• Due to a glitch in the old vBulletin software, some users were "banned" when they tried to change their passwords at the end of February. This does not apply after the site was converted to Xenforo. If you were affected by this, please us viua the Contact us link in the footer.

The U.S and it's list of "Foreign Terrorist Organisations". Good terrorists/Bad terrorists.


Truth.ie

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 5, 2008
Messages
27,972
The U.S and it's list of "Foreign Terrorist Organisations". Good terrorists/Bad terrorists.

Here is the full list (updated Sept. 2013) of the U.S State Dept's foreign terror organisations throughout the World.
Foreign Terrorist Organizations

Whats clear from the list is the lack of clarity and confusion of what exactly is a "terrorist" organisation.
For example.
Republican Sinn Fein, which has an office in the centre of Dublin is on the list, and barred from entering U.S soil.
The MKO (an Iranian terrorist group responsible for 12000 killings and countless bombings since 1979) is not on the list, and can be seen here kowtowing with Hillary.
PressTV - Delisting MKO reeks of Washington?s redefining terrorism


The UDA and UVF (responsible for orchestrating the violence in Belfast last month is not on the list.
Yet the Irish Republican Prisoners Welfare Association ( a fundraising group for the families of prisoners) is on the list.


Far right Cuban terrorists like F4 Commandoes (who in the past have bombed Commercial airlines, hotels and tourist spots) have offices in Miami and openly train and recruit. Obviously not seen as terrorists and therefore not on the list.


Even within the confines of Syria, they have used the concept of good terrorists/bad terrorists.
They have outlawed Al Nusra Front, but continue to support others who are just as ruthless and violent.
Seemingly, it's not the methods of Al Nusra Front that led to their addition to the list, but rather that they weren't on message with U.S Middle East ambitions.


The Kosovan Liberation Army was on the list, but taken off in 1998 as it suited the U.S agenda to use this "terror organisation" to fight Serbian forces.
Later, after the Balkans conflict, it was described as "Al Qaeda in Europe".
Yet it remains off the list to this day, and recently has been used by the West, as a proxy to train more terrorists in Syria. (Yes. Al Qaeda in Europe)
In fact the leader of the KLA is quite entitled to fundraise in the U.S, but 81 year old Ruari O Bradaigh is not even allowed to go on a book tour.


So, when you hear Obama and Hillary talking of their War on Terror, what they really mean is they want to see an end to terror groups not on their side.
It's a sham.
Far right Cuban groups, Iranian terrorists like MEK, and any other terrorist or suicide bomber which is conducive to U.S foreign policy will continue to be supported and financed.
There is NO War on Terror.
Their own list, and more importantly. who is not on the list belies that lie.
 
Last edited:


drummed

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 22, 2010
Messages
37,436
Why don't you e-mail the CIA your corrections?
 

Truth.ie

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 5, 2008
Messages
27,972
The Peoples Mujahedin of Iran.
People's Mujahedin of Iran - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Responsible for killings, suicide bombings and thousands of deaths in Iran.
Was listed a "terror organisation" but now has offices in Paris and 3600 members in U.S military base Camp Liberty in Iraq.
AFAIK, also have some members living openly in Dublin.
They demanded the executions of the U.S hostages in 1979, but according to some, received military training from the U.S Govt within the U.S in 2005.
Why? Because they now use their terror tactics against the elected Govt of Ahmadenejad.
 
Last edited:

Eire1976

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2010
Messages
14,152
Troubling that Loyalist groups are not on the list.

What are our boys in the States doing, sitting on their hands?
 

Truth.ie

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 5, 2008
Messages
27,972

Lonewolfe

Well-known member
Joined
May 4, 2011
Messages
17,467

Astral Peaks

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 9, 2010
Messages
25,982
"Updated Sep 2013"????
 

james5001

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 27, 2009
Messages
11,503
''All in all, unprecedented terror must seem necessary to ideologically motivated attempts to transform society massively and speedily, against its natural possibilities...''- Robert Conquest talking about propaganda in The Soviet Union.
 

Dame_Enda

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2011
Messages
52,182
America won't define terrorism because to do so would expose their double-standards on who is/isn't a terrorist. The People's Mujahadeen of Iran was recently taken off the list because it's an enemy of the Iranian regime like America and Israel. Likewise they armed and funded the Contras in Nigaragua against the democratically elected Sandinistas.
 

EUrJokingMeRight

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 28, 2009
Messages
11,838
The USA has been hijacked by a terror group called the CIA :D

**Waves to the guys in the pizza van with the satelllite dish that has just pulled up outside**

In all seriousness though the US steals more global wealth from foreign soveriegn nations through war(terror) and dodgy financial instruments than any other nation.

The USA is the bigest threat to global peace.

I really wish that the USA was the protector of peace as it likes to portray itself.

I really wish the USA was run by the people for the people.
 

GDPR

1
Joined
Jul 5, 2008
Messages
223,358
Their own list, and more importantly. who is not on the list belies that lie.
Here's a little secret, Truth: There is no agreed upon definition of terrorist in international law. There are some definitions of terrorist acts (and by extension the person who commits these acts is a terrorist). For example this is is the definition for a terrorist bombing under the International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings:

Any person commits an offence within the meaning of this Convention if that person unlawfully and intentionally delivers, places, discharges or detonates an explosive or other lethal device in, into or against a place or public use, a State or government facility, a public transportation system or an infrastructure facility:
a) With the intent to cause death or serious bodily injury; or
b)With the intent to cause extensive destruction of such a place, facility or system, where such a destruction results in or is likely to result in major economic loss.
http://treaties.un.org/doc/db/Terrorism/english-18-9.pdf

However, this is a treaty, so it is possible that not all states are party to it. In this case, it just so happens to be that not all states are party to this treaty. For example, Iraq, Syria and Iran are not parties to this treaty whereas Russia, China, and Cuba are.

UNTC

We use the above way of defining terrorism because historically it has proven very difficult to define the word "terrorist" in international law. Reasons for this difficulty are how we must view freedom fighters and the possibility of state terrorism. What Russia considers to be a terrorist may very well be viewed by China as a freedom fighter.

The United States, generally, acts no different than other countries in this regard. It employs its own definition etc, much like other nations do.

I'd like to note the following: For the Secretary of State to actually have the authority to designate an organization a terrorist organization 3 things must be true:
A) The organization must be a foreign organization.
B) The organization must engage in terrorist activity (as defined in the Immigration and Nationality Act)
C) The terrorism of the organization must threaten the security of United States nationals or the national security of the United States.

These are cumulative requirements. Fulfilling these requirements does not lead to a legal obligation for the Secretary of State to label a foreign terrorist organization as such.
Let's take organization X as an example.

Organization X is an organization in country Y. It engages in terrorist activity as defined in the Immigration and Nationality Act against the government of country Y. However, these terrorist activities do not threaten the security of U.S. nationals, nor does it threaten the national security of the United States. The Secretary of State then does not have the authority to designate organization X as a foreign terrorist organization.

All in all, the US has its own definition of terrorism and has requirements that need to be fulfilled before the Secretary of State receives the authority to designate an organization as a foreign terrorist organization. While details may vary, I think I can say with certainty that it is no different than any other country in the world.

It is, of course, easy to target the United States as someone who does this, but this is a failing everyone in the international community shares. That fact is, of course, a great pity.

https://www.unodc.org/tldb/bibliography/Biblio_Int_humanitarian_law_Walter_2003.pdf
INA: ACT 219 - DESIGNATION OF FOREIGN TERRORIST ORGANIZATION 1/
 
Last edited by a moderator:

GDPR

1
Joined
Jul 5, 2008
Messages
223,358
Ïåðå÷åíü îðãàíèçàöèé è ôèçè÷åñêèõ ëèö, â îòíîøåíèè êîòîðûõ èìåþòñÿ ñâåäåíèÿ îá èõ ïðè÷àñòíîñòè ê ýêñòðåìèñòñêîé äåÿòåëüíîñòè èëè òåððîðèçìó — Ðîññèéñêàÿ Ãàçåòà

The above link will direct you to what I understand to be a partial version of Russia's list publicized by Rossiyskaya Gazeta (Rossiyskaya Gazeta - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia). It dates from 2011, so it might have changed, but I have not been able to find a different version.

How I got there: Russia | Terrorist List

You'll note that there are similarities (such as the exclusion of the KLA), but also discrepancies with the American list.
 

ticketyboo

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 21, 2011
Messages
5,042
Here is the full list (updated Sept. 2013) of the U.S State Dept's foreign terror organisations throughout the World.
Foreign Terrorist Organizations

Whats clear from the list is the lack of clarity and confusion of what exactly is a "terrorist" organisation.
For example.
Republican Sinn Fein, which has an office in the centre of Dublin is on the list, and barred from entering U.S soil.
The MKO (an Iranian terrorist group responsible for 12000 killings and countless bombings since 1979) is not on the list, and can be seen here kowtowing with Hillary.
PressTV - Delisting MKO reeks of Washington?s redefining terrorism


The UDA and UVF (responsible for orchestrating the violence in Belfast last month is not on the list.
Yet the Irish Republican Prisoners Welfare Association ( a fundraising group for the families of prisoners) is on the list.


Far right Cuban terrorists like F4 Commandoes (who in the past have bombed Commercial airlines, hotels and tourist spots) have offices in Miami and openly train and recruit. Obviously not seen as terrorists and therefore not on the list.


Even within the confines of Syria, they have used the concept of good terrorists/bad terrorists.
They have outlawed Al Nusra Front, but continue to support others who are just as ruthless and violent.
Seemingly, it's not the methods of Al Nusra Front that led to their addition to the list, but rather that they weren't on message with U.S Middle East ambitions.


The Kosovan Liberation Army was on the list, but taken off in 1998 as it suited the U.S agenda to use this "terror organisation" to fight Serbian forces.
Later, after the Balkans conflict, it was described as "Al Qaeda in Europe".
Yet it remains off the list to this day, and recently has been used by the West, as a proxy to train more terrorists in Syria. (Yes. Al Qaeda in Europe)
In fact the leader of the KLA is quite entitled to fundraise in the U.S, but 81 year old Ruari O Bradaigh is not even allowed to go on a book tour.


So, when you hear Obama and Hillary talking of their War on Terror, what they really mean is they want to see an end to terror groups not on their side.
It's a sham.
Far right Cuban groups, Iranian terrorists like MEK, and any other terrorist or suicide bomber which is conducive to U.S foreign policy will continue to be supported and financed.
There is NO War on Terror.
Their own list, and more importantly. who is not on the list belies that lie.
I don't know what I can usefully add to this, other than to say, of course, you've got it spot on. One man's freedom fighter, etc.
The US is utterly, hopelessly hypocritical on this issue.
I remember George Bush (the MORE stupid one) saying that he saw no difference between those who carried out the attacks and those who sponsored and supported them. And I was thinking, "right back atcha, George".
The US, in the guise of their own terrorist organisation when it was imperative, the CIA, especially in south and central America, financed and armed the most appalling governments, instigated coups all over that region, and butchered millions through right wing death squads, all this in the guise of fighting the domino effect of communism.
You've said it better than I ever could. There is a moral equivocation about "terrorism", depending on whose strategic interests are being suited and the big prize at stake. Well done.
 

ticketyboo

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 21, 2011
Messages
5,042
America won't define terrorism because to do so would expose their double-standards on who is/isn't a terrorist. The People's Mujahadeen of Iran was recently taken off the list because it's an enemy of the Iranian regime like America and Israel. Likewise they armed and funded the Contras in Nigaragua against the democratically elected Sandinistas.
The treatment of Nicaragua was a particularly low point for the land of the free, in their struggle against that terrifyingly powerful nation and the Sandinistas.
Remember it well. The looper Ollie North, the pretty neat idea, and old aw-shucks, himself, Reagan.
"I don't recall". Bertie must have learned at the old cowboy's knee.
 

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top