1. Perhaps you’re not reading what im writing, you’re actually commenting on what you ‘think’ i have in my mindset while writing. Where does the article say that Muslims are not responsible for their present position? As for the bias against Islam – it does exist, it always has. it doesnt hurt islam in the least, but it does hurt those practicing islam – it has been doing so since the time of the Prophet. It is also a part of the divine scheme of things, and a test of faith.

Nowadays, most of us refute its existence, because it helps us sleep better at night, and shirk our responsibility towards removing that bias from society constructively. Bias against Muslims also exists, but that is mostly because of unjustified actions in terms of social interaction by a ‘majority’ of Muslims (not talking about terrorism or extremism, talking about hypocrisy). and it is justified to a great extent.

When i say that Muslims have not done anything as yet, i am talking in the context of terrorism, not all the other BS they’ve been doing, most importantly, the things they are NOT doing, and are supposed to do. As for those who have committed terrorism, they automatically oust themselves from Islam, or any other religion. Blame the guy who does it, not the religion he claims to follow.

The main bias against Islam is ‘Islam=terrorism’. No one takes ownership of that bias, but all media activity, prosecution and the like is centered around it. You my friend, also have developed that bias sub-consciously to a certain extent (as have most urban people including myself), against so called ‘extremists’to an extent, as is visible in your writings/opinion, which makes it hard for anyone to accept that aafia is actually blameless.

Those in power consider Islam a threat because by Islam, most of their actions are unjustified. Also, Islam preaches equality in punishment, so it is natural for even a king who terrorizes any country to be ‘skeptical’ of the ramifications of his actions. When you analyze further, the problem is not Islam, its the action that causes the ‘equality in punishment’ rule to come into effect. This rule is a major part of US/European law as well. No other religion imposes this criterion for justice at state level – therefore anyone who wishes to take over the world is directly threatened by Islam and those following it (in theory).

That being said, harming innocents, suicide bombing and destruction in civilian areas is not endorsed by Islam, it is as much an act of terrorism for Islam as for any other school of thought, even more so. as even in war, Islam does not allow harming the leaf of a tree.

2.You’re free to target anything and everything, i take full responsibility for what i write, my personality and my school of thought. You don’t have to apologize. The best conversations are ones where people don’t hide behind words like ‘personal’ and ‘political’ . everything you believe in is personal, n there’s no harm in discussing it even if it is, unless you don’t really mean what you say most of the time (which is lying).

3, trial – yes. of those who criticize Islam? no – of those who perpetrate unjustified acts on the basis of bias against it – yes. means trial is not against the bias, it is against the actions that you do while in that state of bias. You have every right to be biased abut Islam – as long as you don’t put it to effect.

Focusing ourselves is important – but it is not half as important as saving another Muslim whos being persecuted for nothing. Just answer this question and you’ll understand -if all Muslims on the earth start ‘focusing themselves’ and become really nice people – will that make the US leave Afghanistan, Iraq and acquit aafia and several hundred other innocent people? i don’t think so. Self improvement – yes- but this is another context, which requires counter action, constructive protest and legal followup.

‘being a good Muslim’ doesn’t win you an argument, being a good conversationalist does.

4. You’re drifting off-topic my friend, and the discussion is turning into an exercise of winning an argument rather than discussing it. If that is the case, you win, you don’t have to prove anything. You are free to believe in whatever you wish to believe. The conclusion may be right or wrong, the article says it, but it is based on the facts given above. You are free to derive n share a better conclusion than the one i have posted, and do share that as well. Yes there are some elements in aafias story which don’t add up, but their weight-age is very low compared to the allegations against her.

For the sake of argument (i don’t believe this is so, but still) – lets take the worst possible scenario. Aafia did it all. bombed 9/11- got Iraq WMD (not yet found) got the Taliban started in Afghanistan, leads a pack of terrorists against the NSA. Now what should be done about this – staying within the legal code of the US?

1. Custody- need to acquire the terrorist. If on US soil, can be done immediately. Being a US citizen (as you yourself pointed out)she would have the right of information of acquisition to her peers, a lawyer, and her basic human rights would be granted. if on non US soil- acquisition, following trial int he same country prior to hand-over (you need to prove that she is actually a terrorist to request handover)- never done like this BTW. abduction is not justified, even for a terrorist. Nor is the killing of her third child during that abduction( this is the part that should be brought to court – a life is a life, young or whatever) the action qualifies for murder, negligence, assault, battery, abduction and several other offenses.

2. trial – period between trial and custody should not exceed an year (8 years in this case, what exactly was being done here). facts need to be produced that prove beyond reasonable doubt that her presence was there at the terrorist act. being a part of the plan (solid facts like proper res. videos, credible witnesses, tapes need to be produced)implies a lesser sentence. Speculations and opinions do not count – the only facts on the table are that she went to zambia for schooling, doesn’t appreciate US invasion of Muslim countries, favors islam and its propagation, and went to the US on 25 dec to 1 jan 2003 for unknown reasons. apart from the trip and the zambia schooling, even i fit those facts. so can i be subjected to abduction, 8 year remand, consequent trial and imprisonment for shooting two officers (who shot me, actually, despite that i wasn’t carrying any weapon or threat), with a gun that doesn’t even have my prints on it? i don’t think so. (Infact, the ease with which they shot an unarmed woman is also a result of premeditated bias infused within US officials against her).

That’s the worst case scenario, and still its unjustified. thats all judge roswell

as for me addressing each of your replies, i have to do it, as i wrote the article in the first place. salam to all at ep.

z

Well, its getting personal I guess, getting argument for sake of argument and discussion is going off-topic, I’d be done after this. (I also observed that you ddin’t use my name )

1. I never claimed that there is NO bias per se. There are two things, bias against Muslims, bias against ISLAM. Both are different. When you say they are biased against Muslim, I have no problem, see my above comments. However bias against Islam do have a different ‘mind-set’ to which I have problem with. When you believe that ‘bias against Islam’ then you can’t really do anything just to rant about it which we have been doing since the Renaissance….neither you can’t have any positive to ‘remove bias’ this is so unpractical. ok Lets suppose there is bias against Islam, where does it come from? Is it divine in western ‘religion’ or power people belief or is it us made the opportunity for them?
Another question, suppose you are one of the power people of this world, you are one of the leader….and you are threaten by small ‘group’ of fanatics? What would you do naturally?

You must have observed that I have only problem when you bring ‘Islam’ in this matter, as a question of being prosecuted, in danger. This is the typical mind set from which we overreact negatively and we have been doing it. There is no danger to Islam or anyone ‘prosecuting’ it or even have bias (even if there is some potential bias of power players). I have faith that nothing can damage Islam as a religion, even if there are no single Muslim or practitioner left on earth, Islam would still be there !!

It’ll be oxymoron on your side if you believe bias against ISLAM and yet you want to remove it and say some beautiful words, no you really can’t, you will just overreact and rant about it.

When you say, “Muslims haven’t done anything yet, they’re just being blamed for stuff”(in a context i know) dude you really need to learn about the divine law of downfall of a nation.
Muslims have achieved no positive gain due to the fact that they are drowned into negative reaction on a colossal scale. They keep ranting about stuff rather than doing something good. They keep shouting oh Islam is in danger, there is bias, they are doing this and that against ISLAM(however they MAY not be doing against islam, but against mislead followers).
You have to realize that Muslims are not ‘thekedaar’ of Islam.
Bias against islam has no connotation whatsoever, it ain’t a problem, the problem lies in its followers, you need to start from Muslims, not Islam. Muslims are problem, not ‘bias against Islam’

2. Please do not defend yourself, I never really meant to target your personality, rather the mindset. If I gave impression otherwise, I apologize.

3. Trial of those who criticize Islam is utter useless, unpractical and against the Sunnah of Prophet(pbuh). You remove bias against islam with a trial? You must be patiance enough …thats why I say keeep focussing yourselves, rather rant about bias or conspiracy theories against ISLAM(not that i’m concerned about Islam here..)

4. Thus, I dont have to come up with ‘facts’ to refute ‘no bias against Islam’ if you really know where am I coming from.
Yes indeed, you put some facts however an speculative conclusion ‘inferred’

Do stop by at office and lets have a discussion

Peace,

1. everyone knows 9/11 was an inside job – still there are no court proceedings/investigations into the real people behind it. All the proceedings taking place are against Muslims one way or the other. It is bias. IMHO, though a vast majority of the west may not share this prejudice, but those in power certainly do, against Islam. If aafia is Jamaat e Islami minded, she has every right to be, just like you and i have every right to be party-minded.

2. as for the gun incident, even if we don’t consider aafias statements(i never did, btw, i favor her sons statement, not hers), it don’t mater, as the prints are still not there, and even the afghan police is giving a different statement of events.

3. zaid hamid is a fanatic promoting hatred for the west and wanting a state of open war between both societies. I’m a guy who believes that Muslims should behave constitutionally and get back their social integrity by positive, non – violent methods, and effectively remove the bias against them by inspiration, bringing to trial those trying to malign islam in the process – its a big difference.

But to solve a problem – you need to admit it exists first. If you stay under the assumption ‘no there is no bias against Muslims’ – you are wrong. if you say ‘yes there is bias, but it is not endorsed by those in power’ you are wrong again, because Muslims haven’t done anything yet, they’re just being blamed for stuff. Another example is that of strip search initiation at international airports (removed recently). specifically for Muslims, my friend. Get it yet? I think its more a case of ‘not wanting to accept that there is bias’ on your part- then being a case of ‘no bias’ – maybe its because there is one zohaibhisam.com and a million express.com’s saying otherwise.

In conclusion, as i said at the start of the article, this is my inference on the subject. It could be wrong, but its mostly based on facts, not assumptions. if you want to refute ‘bias against islam’ do it with facts, not popular media statements like ‘zaid hamidism’.

thanks for the reply. keep it coming. helps elaborate the point more.

z

I agree this is assuredly a case study of US being prejudice. This is the first time, we have already seen the case with Iraq…..

[b]“Knowing that aafia is a strong supporter of Islam, i would naturally be inclined to believe that the ‘islam = terrorism’ phobia of the west has caught up in this case. The jury in an American court needs at l…….” [/b]

I still do not opine to the notion that it has to do anything with Islam per se. I agree as you wrote, this is the case of ‘sorry we messed up’ at all but not the religion itself. US and Pakistani intelligence scams have been questionable since the post 9/11 situation all over the world so this is not new.

[b]“Her work on Islamic propagation and her Establishment of IIRT and Islamic dawah centre in Boston is not a conspiracy theory my friend, its a fact…..”[/b]

Surely its not conspiracy theory, may be i’m not clarifying myself pertaining that it is not the case of prosecuting Islam and when you bases of reasoning about her lifestyle being ‘true spirit’ of islam, is just another resonating factor of your pro-burton bias that would act like a prejudice. Why I say this? because her thoughts are ‘supposedly’ more prone towards Jamat-e-Islami and one can have a difference of opinion over her’s or Jamat’s dogmatic belief. I reckon you agree, no?

I missed something from your first reply, let me quote,
[b]“aafia accepting something doesn’t count, really, not after 7 years of remand and torture…”[/b]

I may have agreement over that but on the other hand you dont have to base your reasoning over her any statement like this…”he denied touching a gun, shouting, or threatening anyone. She said she stood up to see who was on the other side of the curtain, and that after one of the startled soldiers shouted “She is loose”, she was shot….”

Conclusion,
1. You and I both are uncertain about some key factors of her case and lets have an agreement on a degree of speculation on such cases, though I really appreciate your efforts towards getting inclination to reality…
2. If you eliminate ‘Islam’, ‘prosecuting religion’, ‘US against Islam’ sort of ‘Zaid Hamidism’ from your post of thoughts, the post would be more accurate in my opinion. Call a spade a spade or getting sorted out with a ‘trump’ is only a matter of ones perception

On your first reply, I agree with your 1st and 2nd point. However linkage to some potentially extremist cannot be denied right away.

US Citizen: Yes she is
Source: http://express.com.pk/images/NP_KHI/20100929/Sub_Images/1101062749-1.gif
Source: http://www.draafia.org/2010/04/10/dr-aafia%E2%80%99s-12-year-old-daughter-liberated-from-us-bagram-airbase/
However, you may be skeptical about it…

On #5, yeah things seem not be straight forward and you cannot assert to have any clear position, that was my point in first place.

I’ll admit that its kind of over-zealous – but there is little reason for prosecuting aafia otherwise. it took me less than 12 hours to see that she is not a terrorist, i observe it would take an intelligence agent/resource even less time. Then why the prosecution, why the trial, and most importantly, why 86 years in prison. She has not been proved a terrorist, her prints are not on the M4 used to shoot. by law, there is no breach. Still she gets convicted. which shows that there is bias of some kind.

Knowing that aafia is a strong supporter of Islam, i would naturally be inclined to believe that the ‘islam = terrorism’ phobia of the west has caught up in this case. The jury in an American court needs at least 80% majority to come to a decision – in some cases it has to be a full 100%. Here, getting such a strong conviction without hardcore evidence clearly shows bias, or manipulation. And the only purpose it serves is to present to the world another ‘Islamic’ terrorist. What else is achieved from this decision, if not this?

On the contrary, aafia is one of the few Muslim women who have proven to be the best at what they do, and follow islamic practices in society at the same time. Her lifestyle refutes all claims about Islam prosecuting women, and reducing their social rights. Her work on Islamic propagation and her Establishment of IIRT and Islamic dawah centre in Boston is not a conspiracy theory my friend, its a fact.

I’m personally very liberal in terms of religion/opinion, but i have to call a spade a spade when i see it. The only strong evidence about her conviction is her religion, ethnicity, her opinion about the illegal occupation of Muslim states. Even her court proceedings show that she burst into an outrage more than once against US society and its military practices – which i believe strongly helped in her conviction. The court has forgotten that it has to persecute based on actions of person, not their opinion on a subject.

Finally, i think her abduction has little to do with her being a terrorist – it was due to
a) her research or
b) possibility of her knowing something about 9/11- much like 1200 + ther muslims taken into custody the world over.

Much like all the rest, once FBI found out she has nothing on the subject- US intelligence cant just come out n say ‘sorry we messed up’ – esp. in case of someone who has become a national issue in Pakistan. To save face, you must prove that she is a terrorist – else both US and Pakistani governments become scams in the eyes of both nations.

Thanks again for the feedback. it has helped improve the research on the topic. looking forward to hearing more. salam to all at EP.

z

good to see that you further analyzed the data. I admit i have left some parts unanswered, it took me around 6 hours to compile this, some things were left un-addressed – and there are some things which i still don’t understand – but here’s what i do infer about your questions:

1. Purchase of 10k weaponry – Two possiblities.
One – done by her husband on account of his own endeavors, or on behalf of someone else. This may prove that they indirectly helped some plot towards terrorism, if true. Indirect because they were never involved in any terrorist act directly. You don’t buy such stuff including c4 just to hunt animals or keep it lying around, definitely. More importantly, if the FBI knows you did something like this, they don’t let you get off the hook that easy for it, and its not traced 4 years in the background. Why don’t you try buying some c4 in Boston or any other state, being a Muslim, that too post 9/11 – the story just doesn’t sell.

two – its Fake evidence- if you read between the lines, you will find that aafias first husband is one of the main witnesses against her- everything built around her has been done using her husbands ‘statements’ in focus. It is a major possibility that he (and all his admittances) are the result of a sell-out, and that he has a major part to play in her framing. (i would personally go for #2).

2. Marriage to baluchi – again- i think its planted evidence, as almost everyone denies it. aafia accepting something doesn’t count, really, not after 7 years of remand and torture. Her family does not concur to it. Most importantly, the marriage takes place just a few weeks before FBI announces that she is ‘most wanted’. Also pre-marraige arrangements are made while she is near her ninth month of pregnancy? again – there is a major gap there – as the cause of the marriage doesnt make sense. Aafia is working at AKUH, and she is from a well to do, elite family of Pakistan. She doesnt need to marry a terrorist to make ends meet.

3. Her return to US – this is one of the points i don’t understand. It is clear that it was to meet someone – though it cant be ascertained who it was. perhaps it relates to her research – or perhaps she went there to have a party :S. cant go with the second , as again she is in the 6th month of her pregnancy. But this is definitely a point worthy of further investigation.

4.US citizen – I dont think she is – just someone on some kind of VISA. her children are US citizens (2) being born there. She originally has a Pakistani nationality. it remains to be known if she went for a US nationality after their birth. Considering her conservative opinion post 9/11, i doubt she would.

5. you didn’t really mention this, but her early schooling took place in Zambia, South africa. This part doesn’t make sense to me at all, but you missed it . This, plus her visit to states in Christmas season. Answering the conclusion related comments in next post.

z

You wrote,
“and by prosecuting her, you are indirectly prosecuting Islam, its culture, and its woman’s role in society. Aafia has been made an example, so that none can follow in her wake. Its not the terrorism that she didn’t commit, its her propagation of Islam and her commitment to right and wrong that hurt those in power.”

I strongly oppose the notion that she is charged and it has to do anything with Islam…I humbly, in my capacity, opine that as terrorism involves Muslims however not religion, similarly, the US is not charging religion but poeple! If representatives of some faith are guilty, they have to be charged(rightly or wrongly is another matter), not religion directly or indirectly.

Conspiracy minded theories always have some sensation but it has cost us alot since the Renaissance as we are still in an sphere of our old-time-glory……(referring to the law of downfall of a nation). We may discuss it some time

I know its your blog and you are the boss and king and you have full liberty to whatever extent you may want to say… just my 2 cents of criticism

I’ve read every single word of this blog-post and I’d like to know a few things,

1. “In May 2002, the FBI questioned Siddiqui and her husband regarding their purchase over the internet of $10,000 …..ost importantly, the FBI believed them……”

Whether or not FBI believed, this is quite stupid on Siddiqui’s end that $10 grand worth stuff were only for hunting expeditions? Give me a break….there is assuredly something wrong with it…

2. “Aafia marries Ammar Al Baluchi, nephew of Khalid Shaikh Muhammad ……”

I ran a search over the internet and found that on western media as well as local news reported the same story all over the internet and only her family in denial …. (Lets not indulge into the purported picture of media because you also seem to take some resources from there)
I found this….

“She claimed to be married to Ammar al-Baluchi a nephew of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed when FBI agents questioned her in Afghanistan, according to court records.[10] Siddiqui’s marriage to al-Baluchi has been denied by her family but confirmed by Pakistani intelligence, FBI and according to court records by Siddiqui herself.[6] A defense psychologist also confirmed the marriage[11] and BBC confirmed it from security sources and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed’s family.”

Source: http://ja-jp.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=290714393837&topic=13516

What’s interesting is, whether or not she married, her suspicious linkage towards (even potentially) Al-Qayeda group leaves so many unrequited queries for which I’m sure only intelligence agencies know the truth.

3. Her return to the US in Christmas season….what did she actually do there?

4. Is she an US citizen? That’s really an important question…

My only intention to comment is to connote that she can’t be crystal clear in my opinion. There are always some speculations and unanswered questions left behind over which we can only give speculative opinions….I’ll also like to criticize your post in some different manner …