I was right all along.!

Not a scrap of bloody evidence.

The judge held that that there was no need of the court’s directions, as departments concerned had no tangible evidence in order to prove the innocence of Dr Aafia before the US court.

On Monday, the interior secretary appeared in court and submitted that the government had no documentary evidence regarding Dr Aafia and her children’s abduction from Karachi.

See here

I feel sorry for all the kind hearted people of Pakistan who were mislead by the charletons who used and abused this story for self-promotion and to fullfil their irrational anti-American agenda.

Loudmouth Ridley is wrong again

Yvonne Ridley accuses the Pakistan government of never raising the issue of Aafia Siddiqui with the US. It appears Yvonne is wrong again.

"Asked if a more compassionate view of Dr Aafia Siddiqui's case by the US government would help in winning the hearts and minds of Pakistanis, Ambassador Patterson replied, "We are mindful of Pakistan's concern vis-à-vis Dr Aafia’s trial in the US ... She has a series of appeals. (Pakistani) politicians have asked prisoner transfer which will enable her to serve her sentence in the home country. This is complicated. The Pakistan government will have to adhere to certain treaties. But this is not out of the realm of possibility and we have been discussing this with your Government." She dispelled the impression that the Pakistani Government or political leaders who meet visiting US special envoys and Congressmen periodically have not raised Dr Aafia's case with them. "Your politicians have raised the question of Dr Aafia Siddiqui all the time," Ambassador Patterson informed."

News Article here

Here is the video of her saying the Pak government didn't ask for her back

Interesting bits frrom her psychological evaluation

Top paragraph Pg. 4
Following the Attacks of 9/11 Dr. Siddiqui informed her husband that she wished to return to Pakistan. One of the reasons given at that time was that she believed that following 9/11, Americans were intending to abduct Muslim children and were converting them to Christianity. The strength of the pervasiveness of this belief is unknown but it represents a very paranoid idea.

2nd paragraph page 4
Following an argument with her mother who she and the children were living with, an agreement was reached that they would go to Islamabad to live with her uncle. She reportedly left in a cab, phoned her mother from the train station, agreeing to call again when she reached Islamabad. She apparently never made it to her uncle’s residence.

Bottom paragraph page 4
What is reported is that Dr. Siddiqui became involved with a man named Abu Lubaba, who courted her using her concern for the protection of Pakistan against aggressive nations. Late she came to believe he was a “bad man” Abu Lubaba during this period issued a fatwa on Dr. Siddiqui to study germ and chemical warfare.

Top paragraph page 5
In July of 2008 Dr. Siddiqui traveled to Ghazni, Afghanistan reportedly to find her second husband. She traveled with a young boy, who turns out to be her son, Ahmed because she reported traveling alone would draw attention to her
View report here

Earn $$$$$$ in Pakistan!

Look at these people. Here they have a popular cause and they are promoting it by walking around with postcards pinned to their chests. What is the matter with them? Didn't anyone in the Free Aafia movement ever take a marketing class in college? What they need is what every profitable cause has. T-shirts and Bumper stickers! Why hasn't anybody thought of this? Pakistan is a textile hub of the world! Get the shirts printed for 50 cents each, sell them for 3 bucks. That plus the bumper stickers and there is a ton of cash to be made. If anyone in Pakistan is reading this they should get out and corner the market before the Siddiquis get on the ball. If you don't do it then somebody else will.

Why Dr. Siddiqui has never been charged with terrorism.

Federal prosecutors obviously felt they did not have enough evidence to convict Dr. Siddiqui for terrorism charges. That doesn't mean she was not a terrorist fixer.
Al Capone was never charged with being a Mafia Kingpin. That doesn't mean he wasn't one.

Let's look at the terrorism evidence against her:

First: She was recorded raising funds for a charitable organization that turned out to have (suspected or proven?) ties to terrorist organizations. So what? Many people worked for or donated money to these organizations. There is no way of proving Aafia had knowledge of these links.

Second: Either her or her husband purchased night vision goggles and maybe body armour. The reports differ on this. Nonetheless, there is nothing illegal about this.

Third: she opened up a post box and the key was later found in the hands of a guy charged with plotting a terrorist act. For this to be a crime, the court would have to prove that the post box was somehow used in the plotting of the terrorist act and that Aafia gave the guy the key with foreknowledge that it would be used to plan a terrorist act. Her first two suspicious activities would not be allowed in court as neither were crimes and could prejudice a jury.

Fourth: Some guy in Sierra Leone claimed to witness her buying “blood” diamonds. One witness is not enough to prove she was there. How can they prove these were “blood” diamonds? How can they prove she knew they were “blood” diamonds? How can they prove she was going to smuggle them? How can they prove she was going to give the proceeds to terrorists? They can’t. They can’t even prove she was there.

Fifth: She allegedly married a guy who is being charged with plotting 911. Well the 911 plotter has not been convicted of terrorism to this date for one thing, and although she denies it and the guy's family confirms it, there is again nothing illegal about marrying a suspected terrorist.

Sixth: She was found with incriminating evidence in her purse the day she was arrested in Ghazni. Chemicals? What chemicals? Whatever chemicals she had was not illegal to possess else they would have added a charge for that. Notes? From what I have heard her notes mention places in New York and mention mass casualties, but they do not formulate a plot in themselves. They seem more like the incoherent ramblings of someone who might hate America, but how can they prove that what she had in her purse would aid a terrorist plot in the US? Can you imagine some suicide bomber waiting to launch his attack on the US but he is waiting for Aafia to show up with her scribbling about the Statue of liberty and mass casualties? “Thanks sis, We couldn’t have gone forward without you.”.

So you can see how adding these 6 things together may give rise to suspicions. Still, no court in America will allow a prosecutor to add 6 non-crimes together to come up with a crime.

plus, Khalid Shiekh Mohammad, named her as a key al Qaeda fundraiser and operative.

Attempted Murder was easiest, since they had the witnesses. I still wonder what happened to those bullets though.

The Karachi Information Super-Highway (via India and Chicago)

If you want to know what is going on in the streets of Karachi the first place you should check is NBC5 in Chicago. NBC5 gets an up-to-date news feed from the Press Trust of India Website and quotes them. The Press Trust of India website knows what is going on in Karachi long before anyone in Karachi does. In 2003 when all the Karachi news sources were reporting that Aafia Siddiqui was wanted for questioning, the PTI got the scoop on all of them and reported she had already been arrested, even though there are no witnesses to back the claim up. Could the PTI have made a mistake? Of course not. Has anyone bothered to ask them what the source of their exclusive discovery was? Why bother? If it was written on the internet it must be true.

It really is sad, because if people believe this report to be evidence of Aafia's and her kid's being arrested, then surely the source of this report should be able to give clues to unravel the her mysterious disappearance. Why isn't anybody asking PTI wht they reported this? The likely answer is that it was an error and she was never arrested in 2003. Getting to the bottom of the mystery does not help the people who demand Aafia's unconditional release. The arrest is part of their horror story they use to stir up hatred towards the Pakistani government and the US.

The Ridley Riddle

Muslim-convert-celebrity-brainiac Yvonme Ridley became a major player in the promotion of the Aafia abduction story when she read Moazzam Begg's book Enemy Combatant and determined that the girlish screams that Begg and others heard while at Bagram prison were in fact a girl they labelled prisoner 650 and that girl had to be Aafia Siddiqui. Still today many of the Free Aafia groups refer to her as prisoner 650. One thing that Yvonne and others missed out on was that Moazzam was transferred to Guantanamo Bay a month before Aafia went missing. You can see from this article that Begg was transferred to Guantanamo on the 26th of Febuary. Aafia went missing March 30th. So Begg could never have seen or heard Aafia at Bagram Prison.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/3545709.stm