Courtroom Cirque du Jihad


sketch

Imagine this nightmare courtroom scenario: Unhinged Jew-bashing, open mockery of American soldiers, juror intimidation and coldly calculated exploitation of U.S. constitutional protections by a suspected al-Qaida defendant. Well, there’s no need to wait for the Gitmo terror trial circuses. New York City is already getting a glimpse of the future.

Jihadi scientist Aafia Siddiqui is on trial right now in a federal Manhattan court for the attempted murder and assault of U.S. military personnel in Afghanistan’s Ghazni province two years ago. She’s an accomplished Karachi-born scientist who studied microbiology at MIT and did graduate work in neurology at Brandeis University before disappearing in the wake of the 9/11 attacks.

Counterterrorism investigators connected Siddiqui and her estranged husband, anesthesiologist Dr. Mohammed Amjad Khan, to Saudi terror funders. The couple’s bank account showed repeated purchases of high-tech military equipment and apparel, including body armor, night-vision goggles and military manuals. Her second husband, fellow al-Qaida suspect and 9/11 plot helper Ammar al-Baluchi, is one of five Gitmo detainees the Obama administration is planning to transfer to New York for trial.

Siddiqui was identified as an al-Qaida operative, financier and fixer by no less than 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed during U.S. interrogations. Al-Baluchi is KSM’s nephew. Mohammed reportedly enlisted Siddiqui in a Baltimore-based plot to bomb gas stations, fuel tanks and bridges, and to poison water reservoirs in the greater Washington, D.C., area. Siddiqui was taken into custody in Ghazni in July 2008 after attempting to shoot U.S. military interrogators and FBI agents.

Now, the savvy “Terror Mom” of three is pulling out all the stops to win a mistrial. Among her Cirque du Jihad antics:

— Demanding that jurors be genetically tested for a “Zionist or Israeli background” to ensure a fair and impartial jury of her Jew-hating peers.

— Ranting about 9/11 Israel conspiracies during voir dire.

— Screaming out loud during the testimony of U.S. Army Capt. Robert Snyder, who was in the room in Ghazni when Siddiqui allegedly grabbed an M-4 rifle and proclaimed, “Allahu Akbar!” and “I hate Americans! Death to America!” Before being ejected from the courtroom, Siddiqui shouted to Snyder, “You’re lying!” She also babbled about torture at a secret prison.

— Blurting out “I feel sorry for you” to the witness in front of the jury before being led out of the courtroom again.

Siddiqui’s defense team, funded in part by the Pakistani government, asserts that Lady al-Qaida is so mentally ga-ga that she should not be allowed to take the witness stand.

Bleeding-heart human-rights groups have dutifully rallied around Siddiqui. She’s Mumia Abu-Jamal in a burqa. Indeed, her supporters have launched their own “Free Aafia” campaign. But two government-retained psychiatrists, working independently, determined last year that Siddiqui’s so-called symptoms of mental illness were attributed to “malingering” and “manipulation.” The judge in the case concluded that she is competent and understands full well the charges against her.

The Crazy Jihadi tactic is in perfect sync with the al-Qaida training manual advising its operatives to claim victimhood status if arrested and put on trial. This act is also in keeping with a long tradition of terror defendants invoking the insanity card — from “20th hijacker” Zacarias Moussaoui (whose lawyers chalked up his mass-murdering ambitions to a traumatic childhood) to Fort Hood shooter Nidal Hasan (whose defense will undoubtedly play up his lonely bachelorhood).

To make matters worse, the New York Post reported this week that an “unidentified man in a white headdress” mouthed an obscenity at the Siddiqui trial and cocked his finger like a gun at two jurors. The jurors were let go; it remains unclear whether the thug in white headdress will be charged and what relation, if any, he has to Siddiqui.

Would you answer a jury summons knowing you could end up sitting in front of a jihadi sympathizer on the loose who is mentally painting a target on your forehead? And would you trust the White House ringmasters and Justice Department terror-coddlers to protect you from harm?

These suspects belong in controlled military tribunals, not federal courtrooms that are being turned into al-Qaida P.R. platforms. The O.J. Simpson spectacle of a smirking murder suspect, preening defense attorneys, a showboating judge and the judicial process run amok on cable TV 24/7 was bad enough. The 1993 World Trade Center bombing trial, which gave the bin Laden network a multimillion-dollar tax-subsidized legal team, free translation services, personal dry-cleaning services, race-baiting defense witnesses and access to information that was allegedly used by jihadists to evade surveillance, was even worse.

The specter of 10, 15, 20 Siddiqui-style courtroom carnivals — at a cost of at least $1 billion to taxpayers — threatens to throw our civilian court system into complete chaos. America can’t afford to clown around with national security.

  • Phil Byler

    I was very highly critical of Michelle Malkin's ill considered column on John McCain, but this one on the Aafia Siddiqui trial is a very good column indeed and one that I wish everyone read and think about. Civilian trials of radical Islamic jihadists is a very bad idea, and you do get a taste of what it will be like with the Aafia Siddiqui trial.

  • Stephen D.

    Too late to stop this one. BUT, we can treat her EXACTLY like they would a loud mouth criminal defendant. Muzzel her! strap her arms down and strap her into the chair. Allow no one into the court room without them presenting I.D.’s and then follow up with Intel. gathering from those that do attend (White headress, et al) No need for this “nightmare” to be a total waste!

  • Marty

    Let the fanatic rave on. All she does is persuade more and more normal people (those who respect individual rights and practice democracy) that islam produces despicable creatures who practice pedophilia, mysoginy, anti-semtism, and genocide against non-muslims. Aafia is doing a wonderful job reminding us that mohamad was sociopath who has inspired muslims to slaughter millions of innocent people.

  • Paul P

    Michelle M:
    You have painted a very vivid and I believe accurate account of the antics Americans can expect from this Washington/New York based, Eric Holder theatrical production of "Jihadists on trial". When just the name itself seems an oxymoron.

    How you are able to maintain account of all the complex characters, the plot and the subplots within this production is beyond me. But for someone who can mix French and English to create a title in the way you do, I suspect there's much more to you than meets the eye. ;-)

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/JosephWiess JosephWiess

    This is what I've speculated that the terrorists trials will devolve into. Israel bashing, America hating, lies, deception, and political rants. Not to mention threats against jurors.

    This is why terrorists should be tried in military courts.

    • AL.

      Or simply shot on the edge of the road.

    • jac maclean

      (Essex man)? In the civilian judicial process it is accepted that some of the actually guilty must inevitably be released as the price to be paid for helping to protect the wrongly accused. The risk to society is acceptable.
      But where the risks of release could lethally threaten large number of citizens, the innocents must likewise be protected by the lower bar of legal doubt and less manipulable process of a military judicial process.
      The civilian and military both express the same principle that the protection of the innocent is more important than the punishment of the guilty.

  • Warren (UK)

    You americans are mental. How anyone is able to be proud of their rights, freedoms and democracy, yet at the same time deny those very same rights to non-americans, is clearly just a bit stupid. Military tribunals? You people should be ashamed of yourselves.

    • xman

      Oh shut up, brainless pig. If anyone is mental, you are. Islamist terrorists are enemies of the West, as are those who defend them, and as such they should face military trials. And you're nothing more than a terrorist shrilling headcase. And before anyone asks, yes, I'm a Brit.

    • zholtar

      Are you rally that dumb? Why would a non american get american rights? The right to vote in US elections too? Can americans vote in the UK? Why not, I want that right too.
      There is historical precedence for military tribunals, lots during the valiant defense of the british isles, which in hindsite looks like a waste of time, as you will soon be conquered again. This time it IS all your own fault, and no one is coming to your rescue this time. Good luck, have fun at the mosque, or paying the "infidel tax".

      • Jack Samwell

        I am an american and i have to agree with warren. Our rights are granted by God not by the governement. As such they must be equally applied to all regardless of their crimes and country of origin.

        Military tribunals have no rules; the proceedings are held in secrecy and the judgements are largely arbitrary and capricious. If we allow such trial to go on then eventually they will be held for americans as well.

        • Jack Samwell

          It is quite possible that a U.S. citizen could be classified as a terrorist — espcially given our current Homeland security director's definition of one: anyone that engages in tea party rallies, war vets, and people that peacefully disagree with Obama's ideas and policy. Would you like to give the executive branch this much power over your fate in military tribunal? It could happen.

        • Democracy First

          Sounds great, theoretically. But doesn't work in the real world. Say the US was in a conventional war and captured 50,000 enemy soldiers. Would each get a trial?

  • Rick Aztlan

    Whys is this trial receiving virtually no news coverage? This is clearly the reason that the terrorists from Gitmo Will Not Be Tried in NYC. It has nothing to do with listening to the public; it all has to do with image. Hopefully this Administration will lear the difference between a criminal and terrorist before we suffer another 9/11.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/FaceofTruth DogWithoutSlippers

    Deport KSM back to GITMO…….military trials could be determined quickly and cheaply there. They are all guilty – Firing Squad is efficient for these slimy dirty killers.

    • liamjq

      Take a leaf from the book HANNIBAL and have huge farms full of carnivorous hogs…contamination by being eaten by swine means impure death means no martyrdom and no virgins boo hoo £$%^ you and discreetly put the events on youtube so it can be seen to be done

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/FaceofTruth DogWithoutSlippers

        <DIV>I am all for that if it was the ultimate death sentence as a preventative! Go Harris! R

  • Muhammad Zubair

    ok. i live in karachi and thus recieve all the news rather than the filtered version, so this is what i hear. since all of islam is your enemy then i am justified to kill any americans i see. because its war. and since its war, i must be treated under the geneva convention if i am caught, as any american caught is treated. so basically whaat your telling me to do is kill anyone i meet without mercy since they cannot be trusted. i know you wont suddenly realize your error but i agree with warren. you guys are so self obsessed you cannot see why this is happening. you demand freedom yet from others you demand obedience. i guess thts wht happens when you are the descendants of ppl who write 'all men are equal' while they own slaves and hunt 'red skins' because they are beneath them.

    • zholtar

      Sorry, but you are incorrect. YOU need to follow the rules of war and also follow the geneva convention to be treated under it's guidlines. That means you must wear uniforms, have a military hierachy, NOT TARGET CIVILIANS ON PURPOSE, among others. Back in world war II, if they caught you in civilian clothes w weapons, they'd give you a quick field trial (mititaty tribunal) and execute you if guily, if not shoot you on site.

      "demand freedom yet from others you demand obedience"
      what obedience is being asked, what are you talking about?

    • Mark G

      Zubair,
      I am praying for you, that you should some day break free of your mental and spiritual chains. There is a better way. It will be here waiting for you when you are ready.

  • http://p2p-free.info Everett Chubicks

    We absolutely really like Lady Gaga, so adorable. I have still to see the girl in concert. I hope in the near future.

  • Tom

    Warren you are despicable coward who manifestly don't understand the reality and history.

    People who are driven by their religion wishing to exterminate everyone who disagree with them and you complain about military tribunals which have been existing for decades.

    UK has become the kingdom of the Political Correctness and ignorant guy like you is a perfect example.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/bubba4 bubba4

    Michelle…where do you get your information? The New York Post story was tiny and doesn't contain such vivid and specific descriptions. You just don't feel the need do ya? I guess we are lucky you even mentioned the Post.

  • Paul P

    I just can't get myself to dignify any of the comments in support of criminal court trials for terrorists, with a reply.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/TopAssistant TopAssistant

    I spent 40-years in the fire service, most of it with the Department of Defense fire protection (Army, Air Force, and Marine Corps). At one time I was responsible for all of the Army’s fire departments in South Korea.
    While attending a fire chief conference in 1988, I had the pleasure of meeting an Israeli fire officer. During our discussion on the challenges he faced each day, he told me if I would like to see what challenges we would face in a few years, watch what was happening in his country, the Middle East, Europe and around the world. They had been fighting radical Islamic terrorists for years and he told me the jihad would expand throughout the world, including the United States. He was right. This experience brought me to where I am today, a chapter leader for ACT! for America – Raleigh Chapter.

    Folks, if you want to stop CAIR, go to ACT! for America and sign the petition to have CAIR fully investigated. Next, review the STOP SHARIAH PROJECT. Finally, link to the ACT chapters in your state and join, if there is not one close, start one. There is a link on the website explaining how.
    We must have an ACT! chapter supporting each military installation in the nation. The wives, mothers, and fathers, those that have a family member in the military and those of us who just love them will run the chapters. We must top radical Islam; our useless government is too politically correct to do so. Did our government contact the KKK and ask them to come to their offices and advise them how to arrest KKK members without offending them?

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/rightblogger rightblogger

    Warren from the UK and Mohammed from Pakistan are entitled to their screwed up view of things – after all, Warren lives in the land of PC and in a country that is slowly being islamofornicated; Mohammed lives in a country that is a total contradiction: While claiming to fight jihad, most of their military are jihadists, and the government has ALWAYS talked out of both sides of its Islamic (I almost said "islamofascist") mouth. Are they our friends or our enemies? Who knows? Certainly, our various Administrations know diddly-squat about the Truth that is Pakistan. Meanwhile, of course, tens of thousands of its poor citizens are singled out daily for death by Islamic Jihad – in fact, those bastards have their hands full trying to kill their own fellow citizens, let alone other nationals.

    Let's just put it this way: We have totally different outlooks on islamofascism. "East is East and West is West – and ne'er the twain shall meet." Kipling, that old colonial, wasn't far off-base – it's still ever thus.