FBI Most Wanted - The Return, telling on the terrorists Options

[bb7]

I read the FBI Most Wanted woman thread with interest and had some thoughts I wanted to post but that killjoy Admin closed the thread whilst I was getting my ducks in a row.

I have no idea if this Siddiqui woman is innocent or guilty. I think she stands a better chance of a fair trial in the US, despite its heightened paranoia than if she had ommitted a crime and been tried in say Afghanistan. However, the US stance of holding endlessly without representation and trial is reprehehnsible and a step backwards in terms of civilisation. in the abc news report there is no mention of her being detained and tortured although other articles suggest she was....we can only hope the truth will out and there will be justice rather than another case of wrong place, wrong time, oh I've ended up in Gitmo. I feel sorry for her kids as her young son is being held too. Note however news articles suggest that she as arrested by Afghan police and then handed over - does that make her arrest legitimate?

So I have a question. Having narrowly escaped being a vicitim of the 7/7 london bombings myself by about 15 minutes, I have very little sympathy, well none, for the brothers who wear strap ons. Misguided, stupid and murderous, whether they quote passages from the quran or not. If I had known about it beforehand, if I had known about 9/11 i would definitely have shopped those guys and tried to prevent it.

If I found out something was being planned anywhere I would definitely report it but it appears that preventing an act of murder because its being done in the name of Islam would earn me the enmnity of my fellow muslims. Does it make a difference if its being done in the West, in the land of the so called kuffars even though some of them may sympathise with your viewpoint and the cosmopolitan nature of many of the cities means fellow muslims will certainly be victims. Does it matter? What about attacks in muslim countries, take Pakistan and Iraq for example where muslim victims far outweigh the foreign soldiers (in Pakistan, they are all Pakistani victims). If you knew about it, what would you do?

I was extremely dismayed by the viciousness and hate spewed by some supposedly well educated posters in the previous thread - where have all the sane bros gone??

[Jim]

Thats funny, i was just about to open a thread on this as a "Redux" to the other one.

FBI's Most Wanted Woman


http://cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/up/player/pop....php?cl=9254065

[jazain]

bb7, thank you for your contribution. i appreciated hearing it. most of us, no matter where we lived, would try to prevent something terrible like this from happening. moreso, if our family could be harmed. even though most of the evil posting was done by "posers" yesterday just looking to inflict harm on members of this forum, protecting yourself, your family and your country is a priorty and an urgent matter and they would do the same regardless of the idiotic idealogy they spouted yesterday.

[fatima2003]

ohhhh cool.... this is a good discussion..... machallah.......

i will adress these points sister that you made... should we and do we have the obligation as muslims to prevent atrocities form happening.... of course we do....... to those taliban types are you muslim if you do? no.... but they are the crazies of the world......

are military in other countries who are fighting muslim legitamate targets? yes.....

are civilians in non-muslim countries legitamate targets? no........



to say we should kill a muslim to save the life of a non-muslim, this is a hard decision indeed as the person we are killing is muslim..... but then, are they really muslim? the life of anyone whether muslim or non-muslim is not sacred to them, they do not follow the quran, they are the hypocrites of this day, who say they are muslim but do not have Islam in their heart.........

[bb7]

Fatima, appreciate the points you make and the fate of the stooges put into power by foreign regimes has always been an ugly one, I remember pictures of one president hanging in the city square on fire...i think it was the Afghan president put in byt he Russians. Mob justice by the people. But lets face it, would you want someone who has led a campaign of bombings and killed innocent people, muslims or not as the leader of your country? Its unlikley you would be allowed to elect him in any case.

Whats really sad is that 1400 years after the prophet pbuh or 2000 years after Jesus, mankind still resorts to violence as the first means of resolving an issue. One would have hoped we had evolved sufficiently to resolve our differences in a less babrbaric manner...we have certainly been guided to that but that is mostly ignored - I refer to BrJimC's post above. BOTH MUSLIMS AND THE WEST ARE GUILTY OF THIS. The US, for all its sophistication and posturing still resolved its issues by bombing the crp out of Afghanistan and Iraq leaving little cluster bombs for the children. The only difference between them and the brothers is the West is better organised which is their greatest advantage. That and good PR.

To illustrate my point, a CNN news report today stated that one of Gaza strip militant groups has fired thousands of rockets into Israel in the past year and has killed four people and wounded a dozen others. Pretty shabby hit rate for that much effort. Israel however, will have a much greater impact with lesser effort. (Note, I do not approve in any way of either so no pro / anti Israel rants pls - thats another thread). In addition, even though everyone knows about the suicide bombers in Israel and how those pople are targeted and live in fear, only a fraction, a tiny minority know about the true plight of the Palestinians, that they were actually evicted from their lands, that they have lived in appalling conditions in refugee camps for decades and how they have been wronged. All the world sees is disorgansed crowds of masked men with rifles shouting slogans of violence. If they knew the truth, there would be much more political pressure to resolve the issue in their favour and they wouldn't need to send their sons and daughters to their deaths. See, PR.

[Rhoda]

to say we should kill a muslim to save the life of a non-muslim, this is a hard decision indeed as the person we are killing is muslim...

I would like to narrow the focus a little.

Let's say it's not a question of killing a Muslim, but of reporting him to the authorities.

Is there any problem with doing that?

[Coexist]

I would like to narrow the focus a little.

Let's say it's not a question of killing a Muslim, but of reporting him to the authorities.

Is there any problem with doing that?

No... innocent people should not be harmed. So if you see someone about to harm an innocent person, you should do what you can to stop it.

[fatima2003]

I would like to narrow the focus a little.

Let's say it's not a question of killing a Muslim, but of reporting him to the authorities.

Is there any problem with doing that?

my point was (which i dont think i effectively spoke) was that yes, to save the life of an innocent we should kill (or bring to justice) anyone muslim or no, who would hurt an innocent person willingly...... and that anyone who would do this cannot really call themselves muslim........

brother Jim's signature says why.......

[fatima2003]

Fatima, appreciate the points you make and the fate of the stooges put into power by foreign regimes has always been an ugly one, I remember pictures of one president hanging in the city square on fire...i think it was the Afghan president put in byt he Russians. Mob justice by the people. But lets face it, would you want someone who has led a campaign of bombings and killed innocent people, muslims or not as the leader of your country? Its unlikley you would be allowed to elect him in any case.

in answer to your question do I want someone in power who kill innocents and not military targets? no... i do not...... but i do support serious change and the premise much is based on...... the rests needs to change......

Whats really sad is that 1400 years after the prophet pbuh or 2000 years after Jesus, mankind still resorts to violence as the first means of resolving an issue. One would have hoped we had evolved sufficiently to resolve our differences in a less babrbaric manner...we have certainly been guided to that but that is mostly ignored - I refer to BrJimC's post above. BOTH MUSLIMS AND THE WEST ARE GUILTY OF THIS. The US, for all its sophistication and posturing still resolved its issues by bombing the crp out of Afghanistan and Iraq leaving little cluster bombs for the children. The only difference between them and the brothers is the West is better organised which is their greatest advantage. That and good PR.

To illustrate my point, a CNN news report today stated that one of Gaza strip militant groups has fired thousands of rockets into Israel in the past year and has killed four people and wounded a dozen others. Pretty shabby hit rate for that much effort. Israel however, will have a much greater impact with lesser effort. (Note, I do not approve in any way of either so no pro / anti Israel rants pls - thats another thread). In addition, even though everyone knows about the suicide bombers in Israel and how those pople are targeted and live in fear, only a fraction, a tiny minority know about the true plight of the Palestinians, that they were actually evicted from their lands, that they have lived in appalling conditions in refugee camps for decades and how they have been wronged. All the world sees is disorgansed crowds of masked men with rifles shouting slogans of violence. If they knew the truth, there would be much more political pressure to resolve the issue in their favour and they wouldn't need to send their sons and daughters to their deaths. See, PR.

i htink the world knows and simply dosent care.,..... there are some who do and these few i support in their efforts......i also try to teach others about things that are happening.....


anyway.................




PS dont use the palestinian cause as any kind of premise to the discussion...(even in an example).... do nto name names and just use oppressors and oppressed or similar terms as i did in my origional post or there will be an attack on this thread.........

[jazain]

qs.......where are all the trolls from yesterday, other than the spanked. it was like flies coming in an open door....where are they today?

[bb7]

Fatima - you say people know the truth but do not care.... however do not underestimate the ignorance of the masses. I'm a keen consumer of the news and I know where the bias is. Anytime a sympathetic news report comes out , the pro israel lobby immediately jump on the broadcaster so there's a lot of political pressure on them to spin the news a certain way - thats bizarrely what we should aspire to, that kind of social and political clout which we will not have if we pursue violent means to our goals - that just naturally repulses people and can be used against us. I remain hopeful that things can change. If South Africa brought about a change to apartheid, then so can we change things. I get frustrated everytime I see some suposedly representative muslim guy on tv shouting repetitive anti west / violent rhetoric when he could be making a valid point, its counter productive. I spend a lot of time in my everyday life , in and out of the workplace correcting misconceptions about Islam and Muslims and our politics but these guys just reverse all that.

Concerning your PS, I'm not sure what kind of line I've transgressed here but I don't see why I shouldn't use clear language that best describes the situation as I see it. I didn't want to politicise the post and detract from my point by using the oppression language whether i believe it or not. In short, please don't dictate language to be used other than it be respectful (which i believe I was). Attack away if you need to - thats the beauty of the internet!

[MagnaCarta]

Whats really sad is that 1400 years after the prophet pbuh or 2000 years after Jesus, mankind still resorts to violence as the first means of resolving an issue. One would have hoped we had evolved sufficiently to resolve our differences in a less babrbaric manner...

I know for certain that Jesus gave the way for humanity to rise above the use of violence, but I do not know this about Muhammad. And there in lies the dilemma with Islam. We have a prophet who gave the EXAMPLE of using violence, I dont care if you think it is defined in set parameters of "Justice" or not. Because human beings will use their minds and egos to justify the parameters to their cause.

ONLY JESUS gave the absolute on this. It is absolutely forbidden if you truly want to serve God. Religious ideations along the lines that God works through humans with the use of violence to avenge "His Cause" is the greatest lie in all of humanity.

But even though we have Jesus stating this very clearly and giving the teachings that would, IF APPLIED, lead to a compassionate human race that used forgiveness, long suffereing and saw the enemy as a part of their own beloved family, the human race is not willing...that is the key...WILLING to do this. They discard Him, they replace him with one who used violence to "push Allah's cause" and then they throw their hands up in the air and wonder why there is not peace on the planet.

Take Buddha for your guide, Take Jesus for your guide, Take God in your heart and no matter where else you hear that VIOLENCE is holy or the way, you will reject it completely. Because it is evil. Even in self defense, when it comes to 'military'. The only self defense that is purely 'self defense' is the one on one natural response in a human being to an unexpected attack on their person. EVERYTHING else is bologney and it is never justified by God. EVER.

Religions that say it is, that there are 'rules and exceptions' are ensuring that humanity will use this and believe it is a holy act.

And when I read statements like..."should we protect a Non-Muslim and kill a Muslim...or should a Muslim protect a Non-Muslim" I KNOW that there is something really rotten in the ideology that causes one to divide human beings into groups and even pause to wonder which LIFE is more worthy.

The blindness to this is amazing.

[MuhamedAbdullah]

Why are people so quick to assume that this woman is guilty? Carefully read the story from start to finish and ask does it all add up. If anyone thinks there is nothing fishy about the US version of events then they are deluding themselves. For example when asked about her getting shot they claimed that she was in a small interrogation room and when the soldiers came in she disarmed one (they have now changed this story to saying he sat his rifle down and she picked it up), shot at them and missed (how possible would it be to miss 4 people in a tiny room with an assault rifle?) before being shot herself.

Now it has become quite evident in recent weeks that this sister is indeed the woman held and tortured in Bagram air base and who was known as prisoner 650. A month or two ago a grass roots campaign was launched to free her and it began to gain momentum especially in Pakistan. they amazingly she turns up with incriminating evidence in her bag and is captured. Bit convenient don't you think? Just as it was convinent she had incriminating evidence. Surely someone who had evaded them for years would have a little sense about personal security.

Here is a press relase by the campaign to free her shortly before her miraculous appearence:

Urgent Appeal: Aafia Siddiqui Remains Missing With Her Three Children Five Years After Arrest

Urgent Appeal Case: AHRC-UAC-167-2008

PAKISTAN/USA: A lady doctor remains missing with her three children five years after her arrest

ISSUES: Disappearance; rape; violence against women; torture; right to liberty and security; arbitrary arrest and detention

Read full text here......

Here is one after she turned up:

PRESS RELEASE

6th August 2008

Cageprisoners rejects the 'sham' story that is being fed by the US administration regarding the circumstances and details of Aafia Siddiqui's detention.

On Monday 4th August 2008, federal prosecutors in the US confirmed that Aafia Siddiqui was extradited to the US from Afghanistan where they allege she had been detained since mid-July 2008. The US administration claims that she was arrested by Afghani forces outside Ghazni governor's compound with manuals on explosives and 'dangerous substances in sealed jars' on her person. They further allege that whilst in custody she shot at US officers and was injured in the process.

read full text here.............

I would also suggest those not up to date on the case read the following article by Yvonne Ridley:

Prisoner 650


The FBI lost much of its credibility when its chief J. Edgar Hoover was revealed to be a transvestite who preferred to be called Mary.

Hoover, probably the most powerful men in America some say even more powerful then the presidents he served under, was the originator of dirty tricks campaign and kept a lot of dirt on other people in his files.

The only players who were immune to Hoover's secret files were those who had secrets of their own about his personal life - namely, the Mafia. Mafia bosses obtained information about Hoover's sex life and used it for decades to keep the FBI at bay. Without this, the Mafia as we know it might never have gained its hold in America.

Full article posted here

As for her getting justice in the US - have people heard of Guantanamo bay and secret renditions?

[Jim]

salaam bro.

I think that most of us said that we should assume innocence until proven guilty.

No one said she was guilty.

At the same time, you cant just say the government is lying. We dont have all of the facts in the case. maybe the government is not lying.

We have to wait for a trial to determine innocence or guilt and then after all of the facts are out in the open, we can make our minds up.

We have a tendency to believe the government is lying without question in the Muslim community. Frankly, i think she'd get a better trial in the US than say Saudi Arabia or Pakistan.

If she is innocent, Allah will protect her. Allah doesn't need us to condemn each other, pronounce takfir on each other, or commit crimes of terrorism in support of her.

[spike]

Link

It's important to note:

At the time of the incident, Afghan officials gave conflicting accounts of what transpired between Siddiqui and the U.S. interrogators.

and:

U.S. military officials declined comment at the time.

It really doesn't matter a whit what a group like caged prisoners posts on their web site. I doubt very seriously anyone connected to cp was present when any of the incidents with this woman took place since she was first listed as "wanted" in 2004, so basically, it has nothing to do with the circumstances and legalities of this case.

Gitmo is Club Med compared to prisons elsewhere.

[Murteza]

^wanted from 2004 doesnt make her criminal

[Faaz]

I would like to narrow the focus a little.

Let's say it's not a question of killing a Muslim, but of reporting him to the authorities.

Is there any problem with doing that?

Hi Rhoda

There is no problem in reporting at all, and many of them are being reported, almost every muslim comunity in USA is vigilant and has reported, if they new of any loonies out there.

Faaz

[Jim]

^wanted from 2004 doesnt make her criminal

Wanted implies that she is a fugitive needing to be captured for something she did and needs to answer to by being put on trial.

She would be a 'convicted' criminal if she receives a conviction.

Of course, there is an appeals process in the US and a conviction can be overturned.

[Murteza]

^but there is a chances that she isn't commited criminal act. till the evidences provided, she will remain as innocent

This post has been edited by Murteza: Aug 15 2008, 01:59 PM

[Jim]

^but there is a chances that she isn't commited criminal act. till the evidences isn't provided, she will be considered as criminal

M, you have to understand how the law works.

A person commits an act that puts them under suspicion. A warrant for their arrest is granted when evidence is presented to a grand jury. They locate and arrest them and put them on trial.

This doesnt mean she is guilty or innocent. We presume innocence until the state has proven guilty. However, you must agree that they did something to put them under suspicion. The government cant just pick a person out of a crowd and falsely accuse them without them having already done something to put them under suspicion.

If the government cant prove beyond a "reasonable doubt" then they are found innocent or aquitted.