Bush's 'War on Terror' is a Blind Criminal Policy

Visvanathan for Salem-News.com-Jan-29-2014 "The bottom line is, you can't lump all terrorists together. An ! thin" we've got to o a much better #ob of clarifying what are the motivations, the raisons '$tre of terrorists." - %illary &linton
Graves of Tamil Tiger war heroes in Sri Lanka.

'()*+,-.N)/ - After the 0122 attac" on the Twin Towers, 3resi ent 4eorge +ush's '5ar on Terror' was blin ly applie to all liberation movements, whether it was a righteous war or #ust pure terrorism to enforce their ogma or religious i eology on others. Senator %ilary &linton's statement on Tigers to the +ritish 4uar ian ma"es her point very clear. She sai , "! believe that terrorism is a tool that has been utili6e throughout history to achieve certain ob#ectives. Some have been i eological, others territorial. There are personality- riven terroristic ob#ectives. The bottom line is, you can't lump all terrorists together. An ! thin" we've got to o a much better #ob of clarifying what are the motivations, the raisons '$tre of terrorists. ! mean, what the Tamil Tigers are fighting for in Sri *an"a, or the +as7ue separatists in Spain, or the insurgents in alAnbar province may only be connecte by tactics. They may not share all that much in terms of what is the philosophical or i eological un erpinning. An ! thin" one of our mista"es has been painting with such a broa brush, which has not been particularly helpful in un erstan ing what it is we were up against when it comes to those who pursue terrorism for whichever en s Tamil Tigers protected the minority Tamils in Sri Lanka for three decades. they're see"ing." Another statement one has to ruminate is on 3rof. 8avi Selbourne's prophetic statement in 209:; "<or the bitter truth is that a military solution - that is the ran om butchery of Tamil civilians, men, women, an chil ren - is the politics of &olombo= they have, an inten , no other," the ran om butchery, may perhaps provi e the most legitimate an potent means to reach the en goal of Tamil struggle, by asserting the right of reme ial sovereignty. That is the right to pic" up arms. Now )&> fi?es hearing ate for )- ban case on *TT). &ontinuing with the ban five years after the war has en e is e?tremely ri iculous. Still incarcerating Tamil youths in #ails in )uropean countries for attempting to supply arms to the *TT) to protect the Tamil people against Sinhalese butchery, is itself a crime against %umanity. 3lease rea the Tamil Net report on what a vocate Victor @oppe is attempting to o. ATamilNet, Tues ay, B9 >anuary BC2D, 2D;B2 4(TE *u?embourg-base )uropean &ourt of >ustice ')&>/ is sche ule to hear the case F*iberation Tigers of Tamil )elam '*TT)/ vs

&ouncil of the )uropean -nionG '&ase T-BC9122-0/ on BH <ebruary BC2D, legal sources in )urope sai . The case was file in BC22 by Victor @oppe, the Amster am-base +ohler a vocaten attorney an the )&> etermine that he coul legally represent the )urope-base political wing of the *iberation Tigers of Tamil )elam '*TT)/. The eman for annulment of the inclusion of *TT) in the )-'s terrorism list is partly to stop the prosecution of Tamils in The Netherlan s, 4ermany, <rance, Swit6erlan , !taly, an other member countries, (r @oppe has tol earlier. 3leas in law an main arguments; !n the present case the applicant see"s the partial annulment of &ouncil !mplementing .egulation ')-/ No 9I1BC22 in so far as the name of the applicant is maintaine on the list of natural an legal persons, entities an bo ies whose fun s an economic resources are fro6en in accor ance with this provision. !n support of the action, the applicant relies on si? pleas in law; 2. <irst plea in law, alleging that the &ouncil !mplementing .egulation ')-/ No 9I1BC22 is voi in as far as it concerns the applicant an 1or the &ouncil .egulation ')&/ No B:9C1BCC2 is inapplicable ue to a failure to ta"e regar of the law of arme conflict. B. Secon plea in law, alleging that the &ouncil !mplementing .egulation ')-/ No 9I1BC22 is voi in as far as it concerns the applicant since the applicant cannot be 7ualifie as a terrorist organisation as efine in Article 2'I/ of &ouncil &ommon 3osition BCC210I21&<S3. !n this regar the applicant submits that its activities o not amount to offences un er international humanitarian law an national criminal law, which oes not apply to situations of arme conflict. I. Thir plea in law, alleging that the &ouncil !mplementing .egulation ')-/ No 9I1BC22 is voi in as far as it concerns the applicant because no ecision by a competent authority, as re7uire by Article 2'D/ of &ouncil &ommon 3osition BCC210I21&<S3, has been ta"en. D. <ourth plea in law, alleging that the &ouncil !mplementing .egulation ')-/ No 9I1BC22 is voi in as far as it concerns the applicant since the &ouncil i not con uct any review as re7uire by Article 2'H/ of &ouncil &ommon 3osition BCC210I21&<S3. The applicant conten s that, as it no longer uses military means to achieve its goals an is no longer irectly active in Sri *an"a, such a review woul have le to the conclusion that it must be remove from the list. :. <ifth plea in law, alleging that the &ouncil !mplementing .egulation ')-/ No 9I1BC22 is voi in as far as it concerns the applicant as it oes not comply with the obligation to state reasons in violation of Article B0H T<-). H. Si?th plea in law, alleging that the &ouncil !mplementing .egulation ')-/ No 9I1BC22 is voi in as far as it concerns the applicant because it infringes upon the applicantJs right of efence, the applicantJs right to effective #u icial

protection. The ECJ has given judgements in the fields of equal treatment and social rights, fundamental rights and freedom of movement of persons. The EU Court of Justice also settles legal disputes between EU governments and EU institutions. Individuals, companies or organisations can bring cases before the Court if the feel their rights have been infringed b an EU institution.