Sunday, October 31, 2010

Aafia Siddiqui's Life

Peace everyone. This blog covers all the things you don’t really know about Aafia Siddiqui, a Pakistani Neuro-Surgeon, and all the implications around her disappearance, iconic representation in Pakistan, re-emergence,  her terrorist act (in Ghazni, Afghanistan) and consequent trial, prosecution and sentencing (In Manhattan, US). Once the facts are on the table, will give an inference, by law and logic, between the lines.
As always, the message is more important than the messenger or the celebrity in focus. This article does not advocate blind love or hatred for Aafia, but it hints awareness towards what made today’s ‘Aafia’ a possibility, and what we should learn from the incident.

Stated Facts

I. Aafias background

Father: Muhammad Salay Siddiqui, a British-trained neurosurgeon (Neurosurgery in focus)-deceased, cause of death  Aafias divorce, heart attack aug 2002 (see chronology).
Mother: Ismet (Farooqi) Prominent religious, political figure. Ex. MP Pakistan.
Siblings: youngest of three. Elder brother architect in Sugarland, Texas. Sister Fauzia (middle) also Harvard trained neurologist (again, neurology), worked at Sinai hospital, Baltimore, taught at John Hopkins university before returning to Pakistan.
Summary – All amongst Pakistans elite, mostly ex-pats in the sense that they ALL spent more time ABROAD then they did in Pakistan. Common grounds include neurology, careers in UK/US, international exposure and politics.

II. Chronology

This is a brief summary of events in Aafias life. Notice the amounts of time spent abroad, missing, in Pakistan etc.
Born: Karachi, Pakistan.
age 3-8 : attended school in Zambia, Southern Africa (off-shored at an early age, despite being youngest of the family)
8-17 : primary and secondary schooling in Karachi, Pakistan (academics unknown)
18-19: Moved to her brother, Houston, Texas, 1990 on student via. Studied at Houston university, 3 semesters.
19-22: MIT-Massachusetts institute of technology – full scholarship, BS. in biology-  triple major in Biology, anthropology, archaeology – grad 1995. Carrol Wilson award for thesis on ‘Islamization in Pakistan and effect on women’- 1992
Worked with MSA (Muslim students association) and did fundraisers there – said that MSA students came into contact with Abdullah Azzam there (one of Bin ladens ppl, allegedly). Aafia always religious practitioner and propagator of Islamic ideology, throughout student life and beyond.
1995 - telephonic marriage to anesthesiologist (again another medical practitioner) Dr. Amjad Mohammed Khan, now dubbed involved in a plot to ‘terrorize’ a ‘gas station’ in Maryland  (lol. Imagine, doctors wanting to blow up gas stations, they must be low on logic, even in terrorist capacity, its a stupid place to blow up, it serves no purpose.)
1995-98 Amjad comes over to live with Aafia in Lexington, Massachusetts- two children born, Muhammad Ahmed (1996) and Mariam Binte Muhammad (1998) (these children carry great importance as we get to the main investigation). Both these children are AMERICAN citizens.
98-2001 - Brandeis university- Cognitive Neurosciences – PHD. Name of research paper is ‘Separating the components of Imitation’. look it up and read it – it is the most important thing about Aafia, her research. No one ever talks about it. It relates to brain learning patterns, short-term, long term memory, and indirectly – information retention mind control.
The couple also moved to Boston during this time. Aafia started IIRT – Institute of Islamic Research and Teaching. Aafia presided, husband was treasurer. Also established Dawa resource center – giving free copies of Quran and Islamic reform guidance to prison inmates and rehab ppl. (Personally I consider all these actions cultural, not terrorist  – threats).
9/11/2001 - allegedly, under the alias of Fahrem or Feriel Shahin, this Islam propagating neurosurgeon from Boston, Massachusetts bought $19 million worth of blood diamonds in Monrovia, Liberia (still unproven in court), while being with her family at the same time in Boston. This was brought forward 3 years LATER, in 2004 by US intelligence.
after 9/11- Siddiqui insisted on leaving the U.S., saying that it was unsafe for them and their children to remain there.
2002 - In May 2002, the FBI questioned Siddiqui and her husband regarding their purchase over the internet of $10,000 worth of night vision equipment, body armor, and military manuals including The Anarchist’s Arsenal, Fugitive, Advanced Fugitive, and How to Make C-4.Khan (husband) claimed that these were for hunting and camping expeditions. Most importantly, the FBI believed them, n on on June 26, 2002, the couple and their children returned to Pakistan. Smell a rat yet?
August 2002 - Khan heads to Aafias parents and divorces Aafia (great timing). Her father died of a heart attack, august 15, 2002. Third child Suleman (children important) born September 2002. Divorce finalized October 21 2002.
December 25, 2002 - Aafia leaves for US – saying she needs a job – returns january 3rd 2002 (job in Christmas eve season?)
2003 - Aafia working at Agha khan University Hospital – writes to Brandeis for finding a job at the University, owing to lack of options for her academic background in KHI.
Feb 2003 – Aafia marries  Ammar Al Baluchi, nephew of Khalid Shaikh Muhammad (a major weakness in her case, cause of marriage doesn’t make sense) for no particular reason, apparently. Personally, i have serious doubts about this marriage taking place , if at all.
march 1 2003 - Khalid Sheikh Muhammad, the new  ‘chief planner’ of Al Qaeda attacks ( i thought it was bin laden, but anyways) reported a ‘series’ of Al Aaeda operatives while in FBI custody. he also named Dr. Aafia (courier of blood diamonds and a financial fixer for al-Qaida), or so the case material says.
march 25 2003 - FBI issues global ‘wanted for questioning’ alert (much like a most wanted list) for Aafia and her husband (number 1).
Afraid of the FBI apprehension, on March 30, 2003, Aafia, with her three children, called a cab to get to the airport to leave for Islamabad, to her uncle. But she never made it to the other side. FBI claims they never found her in KHI, and she was not in any custody 2003-2008.

Disappearance

Aafia and her children’s whereabouts during 2003-2008 brew as many stories as you can count. Pakistans JI (jaamaat e Islami) seems to know right from 2003 that she was in US custody, they’ve been campaigning against it since forever.
Ministries and the Islamabad Airport confirmed that a woman was detained April 1 2003 for FBI questioning, but these reports were later denied. US says Pakistan ISI had her, ISI say they didnt have her,  then US says she is still wanted, all the time people say US has her. The only person who can answer if she was handed over or not – is Musharraf. But he doesn’t like to talk about his mistakes.
One thing is for sure though – she left with her children, meaning she was looking for asylum, not perpetrating terrorism.  and its important to see that she left with all 3 children. She didn’t get to her uncle in ISB, which means wherever she went, it was NOT her own will that got her there, she was abducted mid-way. If this wasn’t the case, she would still be with her uncle n three children in ISB.

Act of terrorism

July 17, 2008- Ghazni, Afghanistan. Outside the governors compound, with two small bags at her side, a burqa, and ONE child (her eldest son).  A woman by the name of Saliha is arrested and she turns out to be our girl. She is carrying a number of documents written in Urdu and English describing the creation of explosives, chemical weapons, Ebola, dirty bombs, and radiological agents,numerous chemical substances in gel and liquid form that were sealed in bottles and glass jars and 2 kilos of sodium cyanide.

Three versions of the story

1. The American Dream- American authorities say that the following day, on July 18, two FBI agents, a U.S. Army warrant officer, a U.S. Army captain, and their U.S. military interpreters arrived in Ghazni to interview Siddiqui at the Afghan National Police facility where she was being held. the warrant officer put down his M4 on the ground. Aafia, sitting behind the curtain, but not secure, went fr the M4, shouted ‘Allah hu akbar’ and sent two shots directly towards the personnel, no one was killed, but two were injured. She was secured and taken into custody immediately, after a revolver shot to her upper shoulder disarmed her.
2. Aafias story- she related a different version of events, according to Pakistani senators who later visited her in jail. She 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. On regaining consciousness, she said someone said “We could lose our jobs”. Interestingly, no one asked her how she got to Ghazni in the first place.
3. The Afghani version(translated) – Some of the Afghan police offered a third version of the events, telling Reuters that U.S. troops had demanded that she be handed over, disarmed the Afghans when they refused, and then shot Siddiqui mistakenly thinking she was a suicide bomber.
result – Aafia taken into custody till present day, on record.

Children’s whereabouts and statements

1.Ahmed – the eldest

Afghan authorities handed the boy over to Pakistan in September 2008, and he now lives with his aunt in Karachi, who has prohibited him from talking to the press.
August 2010 Yvonne Ridley reported that she had acquired a three paragraph statement taken from Ahmed by a US officer before he was released from US custody – (interestingly – he never was in custody of the US on record, was he)
This is the only fragment of truth, among all the stories given, as it speaks of the death of the youngest child, from a 12 year old.
Ahmed described Aafia driving a vehicle taking the family from Karachi to Islamabad, when it was overtaken by several vehicles, and he and his mother were taken into custody. He described the bloody body of his baby brother being left on the side of the road. He said that he had been too afraid to ask his interrogators who they were, but that they included both Pakistanis and Americans(ISI+ CIA). He described beatings when he was in US custody. Eventually, he said, he was sent to a conventional childrens’ prison in Pakistan.”
The timestamp for this would be Aafias travel Karachi-> Islamabad,  march-apr 2003, the time when she ‘disappeared’.

2. Daughter- Mariam

In April 2010, Pakistan Interior Minister Rehman Malik said thata 12-year-old girl who was found outside a house in Karachi was identified by a DNA test as Siddiqui’s daughter Mariyam, and that she had been returned to her family. Once again, on where she had been all this time, and where she came from – NO COMMENTS.

3. Youngest – Suleman(son)

Nowhere to be found. And how so – He died a bloody death at the age of less than a year, on the street during Aafia’s Capture – mar-apr 2003 (refer to Muhammad Ahmeds statement).

Trial and sentencing

Ironically, for an ‘unproven’ offense that took place in the jurisdiction of Ghazni, Afghanistan, on July 17, 2008 - the trial was held at New York City, US on January 19, 2010, 1.6 years worth of detention, torture and harassment later (not counting the off-record 5 year detention before that).
Aafias trial is the biggest mockery of the law, as literally nothing was proved , and the sentence was declared ‘as ordered’ by pressure groups. As none of the terrorist activities against aafia have been proven with substantial direct evidence, she was only charged on assaulting US officials at ghazni (the M4 story - refer to act of terrorism section, the American dream). Despite the fact that they never got her prints on the M4 even, the jury still gave a guilty verdict, and Aafia has been sent to prison for another 86 (eighty six) years for ‘terrorizing armed military officials’ who shot her, with as much as her voice. No trial however will take place for the injustices committed against her, her family and the merciless ‘collateral’ death of her youngest in 2003 - despite the fact that NONE of the accusations against her have any proof whatsoever.
Aafia’s statements included boycott of the proceedings as she believed they were riggedShe also said post trial – that all Muslims should display self control and not resort to violence following this decision.

The untold elements (must read)

This is the part for which you have been reading. What I infer is not necessarily true – it is just the most logical inference I can make with the data I’ve collected. so, here goes.

1. Not a Terrorist – But a victim of Terrorism

Aafia is not a terrorist – she is just someone who believes in standing up for Islam, and fellow Muslims. she has never taken a life, and she has never influenced someone to do something against their will,and she will continue to be the way she is. She might have associated with people who might have, in turn become ‘terrorists’ or extremist Muslims, but that doesn’t make her a terrorist. Just because someone loves Islam, believes in the occupation of Afghanistan n Iraq to be unjustified, and wishes to help Muslim brethren by non violent methods, like protest, medical expertise or proper legal process, there is nothing ‘terror-istic’ about it. Last time I checked, self defense for a community in general is not terrorism, unjustified occupation is.

2. One of Many

She is one of the 1200 + people taken under suspicion needlessly by the FBI following 9/11. Her exposure in media is due to her being a Pakistani elite – if she was me n you, you wouldn’t even notice. Her trial, and refusal of acquittal is a way of saving face - both for Pakistani as well as American authorities. They know she didn’t do anything wrong, n that grabbing her was a false alarm in the first place – but saying ‘hey we all messed up, sry aafia’ is gonna be the biggest mockery of government and intelligence procedure, both for US and Pakistan. Soa cause needs to be created through which she can be labelled red – and prosecuted with legal right after. Hence the staged act in Ghazni, 2008 – as it proves she was not in US custody 2003-2008- and it also proves she is Al Qaida – indirectly.

3. Why did Aafia do it?

Simple. One child killed in front of her eyes, 2 left. Notice the timestamps on Mariam’s appearance / disappearance, and compare them with the Ghazni event, n the trial. She was missing all this time – I infer that Mariam was used as bargain collateral. Aafia , while in custody- was  ‘forced’ to stage the ghazni act, in exchange for her daughter’s acquittal - as soon as her trial began and the deal for her boycott/not winning the case was finalized, her daughter was released back to Pakistan. Her son was kept with her on-site to make it look more real and deliberate on her part.
So Aafia decides to do as shes told in exchange for her daughters life, the daughter is released to Pakistani govt. after Aafia gets caught in the act – everyone’s happy. Now US intelligence agencies can say ‘ hey we finally caught someone, n gave them a fair trial even, see’ and hope to improve their competence image/foreign relations. I’d like to know who’s heading their think tanks – my piss has more working brain cells, literally, pshh.

4. Neurology

Another possibility for prosecution/detention could be a forced demand for her neurological expertise. Its a long shot, but mind-related tech work and related abductions are not unheard of. FBI reports show that she had possible involvement in mind-control related tech (‘with Al Qaeda’) – so it can also be true the other way round – i.e. US looking for human resource in that area.

Why prosecute Aafia?

Why? because she is a symbol of Islam – a modern, educated, Islamic woman, one of the best at her trade, and a success story for all Muslim women in terms of her social status (pre-terrorism charges) – 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.
Her prosecution is a public stunt to save face, and prevent the public form realizing the kind of racism being dished out at Muslims in the name of terrorism. If she is set free, it puts a black mark on the credibility of the FBI, the CIA, and all other state institutions that are so rampantly making a mockery of Justice in the US and the world over. It also nullifies the decade long campaign against maligning Islam and its followers. so, no fair trial pls – cant afford it.
As its far easier to blame an innocent person than to admit that the US system is messed up, opinionated, and severely biased against Muslims.
The objective is to send out a message – ‘Hey, This is an Islamic woman, a terrorist’. But that objective will not be achieved. Aafia is innocent, and the world will know it – the only propaganda this event will bring is further loss of credibility to those pulling the strings of US power . People in the US and the world over should condemn this act, speak against it. Muslims should support Islam, its propagation, and its culture as much as they can. Musims should shun terrorism and aggression being committed in the name of Islam. Because that is what Aafia’s life is all about – not terrorism. Not blowing up in peoples faces, not killing others and grabbing their land to ensure ones own safety. Not mercilessly killing, torturing  and detaining women and children as collateral for the sake of fictitious national security.
The objective of this decision, is to widen the east west rift further, and escalate it to full scale war.

What to do about this?

Don’t help achieve that objective. Don’t resort to violence. Develop might, but keep it defensive in nature. Improve internal security. Most importantly, stop selling out, at all levels. Go by right and wrong, not by ‘whats in it for me’.
The world and all its resources are subject to cultural influence, not modern warfare. Stop absorbing western culture blindly. Accept positive elements, reject negative ones. Remember who you are, live by it and die by it. Stand for the values that Aafia represents. Be more Islamic, and be proud of it. Excel at what you do. Realize that as Muslims, we need to watch out for ourselves. Protect each other n those around you. Don’t be a sell-out – stand up for what is right.
In the stream of events in this story – not one person in power, US or Pakistan alike, had the integrity to come forward and say ‘No – we will not be a part of this’. During our everyday lives, there are several situations , where we can take a stand, and we refuse to do so – that is where we are wrong. This is our country, our values and our nation and our women n children. We have to protect them.
Don’t hate non-Muslims – inspire them to Islam by being true Muslims, (not sold-out entertainment addicts) as Aafia has done all her life. Even in standing trial, she has laid bare the true nature of those in power in the US – their own people are turning against Islamic racism. Most importantly – get rid of your sell-out leadership ASAP, both in civil and military/intelligence ranks.
Do share with people, so that they know the real Aafia Siddiqui, esp. non Muslims. Comments and related material appreciated.

The Curious Case of Aafia Siddiqui

Aafia Siddiqui, the U.S.-educated Pakistani neuroscientist who for years has been designated a “missing person” by human rights groups and wanted by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) for questioning, is in U.S. custody as many have suspected.
But the U.S. government narrative of her arrest claims that it was recent, rather than years ago.  The time line and details its offers are not only suspect, but ludicrous.
Siddiqui has been transferred from Afghanistan to the United States, where she will appear before a federal court in Manhattan today to face charges of “attempted murder and assault of United States officers and employees in Afghanistan.”
The doctorate in neuroscience has ‘evaded’ intelligence agencies for years, yet managed to get ‘caught’ in mid-July in a central Afghanistan province by Afghan National Police (one of the country’s most incompetent and corrupt institutions) with information on U.S. landmarks, an amateur book on bomb making, and sealed containers with undisclosed contents — all conveniently in the same handbag.
The 5’4″, 110 lbs. middle-aged mother of three also managed to launch a Rambo-like attack on U.S. military officers and an FBI agent.
All this information comes from a Department of Justice (DOJ) press release and complaint seemingly written under the influence of narcotics and Fox’s 24.
NOT-SO-DEEP BACKGROUND
Of all the stories of alleged al-Qaeda members, none was perhaps more peculiar than that of Aafia Siddiqui.  A practicing Muslim born and raised in Pakistan, Siddiqui received her B.S. from MIT and a Ph.D. from Brandeis University — a secular, Jewish institution.  None of Siddiqui’s university colleagues or neighbors offer anything to suggest an inclination toward militancy.  She apparently got along well with those she interacted with.  Indeed, Siddiqui is said to have estranged from her first husband because he wanted their children to be raised in Pakistan, while she preferred that they be brought up in the United States.
Since 2003, the FBI has said that it “has no information indicating [Siddiqui] is connected to specific terrorist activities” but “would like to locate and question [her].”  Khalid Sheikh Muhammad (KSM), allegedly the planner of 9/11, is said to have claimed in interrogations that Siddiqui was an al-Qaeda “fixer”  — perhaps after he was waterboarded.  The Directorate of National Intelligence (DNI) claims that Siddiqui–a U.S.-educated Ph.D. from Karachi–married Ammar al-Baluchi, KSM’s nephew, who appears to be a minimally educated Pakistani Baloch born and raised in Kuwait (i.e. there were ethnic, educational, and class differences).  The DNI also claims that Siddiqui provided administrative assistance to alleged al-Qaeda operatives in the U.S. and even shopped for blood diamonds in Liberia.  Despite the specific claims, no evidence has been provided.  More importantly, despite the severity of the allegations against Siddiqui, she was never charged with a crime.  The gap between media claims–serious they are–and legal action is considerable.  None of these allegations by the DNI are mentioned in her ‘extradition’ to the U.S.’
THE SILENCE ENDS
Until yesterday, the last reported sighting of Siddiqui was in March 2003, at her mother’s home in Karachi.  Media coverage of Siddiqui seems to have peaked around the 2004 Democratic National Convention, when there was speculation about a potential al-Qaeda attack against the moot — which never happened.
Siddiqui’s name stayed out of the headlines till early July 2008, when British journalist Yvonne Ridley claimed she was told that a female prisoner has been held at Bagram Air Base in Kabul for years and, after sexual abuse and confinement, has deteriorated physically and mentally.  Ridley’s speculation that it could be Siddiqui stirred up the issue in the Pakistani media.
In mid July, senior Pakistani journalist Nusrat Javed told his television program co-host and audience that U.S. Ambassador to Pakistan Anne Patterson informed him at a dinner party that she looked into the matter and Siddiqui is not in U.S. custody.  Javed naively said the whole issue was a non-story.
The book on Siddiqui would reopen this Sunday, when the Boston Globe reported that she was alive and in U.S. custody.  Elaine Sharp, a lawyer for Siddiqui’s family in Houston was contacted by the FBI and said, “She is injured but alive, and she is in Afghanistan.”  Sharp added that Siddiqui’s brother was visited by an FBI agent and his request to learn of the fate of his sister’s three children was denied.  Siddiqui’s three children are U.S.-born citizens, one of the many factors that complicate this case.
THE SIDDIQUI ARREST STORY: 24 MEETS THE TERMINATOR
Yesterday, the DOJ formally announced the arrest of Aafia Siddiqui — almost a month after reports emerged of her detention in Bagram.  Virtually all facts claimed by the DOJ are puzzling.
It states that Siddiqui was arrested by Afghan National Police (ANP) on July 17 in Afghanistan’s Ghazni province.  Siddiqui is alleged to have been arrested a week and a half after the initial reports of her detention.  Curious, no?
Siddiqui is said to have been arrested while allegedly loitering around the Ghazni governor’s compound.  She speaks none of Afghanistan’s languages and could not interact with the police.  So why was she, conceivably a technical expert, on the ‘field’, especially without experience and a capacity to mix in and be independent?  How did she make her way around?  Strange, no?  Plus, she was allegedly picked up by the ANP — widely notorious for its corruption and incompetence.  That it could do something right is difficult to imagine.
The ANP officers are reported to have been suspicious of Siddiqui.  She is claimed to have in her handbag:
  • “numerous documents describing the creation of explosives, chemical weapons, and other weapons involving biological material and radiological agents;”
  • “descriptions of various landmarks in the United States, including in New York City;”
  • “documents detailing United States military assets;”
  • “excerpts from the Anarchist’s Arsenal;”
  • “a one gigabyte (1 gb) digital media storage device (thumb drive);”
  • and “numerous chemical substances in gel and liquid form that were sealed in bottles and glass jars.”
Wow.  That’s a bag full of smoking guns.  All that in a “handbag” while canvassing the Ghazni province governor’s compound?  Half of the alleged materiel has no relevance to that site.
So an MIT-educated neuroscientist had to rely on the Anarchist’s Arsenal?  Is that a ‘bootleg’ version of the ‘Anarchist’s Cookbook’?  Did she have any Rage Against the Machine tracks on her flash drive?
Adding to the incredulity is the story of how Siddiqui allegedly got into U.S. hands.  According to the narrative (mostly my paraphrasing):
Siddiqui is detained by the ANP overnight.  The next day (July 18th), a group of U.S. personnel (two FBI agent and several army officers) coincidentally arrived at Siddiqui’s detention facility.  They were “unaware that Siddiqui was being held there, unsecured, behind a curtain.”  One army officer sits down and by chance places his M-4 rifle on the floor near the curtain.  Another officer hears a woman yell.  When he turns, he sees Siddiqui holding the other officer’s rifle, pointing it at him.  Siddiqui said, “May the blood of [unintelligible] be directly on your [unintelligible, possibly head or hands].” I am not sure if this is a direct quote or paraphrasing from the epic film, True Lies.  Siddiqui fires two shots, but the rifle is pushed away by an army interpreter.  She was then shot in the torso at least once by an army officer.  Still, she continued to struggle with the officers as they were attempting to subdue her.  Siddiqui “struck and kicked them while shouting in English that she wanted to kill Americans.”  Then she temporarily lost consciousness and medical aid was rendered to her.
Sounds like Terminator meets 24.
CONCLUSION
The above strongly indicates there is far much more to Siddiqui’s story than the initial New York Times article, which all too often are overwhelmed by official press releases.  The narrative presented in court documents is wildly cartoonish.  If it is true, then I would say Siddiqui might be mentally ill.  Her alleged behavior is erratic, non-methodical, and unscientific.  It counters the DNI profile of her being the ‘patient sleeper.’  Its veracity, not only in the court but also in the realm of public opinion, is clearly contestable.  It defies a nominal personality profile available from personal acquaintances of Siddiqui.
Moreover, it serves to counter a context/competing narrative that is troubling for the prosecuting authority.  In other words, if Siddiqui was arrested years ago on grounds that not only lack a legal/practical basis, but also serve to damage the reputation (and even security) of involved governments, then this ‘story’ provides the seemingly absent basis to try, incarcerate, and shut up Siddiqui.  The Ridley-suggested narrative — that the the U.S. unlawfully detained (and even abused) a U.S.-educated Pakistani Muslim mother and Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) assisted in whatever shape or form — would be immensely damaging to both countries.
Before us, it seems, are two competing narratives.  But I would not rule out other alternatives.  The actual details, of Siddiqui’s arrest — whether it occurred five years ago or two weeks ago — is unclear.  The initial claims made against her years ago are cause for concern.  But it is puzzling as to why, if they were true, there was no legal followup.  Even now, those claims go unmentioned in the present legal action against her.  Siddiqui is not being treated as an enemy combatant; rather, she’s being prosecuted in conventional U.S. courts, albeit in a more closed anti-terrorism context.
And so Siddiqui’s arrest provides not answers, but more questions.
There are so many.
Where are her children?  They’re U.S. citizens.
If she was in Bagram, were the children also there?
Is it true that Siddiqui’s estranged/ex-husband, who seems to have been a person of interest, is now freely practicing medicine in Karachi?  Why?
How could Siddiqui operate in Afghanistan without knowing the local languages — especially in a city that is 70% Tajik and Hazara?
The role of U.S.-Pakistan relations, particularly in terms of intelligence, is likely critical.  Is the ‘arrest’ of Siddiqui a product of cooperation or competition between U.S. and Pakistani intelligence agencies, or none of the above?  Is either, or both, being provided with some sort of deniability in this case?
And who exactly were Yvonne Ridley’s sources?  Was the Siddiqui story leaked to her by intelligence officials from Pakistan, the United States, or another country?  Or did she simply find out from former detainees?
Alternatively, was this a ‘sting’ operation designed to reel her in and provide a context to arrest her (after being arrested or in hiding)?
Who knows?  But all one can say at this point is that the article you’ve read in today’s paper likely offers very little toward the truth.