While Islamists around the world (and Tarek Mehanna here in the Boston area) - and their leftist "usfeul idiots" supporters - are falling over themselves with sympathy for Aafia Siddiqui, not all Muslims think she's the victim in all this. As one blogger writes, "I wouldn't want her living next door."
Blogger Signy (an ex-Muslim), who blogs at Here in Glitnir , wrote about Aafia some months ago. I've excerpted pieces from the blogpost, but I encourage you to read the whole thing. (The bolding is mine.)
"AafiaSiddiqui is one of the live-martyrs of the Islamist armchair jihobbyists. Yvonne Ridley, everyone’s favorite shrill hardcore convert, dubbed her the ‘grey lady of Bagram’ and insists, with a large chorus of fans, that Siddiqui was held at Bagram for four years, tortured and raped daily by those mean awful kafir Americans. It is no different than the fairy tales that are made up – or those stories which turn out to be somewhat true – about the treatment of any accused Islamist terrorist, except that she is a woman. And nothing offends the jihobbyist and Muslim masses more than when someone who isn’t a Muslim man is said to be mistreating a Muslim woman."
"....Siddiqui is no doubt a product of what many of us were subjected to in the late 80s and all through the 90s. Islam was intermingled with politics. Politics are religion, religion is politics. Being a woman, even in the segregated quarters, didn’t mean that this talk was kept from you. It was everywhere. Having the ‘right’ position on Kashmir is a religious obligation. Supporting the ‘right’ party in Palestine is wajib. Frequent discussions on who can and can’t be killed during jihad, on what you can and can’t burn down, on what you do with the slaves that you take. That sort of thing. And all through this time, in the masjids, on tapes, and the Islamic bookstores was jihad. Books, lectures, idle talk. Jihad, jihad. It’s still going on today. Sometimes it’s blatant, but mostly it’s gone quieter since 9/11, and since some of those who used to run their mouths got caught and put in jail for what the government rightly saw, I think, as providing support to terrorists or engaging in the planning stages of terrorism."
"Muslims want it both ways, of course. To talk about jihad – and not the so-called ‘greater’ jihad of spiritual struggle, but the jihad of going after kafirs and winning glory for allah – and not be punished or held accountable for it. Jihad fisbilillah. To kill and die in his way. I know that Steve Emerson is basically a tool, but one of his earlier documentaries contains video footage of these traveling ’shaykhs’ in the US from the 1990s, visiting American masjids and in their own words, with their own voices, exhorting the Muslims to jihad. Tool though he is, that isn’t Emerson’s doing. That is the responsibility of the men who said it and the men who brought them here to indoctrinate people."
"...Aafia Siddiqui came of age in these times, when Islamic charities were running around unchecked sending money to who knows where to support who knows what, and she was a part of it. Yet the same people who will go on about jihad fisibillah and its nobility and who are reluctant to condemn suicide bombings suddenly want all these people – Aafia, KSM, OBL – to be innocent. They’re all framed. They’re all set up. Someone’s doing all these crimes, but it isn’t Muslims, right? When a Muslim is arrested, every time it is a set up, a frame job. Evidence is demanded and when pre-trial evidence is disclosed, it’s not good enough for the armchair lawyers. Without proof of anything, state and federal agencies are accused of framing Muslims, hating Muslims, waging… jihad on Muslims. Every Muslim accused is innocent, every person affiliated with the government or the armed forces is guilty."
That, in a nutshell, has been the response of the Muslims American Society in Boston to the cases of Sharon imam Muhammed Masood (visa violations, lying to federal agents), the Flying Imams and Tarek Mehanna (who went to Yemen looking for terrorist training). The MAS (aka the Islamic Society of Boston) always stands by their Muslim man, repreating their mantra that "it's a witch hunt" and the feds are unfairly targeting Muslims. It's revolting that the MAS/ISB are defending the very people they should be exposing and kicking out of their mosques. Not surprising, but revolting.
"...No evidence is offered that Aafia Siddiqui is the grey lady of Bagram – it is enough for Ridley to say it and for everyone else to run with it, the claims about this mysterious lady growing ever more hysterical and melodramatic. It reminds me of how a prominent Egyptian Islamist group – you know the one – took pornographic photographs of a woman and two men dressed like soldiers in some interesting positions and spread them around the Islamic internet as photographs of ‘American soldiers raping an Iraqi Muslim lady.’ The ’soldiers’ weren’t even wearing the right type of camo for Iraq; the woman was clearly enjoying herself and the photos typical of pornography. No evidence, and while the photos have been debunked, there are still Muslims today passing these pornographic, haram photos around and telling others 'Look what the Americans are doing to our Muslim sisters.' ”
Ha! We had a Boston City Councilor doing the same thing! The Boston Globe actually published one of those pornographic photos in their paper. They were covering a press conference in May 2004 held by City Councilor Chuck Turner and Nation of Islam representative Sadiki iKambon, who claimed these photos were of US soldiers in Iraq. Turner had zero remorse when it was proven that the rape photos were fake. More on this useful idiot here.
Back to Aafia...Signy concludes her blogpost:
"Is it a coincidence that some of the charities Siddiqui worked so passionately for ended up being on the list of designated terrorist organizations, affiliated with al Qaida? Maybe. Perhaps it’s a coincidence that she’s married to accused terrorist Ammar al Baluchi, the nephew of the 9/11 mastermind KSM. What about all that paramilitary gear she and her first husband purchased before fleeing to Pakistan? Or the mailbox she opened for a suspected operative? Who knows. Maybe we’ll never know. But I know that I wouldn’t want Siddiqui living next door. Or worse, turned loose in Pakistan or Afghanistan."
We'll see how good a case the feds make against Aafia Siddiqui as the trial continues in New York city this week. Stay tuned.