US adds Islamic charity organisation to terror list

FeF dubbed 'alias' of Lashkar-e-Taiba, which is already on the list of 'designated foreign terrorist organizations.'


Reuters November 24, 2010

WASHINGTON: The United States on Wednesday added  Falah-e-Insaniyat Foundation, a charity associated with a banned group, to its official list of blacklisted terror organizations.

The US State Department said Falah-e-Insaniyat (FeF) had been dubbed an 'alias' of Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), which is already on the State Department's list of 'designated foreign terrorist organizations'.

Daniel Benjamin, the State Department's coordinator for counterterrorism, said the move 'shows that the United States will not tolerate any support to this organization.

'LeT has attempted to use FeF as a way to evade scrutiny. This designation will help put to an end to that attempted evasion,' Benjamin said in a statement announcing the move.

The official order also named FeF leader Hafiz Abdur Rauf and two other men associated with LeT, Mian Abdullah and Mohammad Naushad Alam Khan, to its list of 'specially designated global terrorists.'

Falah-e-Insaniyat is a name used in public by the Jamaat-ud-Dawa (JuD), initially set up as the humanitarian wing of the LeT, which has been active in relief efforts for those hit by Pakistan's floods.

JuD was blacklisted by the United Nations following the November 2008 attack on Mumbai, blamed on the LeT. The group, which is also banned in Pakistan, denies it still has links to LeT.

Falah-e-Insaniyat provides education, healthcare and disaster relief and first appeared last year to help people displaced by military operations in Swat, in the northwest.

It has support and funding in the Pakistani diaspora, often in the form of donations for its charitable work. Analysts say it could exploit this network for attacks on the West.

COMMENTS (12)

Anoop | 13 years ago | Reply @Anonymous, You ban an organization because you want to plug loopholes in the justice system. If Pakistan refuses to go after people whose existence is known to everyone then they will come up under new names. Its just not about the US here. UNSC has put many terrorists as residing in Pakistan. For example, Dawood Ibrahim is designated a Global Terrorist and even his residence is given and even the place where his Pakistani passport was issued(Rawalpindi). Here, is the official version of the information. http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2010/sc9878.doc.htm You may look upon the US as the great Satan but it is only as dangerous as you let it be. Pakistan played footsie with a much bigger, stronger country not realizing it was becoming its stooge rather a partner. I am not here to defend US actions and interests.
User | 13 years ago | Reply @ Anoop. " According to your theroy a Serial Killer should not be hunted because he might change his appearance, his name,etc. Why hunt for him?". Thats not my theory . Where did you heard saying me that? My question is to question the fundamental assumptions of an action not its affects. What is the fundamental assumption of banning any organization? WHO has to define who is what? Is there a consensus on that? And if yes, What is that concensus? who are the participant? Tell me why US banned that charity ? What would have been their basic assumptions? Knowing that by banning it under certain name will never be enough because they can emerge with some other name with in no time, yet they banned them. Was the objective to sop funding? OR to Play for Political Audience in general and Public opinion in particular? Whereas actual banning was not important at all. ? You are absolutely right, They would do business with some other name but Did US not know it? They certainly do know that and yet...??? So, perhaps objectives and goals are not what they look? or let's put it this way "Declared policy has nothing to do with real objectives"? What do you say? We will come on China's veto of JUD and role of JUD later when you give your opinion these questions.
VIEW MORE COMMENTS
Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ