Aafia Siddiqui has told jurors at her trial that she was held in a secret prison in Afghanistan, her children were tortured, and the case against her is a sham.

On Tuesday, Siddiqui was thrown out of the New York courtroom where her trail is being held after shouting the remarks at the jurors.

The MIT-educated neuroscientist is currently on trial, facing charges of trying to kill US soldiers and FBI agents in Afghanistan in 2008 and connections with Al-Qaeda operatives.

She was ejected from her federal court trial after her second outburst, Bloomberg reported.

“Since I'll never get a chance to speak," she said in the courtroom. "If you were in a secret prison, or your children were tortured…"

She insisted that she knew nothing about a plan to carry out terrorist attacks on targets in New York, The New York Daily News reported.

"Give me a little credit, this is not a list of targets of New York," she said. "I was never planning to bomb it. You're lying."

Siddiqui vanished in Karachi, Pakistan with her three children on March 30, 2003. The next day it was reported in local newspapers that she had been taken into custody on terrorism charges.

US officials allege Aafia Siddiqui was seized on July 17, 2008 by Afghan security forces in Ghazni province and claim that documents, including formulas for explosives and chemical weapons, were found in her handbag.

They say that while she was being interrogated, she grabbed a US warrant officer's M-4 rifle and fired two shots at FBI agents and military personnel but missed and that the warrant officer then fired back, hitting her in the torso.

She was brought to the United States to face charges of attempted murder and assault. Siddiqui faces 20 years in prison if convicted.

However, human rights organizations have cast doubt on the accuracy of the US account of the event.

Many political activists believe she was Prisoner 650 of the US detention facility in Bagram, Afghanistan, where they say she was tortured for five years until one day US authorities announced that they had found her in Afghanistan.

Dr. Aafia Siddiqui Case - A Detailed Story of Lies And Deception By The Americans

By M. Junaid Khan

January 20, 2010 "Pro Pakistan" - We have regularly covered Dr. Aafia case at Pro-Pakistan. We have highlighted the injustices done to her and her family by the Americans in a completely one sided trial. However, the current article is just another effort to share with our readers how this whole drama unfolded till date and how the media reported it. The reason we chose this day is because of the fact that today the American court is again holding another purported trial of Dr. Aafia Siddiqui. The irony is that the current case against her rest on a crime she committed after being arrested by the Americans in Afghanistan in 2008. Or at least that is how Americans put it while the reality is that she was arrested in 2003 by FBI agents in Karachi, Pakistan.

The arrest news was spread in the national and international media and here is just one instance of NBC5 quoting the story back in 2003. According to NBC5, Dr. Aafia Siddiqui is in US custody:

U.S. intelligence officials are reportedly interrogating a Pakistani woman alleged to have moved funds and assisted with logistics planning for al-Qaida. FBI Seeking Siddiqui According to the Press Trust of India in an article published on its Web site Thursday, the woman has been identified as 31-year-old Aafia Siddiqui, who was being sought by U.S. officials last week along with two other men, including one whose last known address was in Miramar, Fla.

According to the PTI, Siddiqui was arrested in Karachi recently after returning from an overseas trip last month. The service quoted reports in the Boston Globe and Oklahama (TV) News Channel’s Web site.

The FBI had issued a worldwide alert for Siddiqui, already said this … ‘a housewife and mother of three who holds a doctorate in neurological science and degrees from Braindeis University and M.I.T. ) Siddiqui reportedly lived in Boston with her husband for several years.’

NBC News reported last week that senior U.S. officials that Siddiqui may be a so-called “fixer” for al-Qaida and not an actual member. According to those reports, Siddiqui may have been used by the organization move money and provide other logistical support. One official said, “The Intel indicates that she is tied to some very radical individuals in Pakistan.”

Now here is the problem, the American kept her under rigorous detention in Bagram jail (Afghan equivalent of Guantanamo Prison) and were not accepting her presence until the story was shared by ex inmates of the jail to the media. She was constantly tortured for 5 years and was sexually and physically abused each and every day for 5 consecutive years while the American put their best resources at work to find a single flaw in her past. Ironically, they failed to find a single wrong in her past and hence Americans were in a fix how to get rid of her.

The real problem started after the press conference in Pakistan by British journalist Yvonne Ridley in which she shared the story of the Prisoner 650, the gray Ghost lady of Bagram prison. In the mean while, we must keep this in mind that Western media left no stone unturned to label her the big catch of Al Qaeda in the hands of the Americans while Americans themselves couldn’t prove a single instance of her involvement in terrorist activities in their 5 years of non stop search for something (anything) to implicate her and save their face.

After Yvonne Ridley’s press conference, it became evident that Dr. Aafia Siddiqui is the unfortunate soul to bear the brunt of the worst kind of treatment in the modern history of the world. A well educated lady was made to suffer 5 years of non stop physical and sexual abuse at the hands of American military and intelligence officials.

The issue of Prisoner 650 became public and every media house in the world started giving it coverage and soon protesters came out on the roads in several Pakistani cities and in few Western countries for her release. The American intelligence agency, who failed to find any evidence against Dr. Aafia Siddiqui, however was quick to stage a ****** drama, that speaks volumes about their thinking patterns. Even hollywood movie writer would have done a better job then the drama script written by the American intelligence agencies. Here is how Dr. Aafia emerged again from the Bagram Prison in front of the World. This is the story some dumb *** American intelligent agent wrote (PS: US agent! please don’t mind my language but trust me your script sucks! At least try to watch 24 and come out with something better next time). And i am quoting direct American biased justice department source so that you know how they report such dramas on thir website to impress their own citizens.

According to website of the US Justice Department:

NEW YORK- Michael J. Garcia, the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, Mark J. Mershon, the Assistant Director-in-Charge of the New York Office of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (”FBI”), and Raymond W. Kelly, the Police Commissioner of the City of New York, announced today the arrest of Aafia Siddiqui on charges related to her attempted murder and assault of United States officers and employees in Afghanistan. Siddiqui arrived in New York this evening and will be presented tomorrow before a United States Magistrate Judge in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.

According to the Complaint filed in Manhattan federal court:

On July 17, 2008, officers of the Ghazni Province Afghanistan National Police (”ANP”) observed Siddiqui outside the Ghazni governor’s compound. ANP officers questioned Siddiqui, regarded her as suspicious, and searched her handbag. In it, they found numerous documents describing the creation of explosives, as well as excerpts from the Anarchist’s Arsenal. Siddiqui’s papers included descriptions of various landmarks in the United States, including in New York City. Siddiqui was also in possession of substances that were sealed in bottles and glass jars.

On July 18, 2008, a party of United States personnel, including two FBI special agents, a United States Army Warrant Officer, a United States Army Captain, and United States military interpreters, arrived at the Afghan facility where Siddiqui was being held. The personnel entered a second floor meeting room — unaware that Siddiqui was being held there, unsecured, behind a curtain.

The Warrant Officer took a seat and placed his United States Army M-4 rifle on the floor next to the curtain. Shortly after the meeting began, the Captain heard a woman yell from the curtain and, when he turned, saw Siddiqui holding the Warrant Officer’s rifle and pointing it directly at the Captain. Siddiqui said, “May the blood of [unintelligible] be directly on your [unintelligible, possibly head or hands].” The interpreter seated closest to Siddiqui lunged at her and pushed the rifle away as Siddiqui pulled the trigger. Siddiqui fired at least two shots but no one was hit. The Warrant Officer returned fire with a 9 mm service pistol and fired approximately two rounds at Siddiqui’s torso, hitting her at least once.

Despite being shot, Siddiqui struggled with the officers when they tried to subdue her; she struck and kicked them while shouting in English that she wanted to kill Americans. After being subdued, Siddiqui temporarily lost consciousness. The agents and officers then rendered medical aid to Siddiqui. Can anyone imagine why someone

Siddiqui, a 36-year-old Pakistani woman who previously resided in the United States, is charged in a criminal Complaint filed in the Southern District of New York with one count of attempting to kill United States officers and employees and one count of assaulting United States officers and employees. If convicted, Siddiqui faces a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison on each charge.

Just try to see a logic behind the purported story shared with the world by the Americans! What Dr. Aafia was doing outside Governor house? Trying to gather intelligence? Trying to blow it up? Trying to get herself arrested? Or just roaming around for a morning or evening walk? In any of the above cases, can you tell me why will she take with her the method of making bombs in her handbag? Was she sitting in some park where she was trying to prepare her lecture or was she trying to memorize some new techniques in the open? Or was she just keeping them in her bag to make sure when she is arrested, she provide enough evidence against her arrest to the government to use it against her? Moreover, she was also carrying landmarks of American buildings etc etc etc! I wonder if anyone would really need landmarks in this modern era? Don’t you think we have a lot more public information available even to a primary kid on the internet and hence there is no need to carry it with you.

Moreover, why would she carry these things with her when she was roaming around Governor palace in Afghanistan? Was she on way to airport to land directly at JFK? Or was there not enough space in her home to keep that documents? A logical mind fail to see a relation in those two set of documents inside the bag of a lady strolling for morning walk in the peaceful and serene streets of war torn Afghanistan! Sounds interesting! Lets see what else she got? Okies! She got some SUBSTANCE (i repeat SUBSTANCE) that was sealed inside a jar and some bottles! Now this has further complicateed the already very tough case here! Can anyone of my reader guide us all here? Because i am lost here! What do you mean by “SUBSTANCE?” Is chocolate a substance or is cookies counted as substance? Do you also count sweets as Substance? If not then share with us what does “SUBSTANCE” stands for? And why would an evening or morning stroller keep these in her bag when she was actually on a picnic in the serene city of Afghanistan? May be she could use it to blow up the Governor’s palace? Or may be she could eat it? I don’t know but it is beyond my level of intellect and I need guidance from our readers since they might have a clue!

The irony is that Americans are trying to tell the world that their dumb story is based on facts while a mere search on internet will confirm our concerns about the real drama run by someone sitting in Langley or Pentagon. Here is how a famous Pakistani newspaper reported a story where an Intelligence Official admitted arresting Dr. Aafia in 2003 and handing her over to American FBI while the same FBI claims to have captured her in 2008 in Afghanistan. This is on the record of a Pakistani court and hence enjoys a legal status unlike Americans provided evidence that only exist in their own records and not to be shared with anyone in the world.

She was later shifted to America where she is facing court trial for a crime she never committed in America at first place. Even the American FBI and Intelligence officials failed to provide the evidence of her finger prints on the gun she supposedly used to shoot her investigators and the interpreters. Even no bullets were recovered from the room which she allegedly fired at the Americans. Here is a link to the details of the court hearing.

According to Yvonne Ridley, who first shared her story with the world, there is some senior ranking American intelligence official responsible for all the debacle since it was his authority to sign the papers authorising her kidnapping, rendition, five years of non stop torture and then keeping her in jail without sharing the details. Even the way she was reproduced is done on the orders of the same intelligence official who is sitting on the most important position in the American intelligence network. He is still using all his available resources to cover his tracks but i think now the thing has gone out and the decision rests with the American Judiciary. The trial of Dr. Aafia Siddiqui has gained tremendous support in USA itself and people from the length and breadth of America have come to the court to witness it despite the fact that the judge changed the dates constantly to create confusion and to bring down the case profile.

The case will be presented today at a US Court. According to the Dawn story:

The trial of Dr. Aafia Siddiqui, the Pakistani neuroscientist under US detention, will begin today in New York City after jury selection was completed last week A JA jury of seven women and five men were chosen on Thursday, with four alternate jurors. Dr Aafia had earlier objected over the composition of the jury.

She is accused of trying to kill US Army officers — who were interrogating her in Afghanistan in July 2008, a charge vehemently denied by her.

No one was hit in the alleged shooting incident, but she was shot twice in the stomach.

Dr. Aafia has repeatedly said she will boycott her own trial and has even disowned the lawyers retained for her defence by the Pakistan government.

Meanwhile, the lead lawyer for Dr. Aafia said that her legal defence team will fight for her acquittal with a strong case it has built over the past four months.

Lets see how long this drama goes on and to what extent the American Intelligence official, backed by other powerful American politicians, goes to hide the crimes he committed against an innocent woman and her family. The outcome of the case is very important since the eyes of the world Muslim population and those who believe in the American justice system are fixed on this case as a benchmark.

Let’s see if Justice prevails in the Wild Wild West!

New York Trial Prompts Outrage in Pakistan

By Saeed Shah

January 20, 2010 "Globe and Mail" -- In the United States, she's been dubbed “the most dangerous woman in the world.” In Pakistan, she is seen as a victim of American injustice in the fight against al-Qaeda. And at the opening of her trial in New York, the judge found her too disruptive and had her removed from the courtroom.

“I was never planning a bombing! You're lying!” Aafia Siddiqui shouted as she was taken out of court less than two hours into the proceedings yesterday.

The outburst came as U.S. Army Captain Robert Snyder testified that documents found in Dr. Siddiqui's possession included targets for a mass casualty attack, including the Empire State Building, the Statue of Liberty, Wall Street and the Brooklyn Bridge.

There was shouting in Pakistan, too, at demonstrations in cities across the country in support of Dr. Siddiqui, who is a national cause célèbre as a symbol of Muslims mistreated during U.S. antiterrorism efforts, just like the prisoners at Abu Ghraib in Iraq, or Bagram, the Afghan prison where her supporters say she was secretly held for years.

Dr. Siddiqui's frail appearance and tormented outbursts in pretrial hearings have added to allegations that she has had to endure years of torture since going missing from her hometown of Karachi in 2003. But according to her detractors, including her former husband Amjad Khan, she was a jihadist who spent those years on the run. Some have even suggested that she became a double agent, working at some point against al-Qaeda.

U.S. officials have accused Dr. Siddiqui, a 37-year-old neuroscientist educated at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, of working for al-Qaeda, in particular as a facilitator for the 9/11 hijackers. The only charges she faces in the New York court, however, are related to the extraordinary circumstances of her supposed capture in Afghanistan in 2008.

“They couldn't find a more innocent person,” says Fauzia Siddiqui, Aafia's sister in Karachi. “I don't believe that there's any justice possible in the post-9/11 U.S. system.”

Fauzia Siddiqui cares for 13-year-old Ahmed, one of her sister's three children, who were all with her when she disappeared. The whereabouts of the other two, Suleman, who would now be 7, and Maryam, 10, remain a mystery.

Dr. Siddiqui's family says she was abducted by Pakistani intelligence and then handed over to American agents.

Shortly after the stories of Dr. Siddiqui's alleged detention at Bagram hit the international headlines in 2008, she turned up in American custody. U.S. authorities said she was arrested after acting suspiciously in Ghazni, Afghanistan, a town 80 kilometres south of Kabul, and found with documentation on U.S. landmarks and jars containing chemicals.

According to the U.S. account, when in custody at a police station in Ghazni, the petite Dr .Siddiqui jumped out from behind a curtain, grabbed an M-4 rifle that was lying at the foot of a U.S. soldier, and shot at him twice, missing. A second soldier fired back, hitting her in the stomach. She was then flown to the United States.

In New York, she faces life in prison on charges of attempted murder, armed assault on U.S. officers and employees and discharging a firearm during a crime of violence – all stemming from the Ghazni incident.

Defence lawyer Charles Swift – whom Dr. Siddiqui has disowned – told jurors there was no conclusive evidence she ever picked up the rifle. “There are many different versions of how this happened,” he said.

In Pakistani cities such as Islamabad, Lahore and Karachi, there were small but emotional demonstrations.

“They [the Americans] are just trying to lock up people to show they have some bad guys, to try to prove they are winning the war,” 18-year-old student Mohammad bin Ismail said in Islamabad. “They are using people like trophies.”

The fact that Dr. Siddiqui is a woman seems to have generated much anger in conservative Pakistan, where her support is noticeably from the religious right. “It's a case of rendition,” said Amina Janjua, a local campaigner for missing people. “We feel that as a Pakistani nation, our respect, honour and dignity is at stake.”

Special to The Globe and Mail

Nur · January 21, 2010

U.S. Military Weapons Inscribed With Secret 'Jesus' Bible Codes

Pentagon Supplier for Rifle Sights Says It Has 'Always' Added New Testament References

By JOSEPH RHEE, TAHMAN BRADLEY and BRIAN ROSS

Jan. 18, 2010 "ABC News " — Coded references to New Testament Bible passages about Jesus Christ are inscribed on high-powered rifle sights provided to the United States military by a Michigan company, an ABC News investigation has found.

At the end of the serial number on Trijicon's ACOG gun sight, you can read "JN8:12", a reference to the New Testament book of John, Chapter 8, Verse 12, which reads: "Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life." The ACOG is widely used by the U.S. military.

The sights are used by U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan and in the training of Iraqi and Afghan soldiers. The maker of the sights, Trijicon, has a $660 million multi-year contract to provide up to 800,000 sights to the Marine Corps, and additional contracts to provide sights to the U.S. Army.

U.S. military rules specifically prohibit the proselytizing of any religion in Iraq or Afghanistan and were drawn up in order to prevent criticism that the U.S. was embarked on a religious "Crusade" in its war against al Qaeda and Iraqi insurgents

One of the citations on the gun sights, 2COR4:6, is an apparent reference to Second Corinthians 4:6 of the New Testament, which reads: "For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ."

Other references include citations from the books of Revelation, Matthew and John dealing with Jesus as "the light of the world." John 8:12, referred to on the gun sights as JN8:12, reads, "Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life."

Trijicon confirmed to ABCNews.com that it adds the biblical codes to the sights sold to the U.S. military. Tom Munson, director of sales and marketing for Trijicon, which is based in Wixom, Michigan, said the inscriptions "have always been there" and said there was nothing wrong or illegal with adding them. Munson said the issue was being raised by a group that is "not Christian." The company has said the practice began under its founder, Glyn Bindon, a devout Christian from South Africa who was killed in a 2003 plane crash.

'It violates the Constitution'

The company's vision is described on its Web site: "Guided by our values, we endeavor to have our products used wherever precision aiming solutions are required to protect individual freedom."

"We believe that America is great when its people are good," says the Web site. "This goodness has been based on Biblical standards throughout our history, and we will strive to follow those morals."

Spokespeople for the U.S. Army and the Marine Corps both said their services were unaware of the biblical markings. They said officials were discussing what steps, if any, to take in the wake of the ABCNews.com report. It is not known how many Trijicon sights are currently in use by the U.S. military.

The biblical references appear in the same type font and size as the model numbers on the company's Advanced Combat Optical Guides, called the ACOG.

A photo on a Department of Defense Web site shows Iraqi soldiers being trained by U.S. troops with a rifle equipped with the bible-coded sights.

"It's wrong, it violates the Constitution, it violates a number of federal laws," said Michael "Mikey" Weinstein of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, an advocacy group that seeks to preserve the separation of church and state in the military.

'Firearms of Jesus Christ'

"It allows the Mujahedeen, the Taliban, al Qaeda and the insurrectionists and jihadists to claim they're being shot by Jesus rifles," he said.

Weinstein, an attorney and former Air Force officer, said many members of his group who currently serve in the military have complained about the markings on the sights. He also claims they've told him that commanders have referred to weapons with the sights as "spiritually transformed firearm of Jesus Christ."

He said coded biblical inscriptions play into the hands of "those who are calling this a Crusade."

According to a government contracting watchdog group, fedspending.org, Trijicon had more than $100 million in government contracts in fiscal year 2008. The Michigan company won a $33 million Pentagon contract in July, 2009 for a new machine gun optic, according to Defense Industry Daily. The company's earnings from the U.S. military jumped significantly after 2005, when it won a $660 million long-term contract to supply the Marine Corps with sights.

"This is probably the best example of violation of the separation of church and state in this country," said Weinstein. "It's literally pushing fundamentalist Christianity at the point of a gun against the people that we're fighting. We're emboldening an enemy."

Johnny B · January 21, 2010

Sheikh Nuurow,

The suicide bombers have " There's no god but 'Allah' " written on their head-bands,

so what the point??

Nur · January 21, 2010

Jahnny Saxib

Which believer is more aggressive, a believer who writes his conviction on his headband, or a believer who writes his conviction on his high-powered rifle sights?

Nur

Johnny B · January 22, 2010

Sheikh Nuurow,

I've difficulties diferentiating the intensity of particular believer's agresivity by comparing where their convictions are written.

Both show enough agressivity to harm the other.

Nur · January 22, 2010

But you can differentiate the following two statements:

1. I would die for Islam ( a Muslim )

2. I would kill him for his beliefs. ( A Fundamentalist Christians)

My point, is, someone is in defense of his homeland and religion. The other, is on the attack for economic interests in someone else homeland.

I am sure that you remember what the Crusaders have done in Palestine, rivers of blood flowing as recorded by Christian Historians, also if we enumerate killings anywhere, no adherents of any faith can compare with Christians who are ironically said to believe in turning their other cheeks and loving their enemies.

1. The Crusade

2. The Imperial invasions and subjugation of many nations worldwide

3. The Abominable Slavery in America

4. The genocide of 6 million Jews in Europe ( Germany, France, Poland and Spain)

5. The first and second Nuclear intentional use on civilians and the killing of hundreds of thousands of Japanese civilians

6. The killing of millions of Vietnamese

7. The killing of 1.6 Million Iraqi people

8. The killing of thousands of innocent Afghans, Palestinians, Somalis, in the name of terror.

All the above was committed by Christians. ( Yet, I do not blame all of these attrocities on all Chrsitians, only those who have committed these crimes are responsible, in Islam, Allah says, ( Allaa taziru waaziratun wizra ukhraa) meaning That No one carries the burden of another. But " Fundamentalist Christian Leaders influencing foreign policy in some western countries have made every Muslim as guilty for the convenient Terror accusation.

Now, compare that with very few incidents of desperate violent actions committed by Muslims, which was a direct result of unbearable accumulated oppression caused by injustice committed by the help of "Christians".

Nur

Muriidi · January 23, 2010

why one day we'll all be terrorists?

we have problems understanding ourselves...so we look at other creatures...wolves move in packs...they fight amonst eachother...birds fly together in a mor organized fashion ,which makes it easiere to deduct a certain logic...

the arabic word for bird is "tayr" , (tayruur ??)

the correct form of jihad is "irhaab" which translated can mean:"teaching dem kuffaar da FEAR of God !"

a mujahid will stop fighting if his opponent bears witness of Allah..

where as a terrorist just wants to kill and take away all hope...

since the earthly lifetime of the prophet Muhammad pbuh ... there were no ...

wait let me express it otherwise.

as a muslim nowadays,assuming that you have a big enemy which is a tyran and enemy of Allah, would mean that you deny the prophet Muhammad pbuh.

after all he delivered the message.

tyrrany "the taghuut" is satan.

mussolini was no match for omar mukhtar..

all of them put together were no match for ghandi

scientology (ilmaniya) was defeated back in 1840,which was followed by a brief phase of chaos (wild west) then the end of slavery and the beginning of anarchy (slavery was ruling)..whaaat?!!

ok ,the industrial revolution was followed by a brief phase of chaos (world war I) and it took a while for everyone to notice/understand the necessary anarchy that goes with the chaos...

no slavery or zionism to uphold the "dawlad"

just worshippers of God

and strugglers towards zion

mr modernist/current events analyst don't deny the information revolution resulting in the absence of understandable causalities to take advantage of society -lol- :eek:

-now go watch the news--

curiosity killed the cat...a terrorist is a dead cat...

be muslim ,don't be a criminal.

next time let's discuss something more imminent;

hadaanan idinla diririn amaa aakhiro la i cadaabaa ?!

Nur · September 21, 2010

Condemned By Their Silence

By Yvonne Ridley

September 21, 2010 "ICH" -- - There are literally millions of people across the world who are now involved in the intriguing case of Dr Aafia Siddiqui and they fall in to several categories.

The first is a huge army of ordinary people of faith and no faith who represent many different nationalities and their aim is to see justice and fair play delivered to Aafia.

The second is a small, but on the surface of it, more powerful group of individuals who are ruthlessly ambitious; prepared to manipulate the truth and openly lie to elevate their own position to the detriment of others and Aafia in particular.

These are numerous in the Pakistan government, past and present, as well as the last two US administrations and includes the dark forces at play which support them as well as the coterie of smooth-talking diplomats and ambassadors who tread the corridors of power.

Then there are the others – perhaps the most despicable group of all who are what I call fence sitters and spectators. The great Irish philosopher Edmund Burke once said that evil would only triumph if good people sat back and did nothing and he was right.

With few exceptions the larger Muslim organizations have remained uncharacteristically quiet about Aafia’s case.

Why have they been muzzled? Correction. Why have they allowed themselves to be muzzled? To their eternal shame they have remained silent about the plight of Dr Aafia Siddiqui because they have been duped by an officially-sanctioned unofficial whispering campaign.

The rule is simple brothers (and sisters), comrades, friends and campaigners. If something is wrong it is wrong, entirely wrong and in Aafia’s case there is something wrong about the kidnap, torture and rendition of a brilliant academic and her three children.

The fence sitters in the US are a disgrace. Men without courage or backbone are more to be pitied, I suppose as cowardice is a dreadful affliction in the battlefield that is life.

A yellow streak down the spine makes people look the other way, blinkers their vision and forces them to adopt an Ostrich position. This makes it all the more easy for hate preachers like Pastor Jones in Florida to emerge and threaten to burn the Holy Qur’an.

But Edmund Clarke was right when he said evil will triumph if good people sit back and do nothing. The leaders of the organizations I’ve mentioned are good people but they are frightened and I pray that one day they will get the courage they so desperately need to stand up and be counted.

And in these troubled times it does take courage to stand up against an arrogant, bullying, intimidating political machine which brought words like kidnap, torture, rendition, water-boarding and extra-judicial killings in to daily use.

Just a few hours remain before the resumption of a trial in a New York court which is being presided over by Judge Richard Berman. To his eternal shame he is one who has remained silent about the manner and style with which Dr Aafia Siddiqui was presented in his court.

How the hell can a Pakistani citizen who allegedly committed a crime in Afghanistan be tried in his court without an official extradition procedure at the very least?

Why did he not demand that the paperwork was at least in order? He has presided over a mis-trial from the outset.

While he deemed the defendant mentally fit to stand trial but not mentally capable of determining her own legal team. Whenever Dr Aafia Siddiqui – a brilliant neuro scientist bordering on genius by the way – attempted to sack her lawyers he refused her request saying she wasn’t mentally fit to make the decision. You can’t have it both ways, Your Honour.

Judge Berman has alas, so far, remained silent about the private – behind closed door meetings – he has had with the Pakistan Ambassador Hossein Haqqani. Another good reason for a mistrial if only the legal team had the backbone to challenge the judge in his court.

The trouble is so-called ‘Dream Team’ lawyers Charlie Swift and Linda Moreno’s very lucrative two million dollar trial was being paid for by the Pakistan Government, making Mr Haqqani the overall client. Hmm, how does that one work when the Pakistan government colluded in the first place with the US intelligence agencies to kidnap Dr Aafia Siddiqui and her three children from the streets of Karachi in March 2003? Another reason to declare a mis-trial.

And what of the ubiquitous Mr Haqqani? He’s not a career diplomat. In fact he holds US citizenship or has aspirations to making him a very peculiar choice as Pakistan’s man in Washington. Once his foray into the world of diplomacy comes to an end he’ll resume his career as a lecturer in America, something his US controllers remind him on a regular basis.

His Excellency has certainly been a busy little bee with regards Dr Aafia’s case … briefing some of my colleagues in the western media telling them ‘off-the-record’ what a bad woman she is!

Just recently his cover was blown when he refused the very excellent female politician Cynthia McKinney a visa to Pakistan. Cynthia was part of an international delegation due to travel to Islamabad to raise concerns about the case with the government there.

Mr Haqqani, who thinks nothing of giving visas to Blackwater guns-for-hire and mercenaries heading to the fresh killing fields of Pakistan saw fit to stop the former US Congress woman from travelling there.

He squirmed and wriggled after being hoisted by his own petard, but like a worm impaled firmly on a fishhook of his own making, he could not escape the humiliating exposure of his duplicitous behaviour.

If he has been briefing against Dr Aafia Siddiqui all this time, one can only imagine what nonsense he filled in Judge Richard Berman’s head during their private meetings. In any other country this sort of revelation would be a career wrecker for both men, but justice is the US is a strange beast.

(Yes, this is a serious allegation to make and I would have asked the judge personally, but he has banned me from using his fax and phone! Hilarious really, when you consider he has no legal jurisdiction in London, where I live. Obviously he thinks if he can hold a trial on a crime allegedly committed in Afghanistan, he can have me renditioned and charged with contempt of court.)

But let’s get back to Dr Aafia’s case which has nothing to do with justice and everything to do with protecting the names and reputations of a collective of men and women in the US and Pakistan – from presidents past and present to lesser politicians and their craven diplomats.

And if it means sacrificing one Dr Aafia Siddiqui on the fire of their burning ambitions then these ruthless people have shown they are more than capable of doing it.

What you have to decide now is if you are a fence sitter or a fighter for justice.

Doing the right thing isn’t always easy but there is a growing army of ordinary people out there who will continue to campaign for justice for Aafia.

We will not be silent – nor will we throw in the towel after Thursday.

That is when our campaigning will really begin.

In the interests of justice, commonsense and decency let all concerned bring an end to this farce now and reunite this innocent mother with her family.

* Yvonne Ridley is President of European branch of the International Muslim Women’s Union and a patron of Cageprisoners

Nur · September 21, 2010