United States and England, Safe-Havens for the Terrorists?
by Adnan Gill
As hard as it may seem, but the truth is the so-called leaders waging war against the menace of terrorism are guilty of providing safe-Havens for the terrorists. Yes, it is true, in this day and age, the United States and England are indeed harboring and nurturing some of the worlds most dangerous and vicious terrorists. It is such a shame that the government's of these countries not only provide safety and comfort to these terrorists, but in many cases they even reward them with their citizenship along with public welfare benefits. You got it right; the terrorists are harbored and comforted at taxpayers' hard-earned money.
In a prime example of hypocrisy and an instance of violation of international laws, in February 2001, one of the worst terrorist the world has ever known, a man credited with more acts of terrorism than Osama bin Laden, a man solely responsible for the massacre of thousands of Pakistani citizens was granted British citizenship with full civil, constitutional rights and privileges available to all British citizens. His name is Altaf Hussain. By granting citizenship to him, the British government deliberately violated international laws, like the UN Security Council's (UNSC) Resolution 1189 (section 5) and still stands in violation of, among many, UNSC Resolution 1368.
By the late 1990’s, there were over 260 criminal cases, many involving acts of terrorism, pending/decided in Pakistan against Altaf Hussain. The Daily Telegraph reported, "When [the news media] asked why Mr Hussain was not deported to Pakistan before he was granted citizenship, a British diplomat [casually] said: ‘He has not committed a crime on British soil.’" In other words, one man's terrorist is another man's hero; but in this case the terrorist was rewarded with the British citizenship. As observed by the British news media, Altaf Hussain is still allowed by the British government to micromanage MQM from UK.
A taxi driver turned politician, in 1984; he became the leader of a political party, called Muttahida Quami Movement (MQM; previously also known as Muhajir Quami Movement). Based on racial lines, his party established no-go-areas and also opened up a number of torture cells around the city for those who were perceived to be political threats to the party. MQM is frequently cited for their involvement in terrorist and mafia activities, especially within the city of Karachi. It is widely believed, that the money made through carjackings, land grabbing, kidnappings, drug running, extortion (Bhatta), etc., enabled MQM to make remarkable gains in successive elections.
In another instance of how the British government protects and nurtures terrorists and mass murderers, Augusto Pinochet, ex-president of Chile and a wanted man for the murders of 3,000 dissidents and leftists, and for the torture of another 30,000 was first arrested and then was released by the then British Home Secretary Jack Straw without facing trial. The message was, unless British interests are harmed, all sort of fascists and terrorists can seek a safe-heaven in England.
Similarly, on the other side of Atlantic, the other self-proclaimed leader of war-against-terrorism has been busy protecting and harboring terrorists as well.
In 2006, a U.S Federal Court of Appeals set a notorious Cuban terrorist free. A Cuban terrorist, Luis Posada has boasted of helping set off deadly bombs in Havana hotels and masterminding a 1976 bombing of a Cuban airplane that killed 73 people. Declassified FBI and CIA documents corroborated Posada’s boasts. In a May 18, 2007, the Los Angeles Times editorial which honed on the hypocrisy of the Bush administration, it said, "With a misguided decision upholding bail for Cuban-born terrorist Luis Posada Carriles, the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans has done more than free a frail old man facing unremarkable immigration charges. It has exposed Washington to legitimate charges of hypocrisy in the war on terror." The editorial then equated Posada with the convicted terrorist Zacarias Moussaoui. It stated, "In other words, Posada is the Zacarias Moussaoui of Havana and Caracas. Moussaoui is serving a life sentence without parole in a federal prison in Colorado for conspiracy in the 9/11 attacks; Posada is free to live in Miami."
Then there are international criminals and terrorists like Charles Taylor. Taylor seized power in Liberia, and is indicted by the United Nation's Special Court with a 654-count indictment for war crimes and crimes against humanity committed during the conflict in Sierra Leone. These individuals are supported by the American political heavyweights and leaders of a very strong televangelist-Christians lobby like Pat Robertson. Robertson repeatedly supported Charles Taylor in various episodes of his TV program ‘700 Club’.
On June 2, 1999, a ‘The Virginian-Pilot’ article reported that Charles Taylor had extensive business dealings with televangelist Pat Robertson. The article alleged that Taylor gave Robertson the rights to mine for diamonds in Liberia. These diamonds are also known as blood-diamonds which the American government has now prohibited its imports. In an investigation conducted by the police against Robertson, it had been alleged that Robertson used his ‘Operation Blessing’ planes to haul diamond-mining equipment to his mines in Liberia. But for some unexplained and mysterious reasons, the Attorney General of Virginia Mark Earley blocked any potential prosecution against Robertson. Clearly, Pat Robertson, a racist and a bigot, who doesn't mind lining his pockets with the stolen money from his ministry and the blood-diamonds. This is the man who blames “Islam for teaching violence,” but is fine with violence as long as he can fatten up his personal bank accounts with the blood-money.
The United States and England (the self-proclaimed leaders in the war-against-terrorism), either believe that they are the only authorities that can designate ”terrorists”, or they believe that the rest of the world is too stupid or too blind to see through their hypocrisy. Meanwhile, they continue to boldly provide safe-havens to some of the most notorious terrorists. Either way, shame on them!
Three weeks after 9/11, Afghanistan was invaded and occupied by the so-called leaders of war-against-terrorism, because she was providing safe-havens for the terrorists. One of the reasons given for the invasion and occupation of Iraq was its contacts with the terrorists. Libya was bombed and heavily embargoed for decades, because it refused to hand over the men involved in PanAm bombing. Naturally, one has to wonder, can anyone dare to invade and occupy the United States and England for providing safe-havens for the terrorists?
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home