----- Original Message -----
From: "Macdonald Stainsby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [L-I] Re: China Moves Forces into Afghanistan Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2001 (....) Do people have any fear that Cuba will get on the "terror" list? ####################### In a coming message I will write about some very recent press disclosures on CIA-sponsored terrorism in South America during the seventies. Cuba has been on the "terror" list long since ago. See the following extracts from the site that is managed by the Bureau of Public Affairs, U.S. Department of State. No mention to Afghanistan is made therein, being excepted a quite brief and indirect one about the "Pakistani support to terrorist groups and elements active in Kashmir, as well as Pakistani support, especially military support, to the Taliban". It is an exercise of political hypocrisy that begins with a little grammar error (_it's_ instead of _its_) : http://www.state.gov/s/ct/rls/pgtrpt/ Patterns of Global Terrorism On April 30, 2001, the Department released it's annual report "Patterns of Global Terrorism: 2000." This report is submitted in compliance with Title 22 of the United States Code, Section 2656f(a), which requires the Department of State to provide Congress a full and complete annual report on terrorism for those countries and groups meeting the criteria of Section (a)(1) and (2) of the Act. This publication is updated annually. http://www.state.gov/s/ct/rls/pgtrpt/2000/index.cfm?docid=2441 Overview of State-Sponsored Terrorism Patterns of Global Terrorism -2000 Released by the Office of the Coordinator for Counterterrorism April 2001 The designation of state sponsors of terrorism by the United States--and the imposition of sanctions--is a mechanism for isolating nations that use terrorism as a means of political expression. US policy seeks to pressure and isolate state sponsors so they will renounce the use of terrorism, end support to terrorists, and bring terrorists to justice for past crimes. The United States is committed to holding terrorists and those who harbor them accountable for past attacks, regardless of when the acts occurred. The US Government has a long memory and will not simply expunge a terrorist's record because time has passed. The states that choose to harbor terrorists are like accomplices who provide shelter for criminals. They will be held accountable for their "guests'" actions. International terrorists should know, before they contemplate a crime, that they cannot hunker down in safehaven for a period of time and be absolved of their crimes. ....................... Iran, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Cuba, North Korea, and Sudan continue to be the seven governments that the US Secretary of State has designated as state sponsors of international terrorism. Iran remained the most active state sponsor of terrorism in 2000. (....) Cuba continued to provide safehaven to several terrorists and US fugitives and maintained ties to state sponsors and Latin American insurgents. ....................... In South Asia, the United States has been increasingly concerned about reports of Pakistani support to terrorist groups and elements active in Kashmir, as well as Pakistani support, especially military support, to the Taliban, which continues to harbor terrorist groups, including al-Qaida, the Egyptian Islamic Jihad,al-Gama'a al-Islamiyya, and the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan. ....................... Cuba Cuba continued to provide safehaven to several terrorists and US fugitives in 2000. A number of Basque ETA terrorists who gained sanctuary in Cuba some years ago continued to live on the island, as did several US terrorist fugitives. Havana also maintained ties to other state sponsors of terrorism and Latin American insurgents. Colombia's two largest terrorist organizations, the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia and the National Liberation Army, both maintained a permanent presence on the island. ....................... Weapons-of-Mass-Destruction (WMD) Terrorism At the dawn of a new millennium, the possibility of a terrorist attack involving weapons of mass destruction (WMD)--chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear (CBRN), or large explosive weapons--remained real. As of the end of 2000, however, the most notorious attack involving chemical weapons against a civilian target remained Aum Shinrikyo's sarin nerve agent attack against the Tokyo subway in March 1995. Most terrorists continued to rely on conventional tactics, such as bombing, shooting, and kidnapping, but some terrorists--such as Usama Bin Ladin and his associates--continued to seek CBRN capabilities. ....................... A few groups, notably those driven by distorted religious and cultural ideologies, showed signs they were willing to cause large numbers of casualties. Other potentially dangerous but less predictable groups had emerged, and those groups may not abide by traditional targeting constraints that would prohibit using indiscriminate violence or CBRN weapons. Some CBRN materials, technology, and especially information continued to be widely available, particularly from commercial sources and the Internet. Terrorist Use of Information Technology Terrorists have seized upon the worldwide practice of using information technology (IT) in daily life. They embrace IT for several reasons: it improves communication and aids organization, allows members to coordinate quickly with large numbers of followers, and provides a platform for propaganda. The Internet also allows terrorists to reach a wide audience of potential donors and recruits who may be located over a large geographic area. In addition, terrorists are taking note of the proliferation of hacking and the use of the computer as a weapon. ....................... ################ So, beware of the ides of April, all you computer-lovers Leninlisters! Cheers, Roberto _______________________________________________ Leninist-International mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international
