Republicans and the Criminal Courts

Fight disinformation. Get a daily recap of the facts that matter. Sign up for the free Mother Jones newsletter.

The case of Aafia Siddiqui has always been a strange one. But strange or not, the Bush administration believed that she had connections to al-Qaeda, and after a long manhunt they took her into custody in 2008. The next day she tried to kill several U.S. soldiers and FBI agents who had come to question her. Shortly after that she was transported to the U.S., arraigned in New York, and put on trial. Marc Ambinder continues the story:

What makes Siddiqui’s conviction relevant for the current debate is that she was captured, on a recognized battlefield — Afghanistan — and tried to kill FBI agents and American soldiers who had come to question her. Siddiqui, 40, could easily have been designated as an enemy combatant. But the Bush administration determined instead that she be tried in federal court. She was read her Miranda rights, and given access to a lawyer.

….The police found documents on her possession that led them to believe that she was part of a plan to cause a mass casaulty incident in the United States. Specific locations listed on the documents included the Brooklyn Bridge and the Empire State Building. Notes on one document referred to the components of a dirty bomb. They found various sealed canisters of chemicals and gells.

….Siddiqui’s conviction on February 3, 2010 was noted in a press release by the Justice Department. So far as I can tell, Republicans on Capitol Hill did not utter a peep of protest.

I’m willing to bet they didn’t utter a peep of protest when she was brought to New York in 2008, either. Funny that. (Via Steve Benen.)

ONE MORE QUICK THING:

Or at least we hope. It’s fall fundraising time, and we’re trying to raise $250,000 to help fund Mother Jones’ journalism during a shorter than normal three-week push.

If you’re reading this, a fundraising pitch at the bottom of an article, you must find our team’s reporting valuable and we hope you’ll consider supporting it with a donation of any amount right now if you can.

It’s really that simple. But if you’d like to read a bit more, our membership lead, Brian Hiatt, has a post for you highlighting some of our newsroom's impressive, impactful work of late—including two big investigations in just one day and covering voting rights the way it needs to be done—that we hope you'll agree is worth supporting.

payment methods

ONE MORE QUICK THING:

Or at least we hope. It’s fall fundraising time, and we’re trying to raise $250,000 to help fund Mother Jones’ journalism during a shorter than normal three-week push.

If you’re reading this, a fundraising pitch at the bottom of an article, you must find our team’s reporting valuable and we hope you’ll consider supporting it with a donation of any amount right now if you can.

It’s really that simple. But if you’d like to read a bit more, our membership lead, Brian Hiatt, has a post for you highlighting some of our newsroom's impressive, impactful work of late—including two big investigations in just one day and covering voting rights the way it needs to be done—that we hope you’ll agree is worth supporting.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate