If suicide bombers' families get paid money, can you arrest them for receiving terror funds?

Question

Some Middle Eastern governments and groups give money to families of people who killed themselves (and others) in homicide/suicide bombings, therefore it would stand to reason that the families are receiving terror funds and should be arrested, no?

Answer 1

It is an interesting concept you put forward.

In the countries that these people live in, no it is unlikely to happen by their own governments. This is because the government usually condones the behaviour. You see this with governments like the PA who condone most violence (or condone through silence) by Hamas or Islamic Jihad etc.

Even though many governments give money to, for example, a widow of a soldier, the problem comes when a you compare apples and oranges - or in this case, soldiers defending their country from annihilation, compared with suicide bombers whose only goal is to murder civilians and soldiers alike and, in their own words "wipe them off the map".

Why this is a problem is that people in these countries are encouraged to become suicide bombers with the money that gets paid to their family. It is part of the bargain. For that reason, these families are receiving terror funds. This is especially true if it comes from Hezbollah, recognised in most countries in the world as a terrorist group.

It is probably not a good a idea to arrest the families as it doesn't stop the root cause of the problem. This needs to come through government education that does not include hate and murder so you can prevent suicide bombings in the first place. This is happening way too much in Iraq, Israel and now crossing the globe all over the place.

Answer 2

I have heard that some terrorist groups "care for" the families of suicide bombers, similar to how the mafia would care for the family of a member KIA so to speak, or the military might provide a death benefit to the family of a soldier killed in action.

I had not heard of monies being disbursed to the families of "homicide" bombers. What the heck is that? Like a bomber who lives or didn't intend to die in the first place? Like a roadside bomber's family? Never heard of that...and...

I had DEFINITELY NOT heard of any governments that give money to families of suicide bombers. I'd be VERY interested in details and sources of THAT.

In any case, from a legal standpoint, I don't think so. Forgetting the investigative/evidentiary challenge of establishing your prima facia case, I believe receiving terror funds would refer to moneis received by a terrorist group to finance a terror operation. But I'm not really aware of how any relevant law reads and this is just my gut feeling from a logical point of view.

I suppose one could make a case for collusion or conspiracy by family members to induce the suicide to act...but....the bottom line is that the family is not commiting any act of terror. Hence, are not guilty.

Now, if governments are giving money....and the families had some sort of reasonable expectation of those funds being disbursed and some recourse under their law to collect said funds...that would seem to be grounds for some finding of supporting terror...but, again, it would be the government, in my opinion, not the family, upon whom the onus would fall.

And who would enforce THAT? The U.N.? Peacekeepers? I mean who does the arresting? The local constabulary who are employed by and effectively an arm of that very government???

That being said, I am not an expert on international law and lord knows our current administration can twist anything into nonsense that our sonambulant citizenry will ignore as they swallow another prozac...

So, CAN the families be arrested? I suppose anything is possible. SHOULD they be arrested? Not in my opinion. They certainly are not the source of the problem. And to threaten them and use them as pawns to deter suicide bombers would not only be ineffective as a deterrent to suicide bombers as separating the bombers from their families is part of the (and all) indoctrination/brainwashing processes; and, it would be an entirely inefficient and pointless use of time and budget that could be far better spent in other ways. In the end, it would amount to nothing more than simple revenge. Eye for an eye. Or pretty much the same thing that a terroroist does. We can not defeat "Terrorism" by becoming terrorists. That would seem pretty obvious...unless you are an oil company who has a vested interest in maintaining the satus quo of chaos and warfare or a member of our global village that drives cars that run on oil, wear clothes of polyester (or some other some other petroleum based polymer) or eats food fertilized by petroleum based products giving tacit approval to all this crap that goes on saying,"What can I do?"...in which case, they could care less about anything but the bottom line and their own comfort. To them, terror, the death of innocent civilians, soldiers, fire fighters, police officers or your dog is just another tool to manipulate the market and consumer, another means to an end or another TV show to watch. "Yeah, throw the bastard's mum in prison! That'll teach those animals. Where's my prozac? Honey, turn up the air conditioner and get me another beer, the game's on. WE WIN!"

A populace in fear is far easier to manipulate. And who doesn't love watching a good horror movie...scare me...ooooh...do it again!

Don't get me wrong, without a sonambulant citizenry willing to live an unfulfilled life of dudgery and quiet desperation, modern economic controlled society, progress and civilization as we know it, would collapse. I'm a big fan of motorcycles, spaceships, air conditioning and modern medicine myself. I'm no anarchist.

Answer 3

Seat of terror organisers.
Terrorrist organisations need a huge amount of funding
for training militants and supplying weapons.
Some countries breed Terrorrist organisations and fund them through un-official means. That's akward but true.

Answer 4

That is a stretch, and would be like saying "The Bush family had several business dealings with the Saudi bin Laden family from which Osama obtained the money to finance the 9/11 attack, so should they be linked to funding terrorism?

Answer 5

I think giving money to families of suicide bombers is the right thing to do as they have bought great pride to their community.

Answer 6

The families live in countries where it's OK to encourage your children to kill themselves if it means you can buy a wide-screen TV.

Answer 7

no, but you can track down where the funds came from and freeze the accounts. dont listen to aussie, he sounds like a terrorist sympathizer

Answer 8

there is no law there!