How hawala money is used to fund terror Vicky Nanjappa in Bengaluru

March 06, 2009 15:41 IST

The Financial Intelligence Unit last month marked 200 transactions in India -- running into Rs 2,000 crore -- as terror-financed. Now, it has commenced its probe to trace the origin of the funds.

It is a known fact that terrorist outfits use counterfeit notes to finance terror operations. This is just one of the means adopted by terror outfits and Pakistan's Inter Services Intelligence to raise Rs 1,800 crore a year to finance terror. However, in the case being probed by the FIU, there is a considerable amount of money deposited in the banks, meaning they are not counterfeit.

The money which is pumped into terror operations is generated through various sources: smuggling of opium, real estate, fake notes and extortion bids.

Interestingly, the main source of revenue remains the ISI. A study conducted on terror financing indicates that the Pakistan government allocates money officially to the Secret Service Funds. This amount is given for collection of intelligence, spy services and secret operations. However a large part of these funds are diverted for terror related operations by the ISI.

Fugitive gangster Dawood Ibrahim [Images], too, has a very important role to play in financing terror. Intelligence Bureau officials say that money that is deposited in banks is generated through hawala transactions and Dawood is one of the main sources of such transactions.

Dawood, according to an official, was in charge of routing in funds for terrorist activities carried out by Students Islamic Movement of India.

Dawood's main source to pump in these funds was an aeronautical engineer who currently is holed up in Saudi Arabia. Dawood with the help of this man, called as Basheer, had set up a 'Muslim Defence Fund' for such transactions.

The big question is how these outfits managed to stash these funds in Indian banks. The confession of Ashfaq Ahmed, a Lashkar-e-Tayiba [Images] operative, throws more light on the same.

He states that his bosses in Pakistan transact money through people settled in Riyadh. He says that most of the funds are transferred to India and are picked up by a hawala transactor. Investigating agencies say that the main places where funds land up are Chandini Chowk in Delhi [Images] and several parts of Mumbai [Images].

The hawala transactor in turn converts the money and then deposits it in the bank. Terror outfits largely rely on fruit vendors, businessmen dealing with electronic goods and those dealing with foreign exchange to conduct hawala transactions.

Once orders to carry out a terror strike is given, the person who has deposited the money is given orders to withdraw it.

Police sources say that records show that hawala transactors have a code name for cirriencies that the use regularly. The US dollar is known as hara, the UK pound as popleen, Dutch Gliders as God, Deutsche Marks as DM and the Franc as FF.

A bank official in Bengaluru [Images] says that the RBI has issued guidelines to tackle the menace of fake currency. However, it is very difficult to keep a tab on hawala money.

"We cannot ask the customer the source of the money and neither do we have the infrastructure or expertise to track the source of the money. It is more of a police job and it is they who have to keep a tab on the money that is being transacted through hawala operators," he says.

Indian Secularism versus Pakistani Islam

No love lost: By Vikram Sood

5 Mar 2009, 0000 hrs IST

Source: timesofindia

Over the years Pakistan has come to believe that the world is beholden to it because it exists. This notion of indispensability allows those in power in that country to be wild, delinquent and dangerous.

Like the spoilt brat of a rich and doting parent, Pakistan either becomes petulant when it is not granted what it unjustifiably demands or becomes belligerent when it is granted that wish by its benefactor.

Today, Pakistan has a begging bowl economy; terrorism is its main export. Unending unrest in Balochistan and sectarian violence in Dera Ismail Khan and Dera Ghazi Khan, coupled with a creaking law and order and judicial systems, evoke little confidence in that country.

There are many in India who are ready to give Pakistan another chance forever. They say Pakistanis are like us but the poor souls are stuck with rotten governments and they need our help to get them out of their predicament.

It is incredibly naive of us to build policies for our future and security on fond nostalgia, which is mostly one way. They teach their children mostly how to hate India with warped versions of history, even in their mainstream schools.

It is strange that we still keep telling Pakistanis that we are all alike and have a common culture and so on. The truth is that they do not want to be like us and, quite honestly, we have nothing in common with them. Not anymore.

First of all, our minority population is more Indian than the minorities there are Pakistani. And our majority too is different from the majority across the border. Pakistanis have never understood, therefore never accepted, the concept of accommodating minorities. Not that we do it perfectly but we do a fairly good job.

In Pakistan, you are either a Shia, Bohra or an Ismaili or an Ahmediya. Being a woman, a Baloch, a Pushtun, a Sindhi or a Mohajir or a Hindu hari is a curse.

Only a Sunni Punjabi is a true-blue Pakistani. Arguments with minorities are settled with a bullet. It is difficult for a Pakistani to understand that minorities can also have a say. Our cricket team symbolises our diversity. Pakistan does not have an equivalent of Bollywood and if it did, Hindus would never dominate the industry.

There are other fundamental differences. They deny history and even geography; we seek our roots in our civilisation. Extremists there cry jihad in the name of god.

We have room for all faiths at the Dargah in Ajmer Sharif, in Darbar Sahib (whose foundation stone was laid by Mian Mir) or San Thome. Fewer Pakistanis understand that it is easy or natural for an Indian to listen to Jafar Hussain Badayuni's rendering of Amir Khusro's `Bahut kathin hai dagar' or `Ek pita ekas ke hum baarek' by Bhai Maninder Singh and Bhai Jitender Singh or `Jai Madhav Madan Murari' by Jagjit Singh on any morning.

In Pakistan today, we see images of mullahs leading a march to medievalism. In India, we see the young and exuberant marching into the 21st century. We are still behind the rest of the advanced world but are determined to catch up. Across the border, they wallow in a sense of victimhood, and blame everyone else for their plight.

In Pakistan, the extremists believe that Islam and democracy are incompatible. Secularism does not exist in the mullah's vocabulary, or even in the minds of some self-proclaimed moderates like General Musharraf.

So what do we have in common with Pakistan that we yearn for? The answer is nothing. We are two different countries with two different kinds of people on two different trajectories and we here should be happy with that.

Pakistan will strike deals with al-Qaeda, will encourage Lashkar-e-Taiba to carry out attacks on India and will appease the Taliban. It would seem that they have a death wish. It would be prudent for us to take measures now in case Pakistan's wish is granted.

The writer is a former secretary, Research and Analysis Wing.

---

Andrew Buncombe: Well-trained, motivated and on the rise. But who are these militants?

Source: The independent

The images are nothing short of terrifying. A dozen well-trained, well-armed men fanning out and taking up their positions with consummate ease and expertise. Nothing could be more different than the grainy CCTV footage of a single truck lurching up to the gate of a five-star hotel and its driver arguing with the security guards and, five minutes later, a massive bomb exploding.

Related articles

• Suspicions grow that attack was 'inside job'
• Chris Broad: 'There were no security forces to be seen. They had clearly left us there to be sitting ducks...'
• Patrick Cockburn: My day with the terror 'charity' working 15 miles from Lahore
• Everyone is at risk now, says Morris

Last night, as Pakistani police continued what increasingly seemed a hapless hunt for the perpetrators of the Lahore attack, a consensus was gathering that the ambush represented the emergence of a new and distressing terror threat for South Asia.

It is not that militant attacks are anything new for Pakistan. Since the summer of 2007, the country has been beset by about 120 suicide bomb attacks on police and civilian targets. But almost without exception, they have been largely crude, hit-or-miss strikes that depended on one or two attackers delivering a truck or car bomb. Tuesday's highly-mobile, commando-style militants armed with grenade launchers and automatic weapons and who slipped away when they realised their objective was not obtainable, appeared anything but crude.

"These were definitely different tactics. They were like commandos and they were very clearly not on a suicide mission," said Ayesha Siddiqa, an Islamabad-based analyst and author. "They had a particular intention – to either kidnap or attack the Sri Lankan team – but when they were not able to do that they fled and have not been seen."

Many have likened the Lahore attacks to those in Mumbai last November when a similar number of well-trained, well-armed militants held off Indian counter-terrorism commandos for more than 60 hours. Those attacks were blamed by India and others on the Pakistan-based group Lashkar-e-Toiba (LeT). It is too early to say whether the LeT was responsible for the Lahore attack and experts point out that, in its 20-year existence, the LeT has never attacked a target inside Pakistan. But clearly something very serious is happening in Pakistan; someone, somewhere is training groups of well-equipped, highly motivated militants who have the wherewithal and skills to challenge even the best of the region's counter-terrorism forces. It raises all manner of questions; where are they being trained, who is supplying them with arms, who is supplying them with intelligence, why are the intelligence agencies such as Pakistan's notorious ISI not aware of this group? More sinisterly, many will ask, are elements in the ISI linked to these militants.

Diving into the alphabet soup of potential suspects for Tuesday's attack may be a futile task. Bahukutumbi Raman, an Indian security analyst and former intelligence official, said he believed a number of Pakistan-based militant groups had the potential to carry out that style of attack. They include the Harkat-ul-Mujahideen (HUM), the Jaish-e-Mohammad (JEM), an offshoot of the HUM, the Lashkar-e-Jhangvi (LEJ), an anti-Shia organisation, and the Harkat-ul-Jihad-al-Islami (HUJI).

Writing on his website, he adds: "Al-Qa'ida and the [Pakistan Taliban] have carried out a number of suicide bombings through individual suicide bombers and vehicle-borne bombers in many towns including Lahore but they have not so far carried out a frontal urban ambush ... Since its formation in 1989, [the LeT] has never carried out any act of terrorism in Pakistani territory, against Pakistani or foreign nationals. All its acts of terrorism have been either in Indian or Afghan territory."

Mr Raman says the HUM once had operational ties with the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) the Sri Lankan rebel group.

The incident has also forced a rethink of what constitutes a target. Until this point, sportsmen and woman were believed to be largely insulated from the region's extremism. But if cricketers are now considered fair game, it means, in effect, that no one is safe.

Asked how Pakistan can defend itself against this new threat, Talat Masood, a former Pakistani general, said: "You have to have a lot of good intelligence, the support of your people and a better police. You also have to have good governance, rather than growing opposition to everything that is happening."

2 blasts strike Myanmar's biggest city

source: Associated press
March 3rd 2009

YANGON, Myanmar (AP) — Two explosions shook parks near busy thoroughfares in military-ruled Myanmar's largest city Tuesday night. An official said there were no casualties although onlookers saw one man being led to an ambulance.

The official said it was not immediately clear what caused the blasts in Yangon. He spoke on condition of anonymity because he is not authorized to release information.

Security personnel rushed to the sites of both blasts and blocked off one road, while soldiers and police stopped and searched vehicles along another main thoroughfare that passes by the sites of both explosions.

The was no immediate comment from the ruling junta — standard practice in the tightly controlled nation where almost all government comment is released through state-run media.

Witnesses said the first blast took place at about 9:40 p.m. at a small park in western Yangon near Myeinigone junction, a busy area with a bus terminal.

The explosion could be heard several blocks away and witnesses saw smoke rising from the scene. Police and soldiers arrived with bomb-sniffing dogs, and onlookers saw a man being walked to an ambulance.

The official said no one was injured.

The witnesses said the second blast, shortly after 11 p.m., occurred by a bus stop next to another park at Kamayut junction, another busy thoroughfare. Several truckloads of solders were quickly deployed to the area.

Terrorism is rare but not unknown in Myanmar, which has been under near-continuous military rule since 1962. Several small bombings occurred in Yangon last year, injuring about a dozen people.

The government usually blames bombings on its political opponents or ethnic rebel groups seeking autonomy. The groups deny carrying out such activities.

The deadliest such attack in recent years took place May 7, 2005, when three bombs went off almost simultaneously at two upscale supermarkets and a convention center in Yangon, killing about two dozen people and injuring more than 160 others. The perpetrators remain unknown.

In recent years, bomb explosions have also been reported in other parts of the country, notably at transport terminals and on buses, the most-used form of transportation.

Copyright © 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

Police left us like sitting ducks, says referee

• David Hopps and Saeed Shah in Lahore
• The Guardian, Thursday 5 March 2009
• Article history

Chris Broad, the ex-England batsman turned match referee who escaped injury in Tuesday's attack on the Sri Lankan cricketers, castigated Pakistan yesterday for not providing the promised "presidential-style security" and accused the security services of fleeing the scene and leaving the visitors as "sitting ducks".

As Pakistani police began investigating whether the gunmen were planning to take the whole squad hostage, Broad arrived at Manchester airport with scathing remarks about the way Pakistani police had handled the attack.

"After the incident there was not a sign of a policeman anywhere," said Broad. "They had clearly gone, left the scene and left us to be sitting ducks. I am extremely angry that we were promised high-level security and in our hour of need that security vanished and we were left open to anything that the terrorists wanted.

"Questions need to be asked of Pakistan security. At every junction there are police with handguns controlling traffic, so how did the terrorists come to the roundabout and these guys do nothing about it?"

Sri Lanka's team captain, Mahela Jayawardene, appeared to side with Broad, saying that the gunmen fought a one-sided battle. "They were not under pressure ... nobody was firing at them," he said.

But Pakistani officials were aghast at the suggestion. Ijaz Butt, the Pakistan cricket board chief, said: "How can Chris Broad say this when six policemen were killed?"

The assailants were carrying enough arms, ammunition, food and medical supplies to hold out for a prolonged period, perhaps several days. Pakistani police believe they could have been planning to board the bus and then put on the suicide vests that some were carrying, which would have enabled them to hold the entire team captive.

It may just have been the quick wits of the driver, who managed to speed the bus away, that averted a dramatic hostage situation. "From the inventory we have recovered, it seems they did not just mean to ambush the cavalcade," said Mushtaq Sukhera, the head of the investigations department of the Lahore police force, in an interview with the Guardian. "It all suggests that they had planned something else, otherwise why were they carrying all these things?"

Sukhera would not speculate on the hostage plan, but other police officers, speaking on condition of anonymity, said taking the bus seemed the most likely.

A huge quantity of firearms, grenades and other equipment was recovered from rucksacks dumped by the attackers, and from an abandoned car. There were also rocket-propelled grenade launchers, meaning that the terrorists were at least as heavily armed as the men who attacked Mumbai for three days in November.

The assailants carried significant quantities of food, bandages and antiseptic liquid. Each of the gunmen wore a bulky rucksack. Sukhera said each rucksack contained half a kilo of almonds, half a kilo of dried fruit, biscuits and water bottles, enough to keep them going for days.

Police yesterday made sweeping arrests, detaining some 50 people, though reports suggested none were the gunmen involved and they had only vague connections to the incident.

Sketches of four of the attackers were issued by the police. CCTV footage emerged showing how calmly the gunmen left the scene. The images showed the terrorists strolling through a nearby market after the attack, machine guns still in hand. The authorities for the first time admitted security lapses yesterday. The top official in the Lahore administration, Khusro Pervaiz, said the "security gaps are very vivid, very clear". He said the outer cordon of the Sri Lankan team's police escort was missing or did not respond. He also said the vehicles being used by the escort were inappropriate.

BAND OF FANATICS: THE ZAKIR NAIK SHOW

Source: weekly Blitz

- VOLUME - 4, ISSUE - 9, DHAKA, FEBRUARY 18, 2009

Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury

To a large section of the television viewers in Asia, Dr. Zakir Naik is a known name. This is mostly because of the prominent presence of his Islamist television channel named ´Peace TV´, which claims it to be the ´solution for humanity´. Dr. Naik operates this channel from Britain under the banner of an organization named Islamic Research Foundation and Peace TV runs with heavy donation and contribution by Muslims from a part of their Zakat, as well as donations from various Afro-Arab sources. According to Islamic dictionary, Zakat or ´alms for the poor´ is the Islamic principle of giving a percentage of one´s income to charity. It is often compared to the system of tithing and alms, but it serves principally as the welfare contribution to poor and deprived people in the Muslim lands, although others may have a rightful share. Zakat's similar-sounding, Arabic language analog is the Hebrew word Tzedakah, the charitable obligation in ancient Israel through to present day Judaism. It is the duty of the Islamic state not just to collect Zakat, but to distribute it fairly as well. Zakat is one of the Five Pillars of Islam.

Speakers in PeaceTV, who regularly appear in the programs are Dr. Zakir Naik [India], Ahmed Deedat [South Africa], Dr. Bilal Philips [Canada], Yassir Fazaga [USA], Abdur Rahim Green [UK], Hussein Ye [Malaysia], Dr. Jafar Idris [Sudan], Salem Al Amry [UAE], Dr. Israr Ahmed [Pakistan], Maulana Parekh [India] etc. But, only one person, who occupies almost 65 per cent of the program segments of this television channel, is Dr. Zakir Naik himself. And, surely, with the slogan of ´solution for humanity´, Dr. Zakir spreads religious hatred, poison, and regularly attacks Judaism, Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism and other religions in the world and cleverly tries to project Bible, Torah and other Holy Scriptures as fake or changed. Dr. Zakir Naik, being a fanatic Muslim not only tries to continue his own way of spreading religious hatred and extremism through his so-called lectures but even promotes the idea of jihad and Islamist aggressions. He has definitely found a very effective tool, when he was able to establish PeaceTV, and now continuing his hate speech agenda as well as his own publicity and promotional programs to project other members of his family as ´Islamic Scholars´ [which includes his minor son and daughter]. And millions of dollars donated mostly by Muslim from the portion of their Zakat fund is going right inside the pocket of Dr. Zakir Naik, and he leads a very lavish life while spending this fund not only for running his own PeaceTV but also for buying luxury and comfort for other members of his family.

By profession although Zakir Naik claims himself to be a medical practitioner, it is not clear as to why he left this noble profession thus entering the full time job of one of the most expensive Islamist lecturers in the world. The fact is, Dr. Zakir Naik is a failed medical practitioner, who found the excellent opportunity of memorizing only some selected verses of Koran and other Holy Books thus appearing to the people with his own interpretation of Islam and very tactfully injecting poison of religious hatred as well as jihadist notion.

Most interesting part of Dr. Zakir Naik is, he also considered to be the champion of his mockery and cheating people around the world, with hundreds of people listening to his lecture in ´Hinglish´ [English in Indian pronunciation] with fullest dedication. In reality, let it be noted that, only a small segment of Indian population are comfortable with English. Moreover, the huge crowd shown in Zakir´s lectures in India is mostly half educated clergies who surely do not understand what Zakir speaks of. If any of the programs will be carefully watched then it will become clear that the audience have no reaction at all on what he says, rather they just sit with semi open or even closed eyes in front of television cameras, thus giving chance to Dr. Zakir Naik to claim to be educating a huge crowd. Some critics even say that, most of these audiences are hired by Islamic Research Foundation with the objective of giving an impression mostly to the patrons of Dr. Zakir and his PeaceTV in the Middle East, that, Islam is really becoming increasingly powerful and prominent in a non-Muslim country like India.

According to some experts, while Al Qaida serves the armed segment of religious terror, Dr. Zakir Naik´s PeaceTV covers the media segment of the same agenda. For example, Dr. Zakir will first attract the attention of people towards his lectures by giving similarities between Islam and other religious beliefs, while at the next step, he comes up to prove all other religions to be fake and Holy Scriptures false through a number of programs like ´Crossfire´, ´Truth Revealed´ etc. Some even opine that, while Al Qaida´s existence is mostly in hiding, Zakir Naik is continuing his offensives openly, which is a much greater threat to global peace and harmony.

In one of the programs on PeaceTV, Dr. Zakir Naik said in Urdu, Jesus Christ never claimed himself to be a Christian. And according to Zakir, Jesus was also a Muslim. By saying this, Dr. Zakir wanted to convince the audience that, there is no divine religion except Islam in this world, since the ancient times.

Dr. Zakir Naik is gradually expanding his influence over a number of media bases in Europe, America and Asia. Recently in Glasgow [UK], a radio presentator named Rev. Mahboob Masih was sacked from a radio station named Awaz FM just because he his co-presenter Afzal Umeed were discussing the views of a prominent Muslim speaker, Zakir Naik, who the Rev Masih accuses of belittling the Christian faith on Peace TV, a digital channel.

Later, Rev. Masih lodged a complaint with Ofcom, the radio regulator, claiming that Awaz FM is in breach of the terms of its license. It alleges "discrimination against members of Asian Christian Community by [the] Muslim management of Awaz FM."

Commenting on Dr. Zakir Naik, an eminent Indian sociologist Imtiaz Ahmed said, "Brought up on the heavy dose of Saudi Arabia-backed Salafist-Wahabi Islam, Naik follows a supremacist ideology.”The Saudis think they have a divine right to convert Muslims across the world into a puritanical Salafist Islam. Naik is their public face,''

He said, "The exclusivist Wahabism is inimical to an inclusive, tolerant Islam practiced in India. I have heard him a couple of times on TV and am deeply disappointed.''

Dr. Zakir Naik, on a number of occasions, defended Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaida. His remark on Osama bin Laden had created quite a controversy some time back. "If Osama bin Laden is terrorizing America or the enemies of Islam, every Muslim should become a terrorist. I can't call Osama a terrorist because his involvement in the dastardly act of 9/11 is not proved,'' Naik had said, defending the most wanted man in the world.

Lahore 'Cricket' attack may mark a shift in Pakistan

Source: Asia Times

By Syed Saleem Shahzad, March 04, 2009.

KARACHI - Pakistan might recently have signed peace deals with militants in its tribal areas, including with vehement anti-establishment Pakistan Taliban leader Baitullah Mehsud, but militants on Tuesday staged a brazen attack in Lahore, the capital of Punjab province and the second-largest city in the country.

The attack by 12 heavily armed gunmen on a convoy escorted by police transporting Sri Lankan cricketers to a match against Pakistan has set off alarm bells in the capital Islamabad that militants are now taking their battle into major urban centres.

At least five people died and six of the cricketers were injured in a 25-minute battle in which militants wearing backpacks and carrying AK-47s, rockets and grenades fought police. The assailants then all fled. The Sri Lankan cricketers have called off their tour and are heading home immediately.

The attack bore some similarity to that of 10 well-armed gunmen, also with backpacks, who rampaged through Mumbai in India last November, killing 140 people. They were later found to have connections to the banned Pakistani group Lashkar-e-Taiba.

"This was a planned terrorist attack. They had heavy weapons," Salman Taseer, who heads the provincial government as governor of Punjab, was reported as saying. "These were the same methods and the same sort of people as hit Mumbai."

Numerous Pakistani analysts have been quick to point a finger at India's Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) for staging what they say is a tit-for-tat attack on Tuesday, although there is been no official announcement in this connection.

A press attache at the Sri Lankan Embassy in Islamabad thought it highly unlikely that the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam, who a waging a bloody separatist war in Sri Lanka, had anything to do with Tuesday's events.

Rather, judging by what was shown on Pakistani television, the attack is the hallmark of those that were waged by militants (many of them Punjabi) against Indian security forces in Indian-administered Kashmir up until a few years ago. They were trained by the Indian cell of Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI).

In 2005-06, these militants joined forces with the Pakistani Taliban and the Afghan resistance after Pakistan closed down their training camps in Pakistan-administered Kashmir, a move that changed the dynamics of the war theater in the region. Beside the Mumbai attack, Tuesday's assault was similar to the storming of the Serena Hotel in the Afghan capital of Kabul in January 2008 and the unsuccessful July 2008 attack on Afghan President Hamid Karzai in Kabul. In all of these incidents, the attackers abandoned their weapons and quickly melted into a thickly populated area of the city where, apparently, they were whisked away by waiting colleagues.

Retired Lieutenant General Hamid Nawaz, a former interim minister the Interior and a close aide of former president General Pervez Musharraf, commented to Asia Times Online, "This proves that striking peace deals [with militants] will not serve any purpose and there is a need to handle them with iron hands. I blame the government for negligence.

"Providing a single elite police commando bus was not enough. They should have been provided VIP [very important people] security like the state provides for governors and chief ministers. Traffic should have been blocked on their route," Nawaz said.

Former Pakistani cricketer Zaheer Abbas said, "I am not a politician to comment on who was behind it, but it has damaged Pakistani cricket very badly. I don't understand why anybody would target Sri Lankans because they don't have any role in the region. There might be some forces who want to damage the cause of Pakistan and Pakistani cricket."

Possible attackers

Pakistani analysts, including retired General Hamid Gul, who is a former head of the ISI, blame India's RAW.

However, there is no precedence for RAW having the capability to carry out such attacks in Pakistan. Its operations in Pakistan have been of two kinds, according to the records of Pakistani security agencies, documented in files and books narrated by their retired officials:

Small bomb blasts in urban centres.

The use of Indophile political parties such as the Awami League in 1970, the Pashtun sub-nationalist Awami National Party, the Baloch separatist group the Baloch Libration Army and the Muttehida Quami Movement.

However, these parties were always used in a limited political context. For creating a law-and-order situation in the country, RAW has always used bomb blasts and other small-level sabotage activities. It has never had the capacity, like the ISI had in India, to use armed groups to carry out guerrilla activities in Pakistan.

More pertinent is to view Tuesday's attack in the context of the peace deals in the Swat Valley and the tribal areas which have stopped the fighting between ethnic Pashtun-dominated militants and the Pakistani army.

Prior to the signing of the deals, the matter of the release of militants who did not belong to the Swat area was raised, that is, non-Pashtun militants. These included Maulana Abdul Aziz, who was apprehended while trying to flee the radical Lal Masjid (Red Mosque) in Islamabad in July 2007.

However, after deciding on the level of compensation packages for the families of militants killed or injured by the security forces and other matters related to Swat and the tribal areas, the matter of non-Pashtun militants was deferred and the peace agreements were signed.

In effect, non-Pashtun militants have been ignored and the attack in Lahore could be a bloody message to the government that the "Punjabi militants" have the capacity to cripple urban centres at any time and place of their choosing.

Syed Saleem Shahzad is Asia Times Online's Pakistan Bureau Chief. He can be reached at saleem_shahzad2002@yahoo.com

Srilankan Team attacked in Lahore

New Delhi: Unidentified gunmen opened fire on a bus carrying Sri Lankan cricket team as they were on their way to Gaddafi stadium in Lahore on Tuesday morning, Dawn news channel reported.

The channel showed footage of two gunmen opening fire using Kalashnikovs. At least 12 gunmen were involved in the attack.

According to the Pakistan Cricket Board seven players have been reported injured.

Many of them are seriously injured - Thilan Samaraweera, Kumar Sangakkara, Ajantha Mendis, Thilan Thushara, Tharanga Paranavithana and Chaminda Vaas.

Pacer Chaminda Vaas was carried off in a stretcher.

Five security personnel are reported dead, three more are seriously injured and have been rushed to the hospital.

The attackers - who came in a white car - lobbed two grenades at the van and the men then started firing at a police van which was providing security to the Lankan team.

The gunmen, reportedly surrounded the team van and opened fire indiscriminately. They reportedly continuously for two to three minutes.

Rocket launchers used in the attack as well and the Sri Lankan team bus has been completely destroyed. The incident happened at Liberty Chowk in Lahore.

The tour has been officially cancelled.

Britain and its Muslims How the government lost the plot

Feb 26th 2009
From The Economist print edition

A desperate search for a new policy towards Islam has yet to produce results

Guzelian

A WAR, a riot, a terrorist attack or a row over blasphemy: not long ago, Britain’s government knew exactly what to do when a crisis loomed in relations with the country’s Muslims. As recently as July 2005, after bombs in London killed 56 people, Tony Blair was confident that he could avoid a total breakdown of trust between Muslim Britons and their compatriots.

Using an old formula, the prime minister called in some Islamic worthies and suggested they form a task force on extremism. Then, hours before the worthies were due to reconvene and mull their response, Mr Blair breezily announced that a task-force of top Muslims had just been created. They moaned, but dutifully went to work.

That system of trade-offs, the equivalent of the “beer and sandwiches” once used to woo trade unionists, had some big drawbacks. It gave hardline Muslims—generally male, old and new to Britain—disproportionate sway. It also led to some dubious bargains; for example, Muslim resentment of British foreign policy was parried by, in part, huge generosity towards the cultural demands of some Muslims—such as the right to establish schools where the curriculum bears scant relation to the lessons other young Britons get.

But in its own odd terms, the old system “worked”. Messages could be relayed between the corridors of power and the angriest and poorest parts of the Muslim street; and Muslim leaders could be induced to expend personal and political capital urging their flock to co-operate with the police and provide useful information.

Now that system, and its unspoken compromises, lies in ruins. It was jettisoned in the autumn of 2006, when the government downgraded existing ties with the Muslim Council of Britain (in which movements close to the Muslim Brotherhood and the Islamists of Pakistan were strongly represented) and tried to find different interlocutors.

But attempts to define a new policy towards Islam in Britain have been floundering since then. The Muslim population is in many ways diverging still more from the mainstream. With its large, young families, it is also growing much faster (see chart): there are 2.4m Muslims today, according to the Labour Force Survey; the census of 2001, a rather different measure, put it at 1.6m. The government is under fire from the political centre-right for being too soft on radical or reactionary Muslim groups who stop just short of endorsing violence. It is also attacked from the left (Muslim or otherwise) for using the fight against terrorism as an excuse for a general assault on Muslims and their cultural rights.

Hazel Blears, the communities secretary, sought to clarify official thinking in a speech on February 25th, after a stream of reports that the government was about to launch an ideological war against illiberal or extremist ways of thinking, even if they were not directly associated with violence. The government, she said, would reserve the right to deal with people whose ideas were unpleasant through a “spectrum of engagement, carefully calibrated to deal with individual circumstances”. With groups that have “an equivocal attitude to core values such as democracy, freedom of speech or respect towards women” there might be “some scope for limited engagement”, the minister carefully added. But on certain forms of “absolutely unacceptable behaviour”—such as homophobia, forced marriage or female genital mutilation—the government would firmly enforce the law with no regard for a cultural “oversensitivity” that had gone too far.

Her speech suggests that a debate within the cabinet on which war to prioritise—the one over ideas and values or the one against terrorism—is unresolved. The government wants to keep its options open.

But the failure of current policies aimed at fostering moderate Islam can hardly be overstated. After spending lavishly on a strategy called Prevent that was supposed to empower moderates—at least £80m ($116m) will have been dished out on such efforts by 2011—the very word “prevent” has become discredited in the strongholds of British Islam, which include east London, Birmingham and a string of northern industrial towns. At the Muslim grass roots, there is a sense that any group or person who enjoys official favour is a stooge.

Many in the government, meanwhile, think their partners are not delivering value for money. The whole relationship has deteriorated since August 2006. After a foiled plot to blow up transatlantic flights, and amid huge ire over the war in Lebanon, a group of prominent Muslims, including two now in government, signed an open letter arguing that British foreign policy in general, and its softness towards Israel in particular, was an important factor behind a surge in extremist sentiment.

Tripping up

Nearly three years on, the government’s biggest problem is that it is struggling with two big questions at once. One is the set of problems described under the catch-all term of “cohesion”—narrowing the social, economic and cultural gap between Muslims (especially in some poor urban areas of northern Britain) and the rest of society. The second is countering the threat from groups preparing to commit violence in Britain or elsewhere in the name of Islam.

The government says the two problems are related: poor, frustrated and mainly self-segregated groups are more likely to produce terrorists. Muslims as a group lag behind other Britons in qualifications, employment, housing and income (see chart). But in fact the overlap between exclusion and extremism is messy. And attempts to fight terrorism through tougher policing, which can alienate whole communities, make boosting cohesion harder.

Among those who claim to speak for disadvantaged Muslims and articulate their grievances, there has been an outpouring of indignation over the government’s stated aim of “preventing violent extremism” by making Muslim communities more “resilient” and better at dealing with hotheads. The idea seems to stigmatise all Muslims, many complain, while the violent extremism of, for example, the white far right is ignored.

Another gripe is that the Prevent programme has poisoned relations between central government and the city councils through which the money is channelled. Some say councils are being strong-armed into carrying out “community” programmes that are really thinly disguised police and intelligence work.

In Birmingham the council’s loudest activist, Salma Yaqoob, complains that Prevent money goes only to those who avoid suggesting that British foreign policy helps to foment extremism, even though the link obviously exists. (Indeed, a government security minister, Lord West, admitted in January that to deny it was “clearly bollocks”.) Resentment of the gag was exacerbated by the recent Israeli assault on Gaza. Many Muslims followed it on Middle East-based media that presented an even gorier picture of Palestinian suffering than other British viewers saw.

The Gaza crisis also triggered a round of name-calling within the world of British Islam that has laid bare a rapid diminution of the middle ground on which emollient types hope to stand. Senior Muslims at the Quilliam Foundation, a “counter-terrorism think-tank” which has received nearly £1m in funding from the home and foreign offices, issued in January a denunciation of Israeli actions that was mocked as faint-hearted by more radical Muslims, while voices on the political right questioned whether the government’s “investment” in this body was paying off.

Torn between remaking the Muslim community—a task that turns out to be much harder than the designers of the Prevent strategy ever imagined—and simply fighting terrorism, the government, understandably, feels it can hardly be expected to abandon the latter. Probing and pre-empting attacks by Muslim extremists is now understood to occupy about 75% of the energy of the British security services, who claim to have had some success in reducing the number of terrorist plots that are stopped only at the last minute. Another less obvious factor in British thinking is strong American concern over the risk that a British-born Muslim could enter the United States and commit a terrorist spectacular there. A healthy slug of America’s anti-terrorism spending goes to forestall just such a possibility.

Meanwhile a string of high-profile court cases involving terrorist conspiracies has served to increase the emotional chasm between Muslim Britons and their compatriots. As an example of two worlds diverging, take reactions to the plight of Binyam Mohamed, an Ethiopian who sought asylum in Britain and was later incarcerated in Guantánamo Bay. He says he was tortured by his American captors, with help from the British secret services.

Mr Mohamed returned to Britain on February 23rd, to mixed reviews. For Muslims (and human-rights campaigners on the secular left) his saga is a tale of American brutality and British collusion. In the rambunctious popular press, however, he is portrayed as a nuisance whose presence in Britain will burden the taxpayer and waste the security services’ valuable time in surveillance.

A way forward

For all the problems besetting British Islam, however, there are plenty of individuals who exemplify at least part of the solution. Among them—at least until the recession makes it harder for strivers to climb out of poverty—are successful young professionals and entrepreneurs, often women, who have managed to fly high in business, medicine, accountancy or the media. “We have prevailed in a two-fronted struggle” against social conservatism and discrimination, says Saeeda Ahmed, the founder of a social-affairs consultancy in the north (to hear an interview with Miss Ahmed, see article).

But successful British Muslims as well as poor ones resent the fact that the rest of society often sees them mainly as potential extremists. Sarah Joseph, a convert to Islam who edits the glossy monthly Emel, says Muslims are fed up with being asked if they are against violence; they want people to know what they are for, such as social justice. The sad fact, in a country that has come to live in fear of terrorism, is that many Britons are indeed more interested in assessing Muslims’ potential for violence than in anything else about them.

Hawala money in India linked to terror funding: US

Source: Dailytimes

* State Dept report recommends New Delhi prioritise cooperation with international initiatives for increased transparency

Daily Times Monitor

LAHORE: ‘Hawala’ money in India is directly linked to terrorist financing, the US has warned, suggesting New Delhi should strengthen its anti-money laundering and counter terrorism-finance legislations.

Citing a US State Department report, the Times of India reported that Washington had also recommended New Delhi work towards becoming a full-fledged member of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), an inter-governmental body that develops policies to combat money laundering and terrorist financing. Noting the Indian parliament’s move to pass the Prevention of Money Laundering (Amendment) Bill, the report suggest India should make necessary legislative amendments to bring its anti-money laundering finance regime in conformity to FATF.

Prioritise: “Given the number of terrorist attacks in India and the fact that in India hawala is directly linked to terrorist financing, India should prioritise cooperation with international initiatives that provide increased transparency in alternative remittance systems,” said the report.

Released by Assistant US Secretary of State for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs David Johnson, the report quotes Reserve Bank of India estimates that remittances to India sent through legal, formal channels in 2007-2008 amounted to $42.6 billion. It cites Indian observers as saying funds transferred through hawala are equal to between 30 to 40 percent of the formal market.

The report noted that India’s strict foreign-exchange laws and transaction reporting requirements, combined with the banking industry’s due diligence policy, makes it difficult for criminals to use formal channels to launder money. However, large portions of illegal proceeds are often laundered through ‘hawala’, ‘hundi’, or other informal money transfer systems.

Listing out the steps New Delhi still needs to take, the report said India should become a party to the UN Conventions against Transnational Organised Crime and Corruption. “Also, India should pass the Foreign Contribution Regulation Bill for regulating non-governmental organisations, including charities,” it said. “India should devote more law enforcement and customs resources to curb abuses in the diamond trade. It should also consider the establishment of a Trade Transparency Unit that promotes trade transparency; in India, trade is the back door to underground financial systems,” the report said.

The hawala system can provide the same remittance service as a bank with little or no documentation, at lower rates and with faster delivery, while providing anonymity and security for its customers, the report said. It claimed that while most money laundering in India was aimed towards facilitating widespread tax avoidance, criminal activity contributes substantially

The 19th-century roots of terrorism

By Chuck Leddy Globe Correspondent / February 26, 2009
Source: The Boston Globe

Terrorist bombings of nightclubs, restaurants, and hotels are, unfortunately, the stuff of today's headline news. But the bombing of Paris's Café Terminus in 1894 was a new, stunning phenomenon made possible by a violent philosophy and the development of dynamite. Yale historian John Merriman does many things in "The Dynamite Club," his book about the bombing, and does them quite well, from explaining the intellectual and social underpinnings of anarchism to detailing the invention of dynamite to taking us inside the murky underworld of extremist Émile Henry, who built and then set off the 1894 bomb.

THE DYNAMITE CLUB: How a Bombing in Fin-de-Siècle Paris Ignited the Age of Modern Terror By John Merriman

Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 259 pp., illustrated, $26

"This book is motivated by a very simple question: Why did Émile Henry do what he did?" In seeking an answer, Merriman meticulously details the massive socioeconomic inequalities of 19th-century Paris, and the rest of Europe, which created alienation and resentment, especially among impoverished intellectuals such as Henry. Merriman shows us the dual worlds of Paris, the conspicuous consumption of the relatively few haves and the desperation, sickness, and want of the majority have-nots. Henry's radical father had been forced to flee France after the 1871 Paris Commune, and young Henry adopted an extreme anarchist philosophy that advocated violence to destroy the social and political order.

Unlike socialists, anarchists like Henry rejected "electoral politics because they saw it as a means of propping up the bourgeois state," writes Merriman. Acts of violence were needed to destroy the state, and as with today's Islamic terrorist groups, anarchism developed a cult of martyrdom whereby those who died destroying the enemy were celebrated as heroes. Merriman effectively explains anarchism's reverence for martyrs, showing how Henry was consumed by a need to avenge the death of other anarchists.

Henry performed his first act of terrorism in November 1892. He walked into the Paris headquarters of the Carmaux Mining Co. and placed a bomb, wrapped as a gift, at the front door. A suspicious employee contacted the police, who came and carefully carried the package to the nearest police station. "Two minutes later, the bomb exploded. Unimaginable horror followed," writes Merriman, detailing the gruesome deaths of five victims inside the station. Henry fled to London, satisfied with his handiwork.

Henry lived on the lam in London and Paris, in a global anarchist underworld rife with secrecy, violence, and the fear of police informants. Merriman writes about international police efforts to uncover anarchist plots around the world, especially in London: "As part of this effort, police agents from France, Italy, Russia, and other countries were dispatched to Britain, where they infiltrated anarchist groups," the author notes. Yet Henry remained on the loose, planning his next bombing.

On Feb. 12, 1894, Henry left a bomb in the crowded Café Terminus. Merriman describes the ensuing destruction: "The explosion left a sizable hole in the wooden floor and punctured the ceiling. Amid general panic, the screams and shouts of the wounded joined the smoke." Incredibly, only one person died inside the cafe, while 20 were injured. Henry was captured fleeing the scene. Under police interrogation, he proudly admitted both bombings.

Tried for murder, Henry defiantly justified his actions as payback for police repression against anarchism. On May 21, 1894, he was guillotined in front of a Paris crowd. In describing the fate of a single terrorist, Merriman has skillfully illustrated how social alienation fueled the rise of extremist ideas and acts. The lethal impulses that motivated Henry aren't so different, the author concludes, from the impulses that lead to terrorism today. This accessible account is historically eye-opening and psychologically insightful.

Chuck Leddy is a freelance writer who lives in Dorchester.

CHRONOLOGY OF MAJOR TERRORIST ATTACKS AGAINST U.S.

source: terrorism project

Also click here for significant terrorist incidents on US

September 11, 2001 - Terrorists hijack four U.S. commercial airliners taking off from various locations in the United States in a coordinated suicide attack. In separate attacks, two of the airliners crash into the twin towers of the World Trade Center in New York City, which catch fire and eventually collapse. A third airliner crashes into the Pentagon in Washington, DC, causing extensive damage. The fourth airliner, also believed to be heading towards Washington, DC, crashes outside Shanksville, PA., killing all 45 people on board. Casualty estimates from New York put the possible death toll close to 5,000, while as many as 200 people may have been lost at the Pentagon crash site.

Oct. 12, 2000 - A terrorist bomb damages the destroyer USS Cole in the port of Aden, Yemen, killing 17 sailors and injuring 39.

Aug. 7, 1998 - Terrorist bombs destroy the U.S. embassies in Nairobi, Kenya and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. In Nairobi, 12 Americans are among the 291 killed, and over 5,000 are wounded, including 6 Americans. In Dar es Salaam, one U.S. citizen is wounded among the 10 killed and 77 injured.

In response, on August 20 the United States attacked targets in Afghanistan and Sudan with over 75 cruise missiles fired from Navy ships in the Arabian and Red seas. About 60 Tomahawk cruise missiles were fired from warships in the Arabian Sea. Most struck six separate targets in a camp near Khost, Afghanistan. Simultaneously, about 20 cruise missiles were fired from U.S. ships in the Red Sea striking a factory in Khartoum, Sudan, which was suspected of producing components for making chemical weapons.

June 21, 1998 - Rocket-propelled grenades explode near the U.S. embassy in Beirut.

July 27, 1996 - A pipe bomb explodes during the Olympic games in Atlanta, killing one person and wounding 111.

June 25, 1996 - A bomb aboard a fuel truck explodes outside a U.S. air force installation in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia. 19 U.S. military personnel are killed in the Khubar Towers housing facility, and 515 are wounded, including 240 Americans.

Nov. 13, 1995 - A car-bomb in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia kills seven people, five of them American military and civilian advisers for National Guard training. The "Tigers of the Gulf," "Islamist Movement for Change," and "Fighting Advocates of God" claim responsibility.

April 19, 1995 - A car bomb destroys the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City, killing 168 people and wounding over 600.

February 1993 - A bomb in a van explodes in the underground parking garage in New York's World Trade Center, killing six people and wounding 1,042.

Dec. 21, 1988 - A bomb destroys Pan Am 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland. All 259 people aboard the Boeing 747 are killed including 189 Americans, as are 11 people on the ground.

As a result, two Libyan intelligence officers are charged with planting the bomb. They are eventually turned over by the Libyan government and tried. The trial, conducted in the Netherlands under Scottish law, begins in May 2000 and ends in February 2001. Abdelbaset Al Mohmed al-Megrahi is convicted and receives a life sentence. The other defendant, Al-Amin Khalifah Fhimah is acquitted.

April 1986 - An explosion damages a TWA flight as it prepares to land in Athens, Greece. Four people are killed when they are sucked out of the aircraft.

April 5, 1986 - A bomb destroys the LaBelle discotheque in West Berlin. The disco was known to be frequented by U.S. servicemen. The attack kills one American and one German woman and wounds 150, including 44 Americans

In response, on April 15 the United States retaliated in an operation dubbed "El Dorado Canyon." Approximately 100 aircraft were launched in direct support of the raid. It was an attack against military targets involving land-based bombers from Great Britain together with carrier-based air strikes from ships in the Gulf of Sidra.

On Nov. 13, 2001 a German court convicted four people for the bombing. Verena Chanaa, a German national, was found guilty of murder and sentenced to 14 years in prison for selecting the site of the attack and placing the bomb. Yassir Chraidi, a Palestinian working at the Libyan Embassy and suspected of being the main organizer of the attack, was convicted of multiple counts of attempted murder and sentenced to 14 years. Two other embassy employees, Musbah Abdulghasem Eter, a Libyan, and Ali Chanaa, a Lebanese-born German and Verena Chanaa's former husband, were both convicted of attempted murder and sentenced to 12 years. Libya has refused to extradite five other suspects sought by German police, including members of the Libyan secret service.

December 18, 1985 - Simultaneous suicide attacks are carried out against U.S. and Israeli check-in desks at Rome and Vienna international airports. 20 people are killed in the two attacks, including four terrorists.

November 24, 1985 - Hijackers aboard an Egyptair flight kill one American. Egyptian commandos later storm the aircraft on the isle of Malta, and 60 people are killed.

October 7, 1985 - Palestinian terrorists hijack the cruise liner Achille Lauro (in response to the Israeli attack on PLO headquarters in Tunisia) Leon Klinghoffer, an elderly, wheelchair-bound American, is killed and thrown overboard.

August 8, 1985 - A car bomb at a U.S. military base in Frankfurt, Germany kills two and injures 20. A U.S. soldier murdered for his identity papers is found a day after the explosion.

June 19, 1985 - In San Salvador, El Salvador, 13 people are killed in a machine gun attack at an outdoor café, including four U.S. Marines and two American businessmen.

June 14, 1985 - TWA flight 847 is hijacked over the Mediterranean, the start of a two-week hostage ordeal. The hijackers, linked to Hezbollah, demand the release of prisoners being held in Kuwait as well as the release of 700 Shiite Muslim prisoners being held in Israeli and Lebanese prisons. U.S. Navy diver Robert Dean Stethem is killed and 39 passengers are held hostage when the demands were not met. The passengers are eventually released in Damascus after being held in various locations in Beirut.

April 12, 1985 - A bomb explodes in a restaurant near a U.S. air base in Madrid, Spain, killing 18, all Spaniards, and wounding 82, including 15 Americans.

November 1984 - A bomb attack on the U.S. embassy in Bogota, Colombia kills a passer-by. The attack was preceded by death threats against U.S. officials by drug traffickers.

September 20, 1984 - A truck bomb explodes outside the U.S. Embassy annex in Aukar, northeast of Beirut. The ambassador is injured and 24 people killed, two of whom were U.S. military personnel.

March 16, 1984 - CIA Beirut station chief William Buckley is kidnaped by militant Islamic extremists in Lebanon. He is said to have died after prolonged torture. His body was found on December 27, 1991 in southern Beirut, nearly eight years after his abduction.

December 12, 1983 - Shiite extremists bombed the French and U.S. Embassies in Kuwait, killing 6 and injuring over 80 people. The suspects were thought to be members of Al Dawa , a group supported by Iran and known for operating against Saddam Hussein in Iraq.

October 23, 1983 - A suicide car bomb attack against the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut kills 241 servicemen. A simultaneous attack on a French base kills 58 paratroopers.

In response, President Ronald Reagan ordered the battleship USS New Jersey, stationed off the coast of Lebanon, to shell the hills near Beirut.

April 18, 1983 - A suicide car bombing against the U.S. embassy in Beirut kills 63, including 17 Americans.

November 4, 1979 - Fundamentalist Islamic students took 52 Americans hostage at the U.S. Embassy in Tehran, Iran.

In response, in April 1980, President Jimmy Carter authorized “Operation Eagle Claw,” a military mission to free the hostages. The mission involved eight USMC RH-53 helicopters, 12 airplanes and personnel who were to be transported from a carrier in the Pakistan Gulf to a point outside Tehran, where they were to spend the night and resume rescue operations the following morning. The operation involved refueling the helicopters at a spot in the Iranian desert dubbed "Desert One." The operation was aborted April 25 after three of the eight helicopters suffered mechanical failures and one of the helicopters collided with a refueling plane, killing five Air Force personnel, three Marines and injuring dozens. The hostages, after spending 444 days in captivity, were released unharmed just hours after Ronald Reagan's presidential inauguration on Jan. 20, 1981.

Christopher Hellman
CDI Senior Analyst
chellman@cdi.org

Victoria Garcia
CDI Research Assistant
vgarcia@cdi.org

Islamic council's fatwas divide Indonesia Submitted by Marina Dimova on Thu, 02/26/2009

Souce: Visitbulgaria.info

A series of religious edicts issued by Indonesia's council of Muslim scholars has triggered controversy, exposing sharp divisions between conservatives and liberals in the world's most populous Muslim nation.

In January, the Indonesian Ulema Council (MUI) issued a fatwa, or religious edict, banning Muslims from practising yoga that includes Hindu rituals, such as chanting.

It also ruled smoking in public and abstaining from electoral voting are sinful.

The rulings, which are not legally binding, sparked criticism from some Indonesians who worried about their implications on human rights and democratic freedom with some critics going further by suggesting that the government disband the council.

The council has been criticized for fatwas issued in 2005 declaring that liberalism and secularism are against Islamic tenets and that the Ahmadiyya Muslim sect is heretical because it does not recognize Muhammad as the last of the prophets.

The fatwa on Ahmadiyya has been blamed for a series of attacks on the property and followers of the sect by fundamentalist Muslims.

The council has defended its edicts, saying its job is to provide guidance to Muslims on issues of public concern.

"It's obvious there are Muslims who don't understand religious laws, and they need fatwas on issues that are not clearly stated in the Koran," said Amidhan, a council deputy chairman who, like many Indonesians, goes by one name.

But some liberal observers said they believe the fatwas are a threat to the country's reputation as a tolerant nation that respects diversity.

Muhammad Syafi'i Anwar, executive director of the International Centre for Islam and Pluralism, said the edicts showed that the council was aligning with groups that seek to impose sharia, or Islamic law, in Indonesia.

"This is part of creeping 'shariaization,' but I'm optimistic they won't go very far," Anwar said. "I believe the media is critical."

The council and other groups representing followers of Buddhism, Christianity and Hinduism were set up by the government of former dictator Suharto as part of his efforts to maintain religious harmony and his grip on power.

The council is not a government institution and is funded by public donations, but under Suharto's rule, which ended in 1998 amid widespread unrest, the council's fatwas tended to toe the government line.

"The MUI is trying to assert its power because it was only a rubber-stamp institution during the Suharto era," Anwar said "They have more influence, thanks to the backing of groups that promote conservative agendas."

The overwhelming majority of Indonesia's 190 million Muslims are moderate, but a vocal Islamist minority has been clamouring for the imposition of sharia.

Fachry Ali, a political analyst at the University of Indonesia, said he did not believe the council had ambitions beyond what it sees as religious duties.

"Yoga, for example, is problematic in the context of pure Islam, which is against all forms of idolatry," he said. "MUI is just one of those groups seeking to purify Islam."

"The MUI believes that the views of the liberals are not based on religious texts," Fachry added. "It's hard to reconcile when both sides stick to their points of departure."

The council said Muslims could still practise yoga, which is increasingly popular among middle-class Indonesians, if they don't use chants associated with Hinduism and treat it purely as a form of physical exercise.

The council said it fears the ancient Indian exercise could erode the faith of Muslims

Dian Putri, who works for a media company, said she did not intend to follow the council fatwas although she does not practice yoga with chanting.

"They're too extreme," she said. "It's like they're playing God. Maybe those fatwas are useful for religious Muslims, but for more liberal ones, sometimes their statements are disturbing."

But Henri Basel, a teacher, said he supported the council.

"People criticize the fatwas without reading them in their entirety," he said. "Of course, people can choose not to follow the fatwas if they also have sound religious reasonings, but there's no point in making a fuss about it."

"Those so-called liberals have access to the media like newspapers, TV and the Internet, but the majority of Indonesians don't necessarily agree with them," he said.

Sri Lanka lost $200 billion due to terrorism

Source: Financial Times

By Quintus Perera Terrorism has cost Sri Lanka over $200 billion in terms of low business confidence, investors shying away and tourism suffering while, pressure exerted on the currency and borrowing has also become difficult, according to the country’s foreign secretary. Dr Palitha T.B. Kohona, Secretary to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, making a presentation on "Sri Lanka - Progress Towards Peace and Prosperity" as the keynote speaker at the Rotary District Conference last week, said however that the country's resilience has risen to these challenges. He said successive governments have continued the process of ensuring economic development amidst vast difficulties. He said the country continued to advance economically and considerable success has been demonstrated in accomplishing the Millennium Development Goals, as agreed at the UN Millennium Summit in 2000 which aims at reducing poverty and improving the lives of people. He said that poverty in Sri Lanka has dropped. Dr Kohona said that despite the adverse publicity and the determined efforts (by terrorists) to destroy the country, even from within, Sri Lanka received a record level of FDI in excess of US $ 800 million in 2007. He observed the cynical willingness of some to accept allegations made by organizations overtly sympathetic to the LTTE and some NGOs, who have a vested interest in continuing their operations in the country which is a tourist haven. Nalin Fernando, Governor, Rotary International District 3220, Sri Lanka elaborated on Rotary’s social and humanitarian activities carried out in Sri Lanka while Aziz Memon, Representative of the Rotary International President from Pakistan made a detailed presentation of Rotary International activities.