They had the court hearing, or are still having the court hearing, it isn't clear, for Aafia Siddiqui today in Manhattan on her fitness to stand trial. She was ordered into the courtroom, and apparently had a series of "outbursts", meaning she spoke to the court and to the spectators during periods when she was supposed to be quiet (I'm not defending that, but the articles make it sound as if she was screaming or something, and she apparently wasn't, but wouldn't shut up at times).

She contended (in the 'outbursts') that she wasn't psychotic, that she didn't hate America, that she didn't shoot anybody, that she was for peace, and that she was "injured". She contended she hadn't shown up for other court appearances because she didn't like being cuffed or stripped. She wore her scarf burqa style over her face.

There are no fewer than 5 psychiatrists testifying about her sanity, 3 for the prosecution and 2 for the defense. There are contentions that she talked freely after her arrest with FBI agents before she was shot, and on the plane when she was being rendered to Brooklyn (there was no court hearing in Afghanistan). There are contentions that she and her husband met several times. There are lots of contentions about hallucinations and apparently the "malingering" allegation stems from her not having all the physical symptoms of depression, and having a flat affect when she talked about her own death.

I don't currently know what to make of it. I don't see how she could have been interviewed extensively by the FBI before she was shot, since she was in custody of the Ghazni Police, the Governor of Ghazni, and then the Afghan National Police up until that time, and the FBI had just arrived and didn't know she was there (according to their affidavit) when the shooting was supposed to have taken place.

Something stinks. Possibly on both sides, but I'm still leaning against the U.S. official story on this one. And Stuart Grassian says symptoms of extreme isolation damage are unique, not some textbook depression. And the guy alleging malingering has got $447,000 in funding from the FBI over the last 8 years. And his recent specialty is the 'mind of the terrorist' and how to keep terrorists from recruiting in American jails. And all that. No connection to SERE, thank god.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iTN4w3kCOjtCSOP0WvpNLHU9EP0wD9993R2O1

Are we supposed to support the Uighers for rioting -- burning buildings and vehicles and stabbing people in the street -- and training at terrorist camps because (as an article linked to the companion piece puts it) "they are training for homeland independence"?

What were those guys in Pakistan and Afghanistan training in, anyway? Drafting a Constitution? Lobbying? Techniques of peaceful protest? Grass-roots organizing?

The "training" that comes out of those camps is more like assassination, bombings of public buildings, markets and cafes, throwing acid in women's faces for various religious reasons, and using human shields. But it's not okay to dislike that kind of indiscriminate violence because it's against a repressive government, and in fact to dislike it shows that Americans hate Muslims? Wait, what? If we hate them so much shouldn't we have sent them back to China? How'd we screw that one up?

Never mind. I guess I'll just go off and join one of those "roving gangs terrorizing Muslims" that, in one of his prescient earlier screeds, Greenwald assured us are even now roaming American streets with impunity.

Why don't we see Jews running through the streets murdering people when they are just as justified if not more so?

Because Israel often blocks cameras and reporters from going to the places where Jews are running through the streets murdering people.

Who on God's green Earth would ever believe that they are justified to run through the streets murdering people?

-----

China is an empire. That is why it feels it needs to keep such a stranglehold on disparate regions of non-Chinese peoples, such as Tibet and Xinjiang. Stability is better than instability; peace is better than war.

I don't know much about the history of Xinjiang, but I do know that there have been riots and seperatist movements in Xinjiang for the past several decades. If this one becomes a major issue in the news media, then I know that the CIA is behind it - because it was never a big deal before. So obviously, there is now an agenda. The breakup of China? Fomenting instability in China? Why not? They are stronger than us, smarter than us; they are growing, we are shrinking, they are getting stronger, we are getting weaker. Now is the perfect time to try to break up China, or at least give them major headaches.

We tried it with Russia via Georgia - and we failed miserably. I am sure the Chinese studied that little maneuver of ours. As anybody who has matriculated with Chinese students knows, these people are smart, they are strong, and they have 5,000 years of history to learn from. A little CIA-backed social unrest in a Western province, orchestrated by a couple of snot-nosed punks from Harvard or Georgetown, is not going to bear much fruit.

What part of what you said is inconsistent with what I said, that the Christians in the U.S. care only when violence in Sudan is perpetrated against Christians there?

China is also there for the oil, and the Sudanese find it convenient to clear the area near their claims. China has been documented giving the government weapons.

The ICC prosecutor agrees with you about genocide in Darfur. But he did find evidence worth prosecuting of crimes against humanity. Do you think he's interested in oil? Pop quiz. What's there in Rwanda/Congo that isn't oil, and funds and causes big time wars? I don't see how you decide I didn't care about Rwanda.

I respect your expertise, but you make too many assumptions about me, so that pretty much negates my thinking that you rely on expertise for your opinions.