Mubarak Slams London For Harboring Terrorist Groups

The reason for this harboring policy, as EIR has emphasized, is that the core of British imperial method has always been to rule through orchestrating conflict and war, made possible by systematically organizing, funding, protecting, and deploying the most irrational and violent, opposing, sides, of each and every important conflict, anywhere in the world. For example, every opposing, insurgent group in Lord Palmerston's 1848-49 revolutions launched against Britain's rival Austrian Empire, was headquartered and deployed out of London. Operating from this same standpoint, Britain today, has fostered all important, and competing, terrorists groups in the Mideast, whether fraudulently termed ``Islamic,'' ``Arab,'' or ``Jewish.''

President Mubarak began his campaign on Nov. 23, when he told a press conference in Aswan, that the Islamic Group leaders who took credit for the massacre, were based in London. Among these, is Yassir al Sirri, who told the British press that the massacre was ``justified.''

``Why is the convicted assassin of a girl, Yassir al Sirri, being allowed to move and act freely?'' President Mubarak asked Der Spiegel. ``London asked us for documents on his criminal record. Well, we sent those documents, but nothing has moved, so far.''

President Mubarak also emphasized that economic development is required to combat terrorism, because social problems are used as pretexts for terrorist recruitment. ``Turning the desert into arable land, has to be pushed forward with utmost urgency,'' he said. ``The Toshka Project that has been launched in southern Egypt, is the first step in a program, that later on is to provide a basis for the livelihood of millions of Egyptians.'' (See article, p.|60.)

A contrary view, put forward by al Sirri's London-based Islamic Group sidekick, Abu Hamzah al Masri, shows how Britain's ``Islamic'' patsies are controlled. Justifying the Luxor massacre, Masri told the Egyptian daily Rose al Yusuf on Dec. 1, ``We believe in the principle of establishing Shariah [Islamic law], even if this means the death of all mankind.'' This suicidal mentality, also typical of ``Jewish'' terrorists in Israel, shows how London keeps the Mideast pot boiling.

For his part, the financier of Egypt's Toshka Project, Sheikh Zayed al Nahyan, President of the United Arab Emirates, has also expressed concern over British harboring of terrorists. Speaking at a press conference in Cairo on Nov. 25, Sheikh Zayed said of the British: ``We Arab nations should in unison tell states that harbor terrorists, to stop cooperating with them. By doing so, they close the door of cooperation and friendship with us.'' The sheikh noted that the British tried to undermine the U.A.E., but, ``the Union survived, while the Sun of the British Empire did set.''

What London's terrorists have to say

``Mubarak is acting hysterically,'' al Sirri said. ``He is focussing a campaign on Britain. But he's only acting within the larger framework of the United States' policy, acting as a dog, or agent, of America. His campaign is part of a comprehensive U.S. plan and general policy to unleash its dogs against Britain.''

By contrast, al Sirri praised his British masters for protecting him. ``The Egyptian government demanded many times that I be extradited to Egypt. But, Britain, every time, demanded they submit proof against me,'' he gushed. ``The only proof that the Egyptian regime could present, was a sentence against me by an Egyptian military tribunal.''

Al Sirri's statements (see Documentation) also betray another essential feature of British imperial method: to blame its crimes on others, and rally its colonial victims, such as the Arabs, against the United States. In fact, the grave injustice which characterizes the Mideast, is a result of British policy, and finds its origin in the manner in which Britain carved up the region following World War|I, and its sponsorship and deployment of its Israeli puppets, typified by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, after World War|II. Britain's main aim in its current terrorist offensive, is to provoke a new Arab-Israeli war, leading to a ``Cuban missile''-style crisis meant to break the back of the Clinton administration, thereby making it impossible for President Clinton to deal with the onrushing systemic global financial collapse.

Unfortunately, not everyone in Washington understands this reality, or thinks that the United States is, or should be, in conflict with the British Empire.

At a State Department press briefing on Dec. 9, EIR correspondent William Jones asked State Department spokesman James Foley, whether the U.S. government was prepared ``to put pressure in the form of sanctions on the British to stop'' its harboring of terrorists. Foley responded: ``I really think that's a preposterous assumption on your part. We have a thoroughgoing and very productive security and terrorism dialogue with the British authorities, who face the same kinds of threats in other arenas as we do around the world.''

Egyptian press exposés

``London's share of terrorist sects alone, according to security sources, is 1,400,'' the paper reports, ``which include 4,000 members who are active. Security sources describe these people, as `the lords of terrorism of England.' They live a life of luxury, preying on the money donated by the millionaires and terrorist organizations, both in Britain and abroad, for their terrorist operations.''

Al Ahram reports that London became the ``Islamic'' terrorist Mecca following the war in Afghanistan, when ``legions'' of unemployed Afghan mujahideen, who had been drawn to Afghanistan from all over the Islamic world, flocked to London for protection, and for new assignments. Among them, was the Islamic Group's al Sirri.

The government paper quotes an unnamed security source, in its analysis of British motives in making London the world's terror capital, which partially describes British thinking: ``The British expect to reap a great advantage through controlling the most dangerous terrorists on its soil,'' it quotes the source as saying. ``The growth of such entities on its soil, provides British institutions and relevant organs, with a clear picture of the nature of the situation and political attitudes of the nations from which these terrorists came, without the need for on-the-spot activity.''

``Through this logic,'' the source continues, ``British intelligence works contrary to all its counterparts in the world. The information British intelligence has acquired about these groups and its members, is an invaluable card, which it can use to either negotiate, or put pressure on, Middle East states.''

Al Ahram adds, that part of the purpose, is to manipulate these terrorists, and take them over, on behalf of British geopolitical aims. ``The flexible Anglo-Saxon justice system provides a good ground for penetration and manipulation,'' it notes. Britain's Israeli puppet also play this game. An article in the Dec. 4 Jerusalem Post notes that the ``Mossad's principal function in Britain is to recruit Arab agents,'' emphasizing that there are more Arabs in Britain, than Israel and the Occupied Territories combined. Through such recruitment, Netanyahu finds the Arab dupes to launch atrocities against Israeli targets, to justify his British-backed military adventures.

Al Ahram's source concludes: ``London's `permanent interests' have always converged with the lords of terrorism who live in Britain, and who never underestimate what their existence represents for British interests.''

Meanwhile, other Arab and Islamic governments are joining up with President Mubarak's campaign. According to the Egyptian press, the interior ministers of all the Arab states will gather in Tunisia in January. Included on the agenda will be London's safehousing of international terrorists. The issue was also raised by Malaysian Prime Minister Dr. Mahathir Mohamad, at the Dec. 9-10 summit of the Organization of Islamic Conference, in Teheran, Iran, where he decried ``Western democracies,'' meaning in this case, Britain, which ``give refuge to those of our people who promote disruptive activities in our countries,'' even while accusing Islamic nations of promoting ``terrorism.''