|
| |
THE TERROR WITHIN - Britain's new catch-all terror laws are crafting a police state |
| |
A new language for declarations on terrorism has been created by the government which means that in future extremists will be referred to as pursuing “anti-Islamic activity”. Home Secretary Jacqui Smith said that extremists were behaving contrary to their faith, rather than acting in the name of Islam and Security officials believe that directly linking terrorism to Islam is inflammatory, and risks alienating mainstream Muslim opinion.
The Home Secretary’s first major speech on radicalization last month, repeatedly used the phrase “anti-Islamic”, and in one passage she said: “As so many Muslims in the UK and across the world have pointed out, there is nothing Islamic about the wish to terrorize, nothing Islamic about plotting murder, pain and grief.” Indeed, if anything, these actions are anti Islamic’. Another section referred to enlisting the Muslim community against “anti-Islamic activity” and her words were chosen to reflect new Government strategy on labelling the terrorists and their recruiting agents. 'No more ‘War on terror’
This pattern follows a decision taken last year to stop using the phrase “war on terror”, first adopted by George Bush after Officials were concerned it could act as a recruiting tool for Al
|
|
|
|
|
Qaeda, which is determined to manufacture a battle between the values of Islam and the West. The new strategy emerging across Government is to portray terrorists as nothing more than cold-blooded murderers who are not fighting for any religious cause, and Al Qaeda inspired terrorism is instead being described by key figures as “more like a death cult”.
Whitehall sources have made it clear that the “war on terror” and “Islamic extremism” will not be used again by people at the top of Government or those involved in counterterrorism strategy. Sir Ken Macdonald, the Director of Public Prosecutions, has also said phrases which liken London to a “battlefield” will no longer be used. Miss Smith said extremists who use the internet to radicalize young children would be pursued in the same way as paedophiles. This month she will meet members of the online industry to decide how to crack down on Al Qaeda inspired sites.
Illegal material will be tracked down and removed using tactics already deployed against online paedophiles. Those guilty of grooming youngsters for terrorism could face prosecution under incitement laws. Miss Smith said: “If we are ready and willing to take action to stop the grooming of vulnerable young people on social networking sites, then I believe we should also take action against those who groom vulnerable people for the purposes of violent extremism.” Her plans also include a new unit to sift through intelligence gathered by police and security agents, which will be told to “identify, analyse and assess not just the inner circle of extremist groups, but those at risk of falling under their influence”.
Young people found to be falling under the spell of potential terrorists will be targeted for help by community leaders and the authorities. Outdoor activity centres and sports facilities will be sent guidance to stop them being used as meeting places by fanatics after the July 7 bombers were photographed attending a white water rafting centre in Wales.Mosques will be helped to root out extremism, with imams encouraged to learn English. Efforts will be made to improve the access of women to mosques and their management committees. There will be new advice for universities on how to deal with extremism on campus, and a crackdown on extremist material in libraries and galleries. In addition a forum of headteachers will be set up to advise on what more can be done to protect children and build bridges between communities.
Youngsters will be taught about all faiths in schools, and £2million will be spent “twinning” schools of different faiths. Funding will be boosted to allow more youngsters to carry out volunteer work overseas and the Government also wants to hold more “roadshows” of
mainstream Islamic scholarship around the country. Counter –terrorist Laws Miss Smith said: “Counter-terrorist policing is not just about the sharp end - the disruption of those who seek to attack us - crucial though that is.”It must also be about stopping people becoming or supporting terrorists. We can’t, after all, simply arrest our way out of this problem.” The changes will have a dramatic
impact on the current anti terrorism legislation and include the following changes:
• Proposed changed in terror laws allow the police to detain suspects without trial for 42 days
• Allows lifelong tracking after release of anyone sentenced to more than fi ve years for a terrorism offence
• Foreign nationals facing expulsion for suspected terrorist offences can be denied access to the information indicting them
• Access to information deemed useful to terrorists is reason enough for prosecution |
|
| |
 |
Sabeel Ahmed brother of the Glasgow bomber had to plead guilty to get out of jail after one year |
|
|
Police State Fears - If we are ready and willing to take action to stop the grooming of vulnerable young people on social networking sites, then I believe we should also take action against those who groom vulnerable people for the purposes of violent extremism
However, the government’s radical plans have lead to fears that they are crafting a police state, a year after the Glasgow Jeep Bombing and following the conviction of Sabeel Ahmad
a brother of one of the bombers, who maintained his innocence for almost a year. Sabeel was arrested on the day of the bombing although there never was never any evidence that he had advance knowledge of it; his crime was that he opened an e-mail from his brother Kafeel (who rammed the jeep into the terminal building at Glasgow, killing only himself) well after the incident, and failed to inform the police about the e-mail he had received Sabeel Ahmed brother of the Glasgow bomber had to plead guilty to get out of jail after one year hours later.
|
|
|
Apparently, Sabeel was forced to plead guilty in order to avoid a prison sentence. Therefore the new British law on terror is now redefi ning guilt with the Terrorism Act 2000 getting even tougher. The government proposals will add yet more powers to the Terrorism Act, including extension of detention without trial to 42 days from 28, already by far the highest in Europe, and lifelong tracking after release of anyone sentenced to more than fi ve years for a terrorism offence.
Foreign nationals facing expulsion for suspected terrorist offences may now be denied access to some of the information brought against them and it appears that Muslims of Indian or Pakistani origin have been hit hard by these ever-toughening laws. |
|
| |
 |
Dhiren Bardot sentenced to 40 years in jail |
|
|
Dhiren Barot, originally a Hindu from a Kenyan Indian family who converted to Islam, was sentenced two years ago to 40 years in jail for planning, as the prosecution said, a “memorable black day”. He would plant radioactive “dirty bombs”, blow up the World Bank and International Monetary Fund buildings in Washington, the New York Stock Exchange, the Prudential buildings in nearby New Jersey, plant bombs under the Thames in London so to divert the water into London Underground tunnels, a gas attack on the Heathrow Express into central London, spectacular attacks through hijacked petrol tankers, and aircraft, these days a terrorist favourite.
Except that Barot did not have the means to do any of this—not even the prosecution or judge who declared him guilty—said he was capable. Infact he was nowhere close to acquiring the means to carry out even one of these attacks. Whilst Barot’s horrifi c beliefs |
|
|
were not in doubt as demonstrated by his writings entitled The Army of Madinah in Kashmir, packed with fantasies about killing Indian soldiers. Barot also wrote his 39-page “black day” fantasy apparently for the benefi t of Al Qaeda supporters which Pakistani Security
Services, the ISI found it on his laptop and handed it over to the British police to show willing in the war on terror. The Court of Appeal even assumed Barot had “viable” means to carry out these attacks and though the court acceptedthat he had not done or even tried anything, and that there was no certainty he would have succeeded, it only reduced his sentence to 30 years from 40 years. The new changes look set to take the law further in effectively punish free thought and information.
Rizwaan Sabir, a Pakistani researcher and a fellow researcher at Nottingham University, were arrested recently because they had downloaded material on Al Qaeda as part of his research on Islamic terrorism. They were detained six days, and their houses raided. Last year, four students from Bradford University and a schoolboy, were jailed for possessing a US military document on explosives, but were freed earlier this year after Law Lords ruled that the Terrorism Act “must be interpreted in a way that requires a direct connection between the object possessed and the act of terrorism”.
Several of the additions to the Terrorism Act have been strongly opposed by MPs and human rights groups. One of the most controversial changes was the statutes relating to access to information that might be useful to terrorists, and the offence of encouragement to terrorism which was opposed at the time because it was felt it was far too broad, and would have a chilling effect on free speech. |
|
| |
Orwellian World
* Proposed changed in terror laws allow the police to detain suspects without trial for 42 days * Allows lifelong tracking after release of anyone sentenced to more than five years for a terrorism offence
* Foreign nationals facing expulsion for suspected terrorist offences can be denied access to the information indicting them
* Access to information deemed useful to terrorists is reason enough for prosecution |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
Human rights and wrongs
Human Rights Campaigner Judith Sunderland expressed concern commenting. “One of the results is this kind of prosecution where you have people who may be looking at information for legitimate academic reasons who then are subject to prosecution because that information could be determined as useful to terrorists. These are very dangerous developments, really.” The Government has had to deal with diplomatic scrutiny as a result of its laws after the British Justice Minister Michael Wills was questioned by representatives of 38 countries from UN Human Rights Council in April over Britain’s terror laws. |
|
|
States like Syria and Algeria, not known for their human rights record, criticised Wills for the denial of human rights that Britain’s new terror laws imply. The UN Human Rights Committee had previously been critical of Algeria for allowing 12-day detentions without charge, but many commentators find it ironic that Britain will introduce more draconian laws than even these countries. |
|
|
| |
|
