This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 DHAKA 003942 
 
SIPDIS 
 
FOR I/FW, B/G, IIP/G/NEA-SA, B/VOA/N (BANGLA SERVICE) STATE 
FOR SA/PAB, SA/PPD (LSCENSNY, SSTRYKER), SA/RA, INR/R/MR, 
AND PASS TO USAID FOR ANE/ASIA/SA/B (WJOHNSON) 
 
CINCPAC FOR PUBLIC DIPLOMACY ADVISOR, J51 (MAJ TURNER), J45 
(MAJ NICHOLLS) 
 
USARPAC FOR APOP-IM (MAJ HEDRICK) 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: KMDR OIIP OPRC KPAO PREL ETRD PTER ASEC BG OCII
SUBJECT: Media Reaction: GWOT: London Bombings, Israel, 
Hiroshima Day; Dhaka 
 
Summary: Criticizing anti-terrorism measures proposed by the 
British government, newspapers say that laws that erode 
fundamental rights are more a threat to democracy than 
terrorists. 
 
On the departure of Netanyahu from the Sharon government, 
"New Age" predicts a murkier situation in the Middle East. 
 
On the Hiroshima-Nagasaki Day, conservative "Ittefaq" 
wonders whether a nuclear weapons-free world will ever be 
established. 
------------------------ 
¶1. GWOT: London Bombings 
------------------------ 
 
"Is Tony Blair on the right track to combat terrorism in 
Britain?" 
An editorial page article in English language newspaper 
"Daily Star" by former ambassador Harun ur Rashid opines 
(8/10): 
 
Political observers believe the basic fault lies in the mind- 
set of Blair and his advisers -- which the Iraqi war has 
nothing to do with the London bombings.  Whenever the 
premise is incorrect, the conclusion will also be incorrect, 
that is what common sense logic tells every one of us. 
Blair proposed on the next day, August 5, sweeping anti- 
terrorism plans including new powers to expel foreign 
nationals who "glorify jihad," to shut down mosques breeding 
fanaticism, and to blacklist extremist clerics, web sites, 
and bookshops. He even threatened to amend the provisions of 
the British Human Rights Act that are in conformity with the 
European Human Rights Convention. 
Observers believe that his measures are likely to infuriate 
many Muslims overseas, particularly in the Middle East 
region. Furthermore, they argue that it would be a green 
signal to authoritarian rulers in the Middle East to silence 
their critics on the pretext of combating "terrorists." 
Human Rights groups and various Muslim organizations blasted 
the raft of new powers to combat terrorism in Britain. The 
Islamic Forum Europe warned that the measures could 
jeopardize national unity in Britain. Some Muslim 
organizations have supported them, because of the fear that 
they would be branded as extremist organizations if they 
don't. 
Terrorism laws that erode fundamental rights are more a 
threat to democracy than terrorists. It is a hollow victory 
if laws crush liberty. Terrorism threatens the lives of the 
British people, but they do not threaten the values that 
they hold dear. One fundamental fact is to remember that 
terrorists don't have the means to destroy Britain as a 
nation. 
The rule of law must prevail in a country known as "mother 
of democracy." The rule of law means power can be exercised 
only within bounds. Its corollary is freedom. As long as an 
individual is peaceful and obey laws, that individual is 
free to do as he or she pleases, and those with power cannot 
stop that individual without lawful reason. 
If Britain now degrades the institutions that they have 
cherished since the Magna Carta of 1215, the very 
institutions that terrorists want to destroy, it will herald 
a victory for terrorists. By adopting these extreme 
measures, the British people will forsake what they always 
sought for, what they have taken pride in, and what has in 
large part defined their cultural and political identity for 
centuries. 
--------------------- 
"Bush-Blair axis: Exploiting human tragedies to curb civil 
rights" 
An editorial page article English language newspaper "New 
Age" by Executive Editor Nurul Kabir 
The Bush administration has already abolished the civil 
rights in question in the name of patriotism! The arbitrary 
arrests of people, without court orders, are now regular 
phenomena in the United States. Besides, journalists who ask 
biting questions are considered `unpatriotic' these days. 
The situation in the UK is not much better. The Blair 
administration is also out to use the July 7 bombings as an 
`opportunity' to gag the comparatively vibrant English media 
on the one hand, and expunge many civil rights that the 
Britons had earned through decades of democratic movements. 
Who could imagine, even in the near past, that the British 
police would demand the authority for extra-judicial 
killing, by way of demanding the authority to `shoot-to- 
kill'. But Blair confirmed to the press, on July 24, that 
his police had really been demanding such authority. What is 
important is to realize that they want this undemocratic 
authority `in order to protect policy', the policies of the 
Blair administration - the kind of policies that cannot be 
protected without being undemocratic. 
 
Blair has also announced on August 5 a `heavy agenda' that 
includes enactment of a `new anti-terrorism law' to take 
care of those `condoning or glorifying terrorism', and 
application of laws to strip citizenship of the `naturalized 
citizens engaged in extremism', etc. Nobody knows whether 
people like Livingstone or journalist like Fisk would come 
under the purview of those laws because of their objective 
interpretations of the violent reaction of the frustrated 
Arabs to the West's policy of violence in the Gulf region. 
 
Besides, Blair has reportedly decided to deport some 500 
Muslims, representing diverse countries and cultures, from 
the United Kingdom! The whole world knows about the 
Christian fundamentalist bias of `crusader' Bush, now it is 
the turn to know Blair's bias for religious fundamentalism 
as well. 
 
Clearly, the political establishments, headed by Bush and 
Blair, not only have turned the whole world into a 
battleground, but are also out to destroy many a finer 
democratic right that the peoples of the US and the UK hade 
earned through decades of painful political struggles and 
has been serving as an inspiration for many struggling 
nations across the world. 
 
The democracy loving people of the world have, therefore, 
been left with no option but to make concerted efforts to 
stop the advances of the US and UK policies of the day, home 
and abroad. The sooner the better. 
--------- 
¶2. Israel 
--------- 
"Mischievous Netanyahu" 
Independent English language newspaper "New Age" editorially 
comments (8/10): 
Binyamin Netanyahu has regularly had a capacity for making 
mischief. He has shown yet once more just how good he is at 
such games. In resigning from the position of finance 
minister in Ariel Sharon's cabinet, Netanyahu has tried 
telling Israelis that by withdrawing from Gaza the prime 
minister is actually undermining the national cause of all 
Israelis. 
In the era of openness, men like Netanyahu are an 
anachronism. Even so, the truth is that there are hard-core 
Israelis who still regard him as a heroic defender of their 
rights. If Netanyahu could scream his way into the public 
consciousness enough to cause the assassination of Prime 
Minister Rabin, he might now well have the capacity of 
making things quite fraught for the current Israeli leader. 
And if he can do that, there is certainly no knowing where 
things might lead. Given that there are arch conservatives 
like Netanyahu spread all around, George W. Bush for 
instance, it is quite possible that conditions in places 
like the Middle East could turn murkier than they are 
already. Note the pressure on Iran and Syria, whose leaders 
have been meeting in Tehran. 
------------ 
¶3. Hiroshima 
------------ 
"No More Hiroshima-Nagasaki" 
Conservative Bangla language newspaper "Ittefaq" editorially 
comments (8/10): 
Memories of Hiroshima and Nagasaki are very tragic. 
Fortunately, nuclear bombs or weapons were not used any 
other places after Hiroshima and Nagasaki.  But production 
and stockpiling of these dangerous weapons continue.  60 
years after Hiroshima-Nagasaki bombings and 15 years after 
the end of the Cold War, there are 20 to 30 thousand nuclear 
weapons in the world.  At present, nine countries in the 
world possess nuclear weapons.  In one sense, Japan can be 
said a nuclear nation because it has plutonium and 
technology to produce bombs within a few weeks.  Iran is 
also trying to acquire power.  Nuclear proliferation is now 
an acute problem in the world.  As long as these weapons 
remain, there will be the risk of using them.  The people of 
the world are in panic and memories of Hiroshima and 
Nagasaki increase their fear manifold.  They naturally 
demand the destruction of all nuclear weapons and a nuclear 
weapons-free world.  Will ever their legitimate desire be 
fulfilled? 
Chammas