Terrorism adviser to Met is on wanted list

Terrorism adviser to Met is on wanted list

www.timesonline.co.uk

A man wanted by Interpol for his links to an alleged terrorist organisation has been advising Scotland Yard on countering Muslim extremism, a Times investigation has discovered.

Mohamed Ali Harrath has been the subject of the Interpol red notice since 1992 because of his alleged activities in Tunisia, where he co-founded the Tunisian Islamic Front (FIT).

Tunisia has accused Mr Harrath, the chief executive officer of the Islam Channel in Britain and an adviser to the Scotland Yard Muslim Contact

(visit the link for the full news article)

This cracks me up. It seems that any snake oil sales man can pull the wool over the eyes of UK officials. We have the most learned experts in our universities, British nationals of foreign origin who have immense love for this country, people of peace that do not want wars to be brought over here yet those entrusted to protect this country go to a wanted suspected terrorist for advice?

What were they thinking and how is someone accused of violence in his home country, Tunis, to comment on the tribal dynamics in Pakistan and the radicalisation of born and breed Westernised Brits of Asian and Africans extractions.

This gives a tremendous insight of the mindset of the Met.

a) They are ignorant of what causes radicalisation
b) They rely on low lives for advice
c) They do not trust ethnic minorities in this country.
d) They are ignorant of what motivates an individual beyond the material and the self.
e) They have a disregard for learned experts.
f) They rate a violent man for his supposed expertise on all things foreign.
g) They are ignorant of current affairs and the dynamics of war and terrorism.

www.timesonline.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)

i don't agree with you OP, it shows that interpol are willing to put someone on the red list of suspected terrorists with absolutely no evidence. your link admits numerous times that there is nothing to say that this guy is a terrorist or has any links to terrorism.

At the risk of speaking out of line..., since I am not a citizen of the UK, it may also (or alternatively) point to the possibility that the terrorist organization he is linked to is a 'construct' of the government.

I have long held that if we knew the truth of it, many - if not most - of the so-called terrorist organizations or radical groups are actually operational aspects of covert foreign intelligence agencies or government-sponsored crime.

But then, I am sure I could be considered just another nut-job conspiracy theorist, so take it with a grain of salt.

Originally posted by pieman
i don't agree with you OP, it shows that interpol are willing to put someone on the red list of suspected terrorists with absolutely no evidence. your link admits numerous times that there is nothing to say that this guy is a terrorist or has any links to terrorism.

Then the Met knew something that Interpol did not know. Perhaps they should have enlightened Interpol before this embarrassing disclosure.

Its the age old discussion once again I'm afraid.

Complex conspiracy vs rank incompetence.

I ascribe it to the latter... kinda like the case where the Home Office hired illegal immigrants to clean their offices (where sensitive papers are no doubt around).

The incompetence of the government has become so routine that people are simply not shocked by it any more. Its a bit like in 1984 where the part just "corrects" history, and the proles are too brainwashed to bother caring.

In fact its exactly the same scenario...

reply to post by masonwatcher


no, perhaps you should actually read the linked story in its full.

No one has ever produced evidence linking Mr Harrath to any terrorist activity.

if this is to be believed, i have not checked, then interpol have put him on their list with no evidence. should someone be damned without need for stuff like evidence in the UK now?

i call mis-info on the story.

[edit on 15/12/08 by pieman]

Originally posted by pieman
reply to post by masonwatcher

 

no, perhaps you should actually read the linked story in its full.

No one has ever produced evidence linking Mr Harrath to any terrorist activity.

if this is to be believed, i have not checked, then interpol have put him on their list with no evidence. should someone be damned without need for stuff like evidence in the UK now?

i call mis-info on the story.

[edit on 15/12/08 by pieman]

Perhaps you should develop your reading comprehension?

So what you are saying is that names are on Interpol list for no reason? And I always thought that Interpol lists were simply alert notices. Who would have thought evidence was to be plastered all over the data bases. On top of this the Met simply sat and stared at the red flags yet ignored it because there was no evidence.

You do know the subsequent excuses by the Met is fluff? Had the Met been serious about their claims they would have got onto Interpol and asked for evidence.

The Times has also learnt that, in evidence before Britain’s Special Immigration Appeals Commission in 2003, an MI5 witness accused the FIT of terrorism activities in France. Mr Harrath denies this, saying his movement was wrongly blamed by the French courts for founding a guerrilla network that held banned military weapons.

MI5 was making allegations against the dude in 2003!

[edit on 013131p://pm3110 by masonwatcher]

Originally posted by masonwatcher
Perhaps you should develop your reading comprehension?

why, what have i missed?

So what you are saying is that names are on Interpol list for no reason?

no, the link you linked to is saying that!?!

You do know the subsequent excuses by the Met is fluff? Had the Met been serious about their claims they would have got onto Interpol and asked for evidence.

no, i don't know anything about subsequent excuses. all i know is what you've posted, and your source doesn't back up your suggested interpretation.

MI5 was making allegations against the dude in 2003!

an allegation is just that, what exactly is an allegation worth? iraq was alleged to have WMD by the same family of intelligence agencies.

reply to post by pieman

an allegation is just that, what exactly is an allegation worth? iraq was alleged to have WMD by the same family of intelligence agencies.

You have just made my point. How can allegation take a country to war yet not be acted upon by the police who are tasked to investigate allegations?