Hizb-ut-Tahrir Speak

[rghthrerightnow]

I was lucky to come across this article written by a leading member of Hizb-ut-Tahrir. I thought given the recent flurry of polls posters here would be interested.

I will paste a couple of paragraphs that informed my impressions of the group, but i really recommend the whole thing is read, it isn't very long.

it should send seismic waves throughout Britain that on Friday 5 August 2005, Tony Blair announced that he planned to proscribe a solely political organisation that, moreover, has a history of non-violence spanning more than fifty years. The group in question, Hizb-ut-Tahrir (“party of liberation”), has maintained that stance – based upon a deep religious belief that it is prohibited for Muslims to use violence to try to establish their political goals – despite immense persecution in many parts of the world.

If the group is non-violent, I see no reason why it should be banned, anymore that the BNP which want an all-white Britain.

The goal of Hizb-ut-Tahrir, of which I am a member, is to re-establish by political work alone an Islamic form of governance in the Muslim world; and in so doing, to end the damaging interference – political, economic and military – that has persisted in the Muslim world from the colonial powers and their “viceroys” until today. Our frank words, and Islamic rhetoric for our Muslim audience, have provoked much criticism, but no serious person who has scrutinised our group has considered us violent.

http://www.opendemocracy.net/conflict-terrorism/ban_2740.jsp

I am disturbed by the idea of an Islamic form of governance, especially Sharia law etc. i do not think there should be a muslim world, as i believe all parts of the world should belong equally to people of faith, and of none. So would hope this type of ideology, and ideal, could be discussed openly within our society. Thereby the best elements of islamic culture can grow with the best of others, rather than one subverting the other.

Any thoughts? Has this article changed your mind on Hizb-ut-Tahrir?

 

[Clintons Cat]

did Hizb-ut-Tahrir support the destruction of the standing buddahs in afganistan? Or the Saudi financed "rennovations" of the Sarajevo Central Mosque.

If so then no my opinions of Hizb-ut-Tahrir have not changed.

 

[rghthrerightnow]

did Hizb-ut-Tahrir support the destruction of the standing buddahs in afganistan? Or the Saudi financed "rennovations" of the Sarajevo Central Mosque.

If so then no my opinions of Hizb-ut-Tahrir have not changed.

so you support a ban on them, on the basis of them not criticising something?

or you have decided you do not like them because you know they didnt oppose these things?

i do not know what they do and do not oppose, in terms of extremist actions in other lands. however that article informed my view of them. i was hoping those who had alluded to superior knowledge of Hizb-ut-Tahrir on other threads would educate me further by being more specific

p.s. thanks for replying to my dead thread

 

[Poi E]

Or the Saudi financed "rennovations" of the Sarajevo Central Mosque.
d.

Yes, the fucking wahhabi vandals. A plague on their house. Those filthy Saudis have also been knocking down other damaged mosques in Kosovo.all they need to do is wave their money and things get rubber stamped

 

[Clintons Cat]

any thoughts? Has this article changed your mind on Hizb-ut-Tahrir?

you asked if my opinions had changed,no they have not.from that you conclude,

"so you support a ban on them,"

no,i have made my opposition to a ban clear on several occasions

"on the basis of them not criticising something?"

no i asked if they supported something,and had made their support for ideological totalitarianism clear on previous occasions.Thanks for trying to stretch my words to fit your arguement though.


so no i do not wish to see them banned,however i believe their assertations to represent the "muslim community" should be challenged at every opportunity.

does Hizb-ut-Tahrir support the destruction of local indigeonous interpretations of Islam and culture? Its a fairly simple question?

Sarajevo Mosque

 

[james_walsh]

Any thoughts? Has this article changed your mind on Hizb-ut-Tahrir? -quote

Well it hasn't changed my opinion, because im still in the don't know camp.
Do they give materal support to people oganising attacks (anything from 'terrorism' to wife beating)? Do they significantly help the recuitment off such people , including getting people to go off and fight in holy wars abroad?

Im along way from being able to call it one way or other. I certainly wouldn't be prepared to invest political 'capital' in defending these space cadets.

 

[james_walsh]

does Hizb-ut-Tahrir support the destruction of local indigeonous interpretations of Islam and culture? Its a fairly simple question?

(quote)

Thats a good question as well. But if they intend to accomplish such goals with out intimidation, we are for certain ,in free speach territory.

 

[rghthrerightnow]

no,i have made my opposition to a ban clear on several occasions

sorry i am not at the stage of being able to keep up with who thinks what. didnt mean to offend, was just trying to clarify.

does Hizb-ut-Tahrir support the destruction of local indigeonous interpretations of Islam and culture? Its a fairly simple question?

as i said, i dont know, but thanks for the link will check it out

 

[rghthrerightnow]

Well it hasn't changed my opinion, because im still in the don't know camp.
Do they give materal support to people oganising attacks (anything from 'terrorism' to wife beating)? Do they significantly help the recuitment off such people , including getting people to go off and fight in holy wars abroad?

Im along way from being able to call it one way or other. I certainly wouldn't be prepared to invest political 'capital' in defending these space cadets.

i supposed im still dont know.. still looking for more answers myself. im not too bothered about political capital as im thinking of leaving the only political organisation i belong to, and merely focusing on campaign groups. im so disillusioned poor me

i was moved by the article on the other side of the coin -
http://www.opendemocracy.net/conflict-terrorism/muslim_experience_2743.jsp

about a young girls experience of the forceful nature of their activists on campuses, and the lack of anyone to speak for her as a muslim (perhaps she should simply speak louder herself)

i think supporting terrorism financially should be prosecuted using existing laws. i haven't found anything yet which links them directly to violence.

 

[Clintons Cat]

one thing i was considering today,seeing as how the incitement to religious hatred laws have been extended recently,was perhaps the same protection should be also applied to heretics,apostates and unbelievers.

 

[Atan]

This group and all others similar to it have to banned. Its not that they directly are responsibile for terrorist acts here in UK but by their rhetoric they feed into the pool that potential terrorists are born in.

I am a Moslem and have come across Hizb ( and other groups ) literature - Its all designed to create a feeling of 'us and them' - Some people can become influenced by this and over time become radicalized, from this radicalized group a few can go further - Like what we saw in London.

This pool has to be drained, those already influenced have to watched if this problem is going to sorted out.

And I think its high time the UK moslems were 'insulated' from the radical Islam found in so many moslem countries. Mullahs must not be imported from abroad ( which has been done with Home Office giving Visa's ) who have come to UK and infected the young. A unemployed youth in Leeds is easy prey to these Mullah's, esp. when the parents send their kids to the local Mosque, not knowing that their kids are being brainwashed.

All Mosques should be registered with all Mullah's being reguired to be certified by some UK body. All Mullah's should be required to pass some. Any Mullah found to be preaching anything inconsistent with being a Briton should have his certificate revoked.

Its time for a serious effort on the part of government for all Britons and that includes moslems like me. I could be a victim of these terrorists and on top of that have to face rest of the community looking at me as some extremist.

 

[keithtalent]

Any thoughts? Has this article changed your mind on Hizb-ut-Tahrir?

No - they remain a bunch of nutbars.

(Check the article out if you've yet to - reads as a piss-poor defence of free speech. Well for me anyway).

 

[JHE]

Atan, I don't believe for a moment that you are, as you claim, a Muslim.

***

As for the proposed outright banning of Hizb ut-Tahrir... I'm not convinced that it is either justified or wise. However, I certainly hope that MI5/SB are keeping a very close eye on them and their contacts - both where they operate under their own flag and where they operate semi-clandestinely, within student Muslim societies etc.

 

[tangentlama]

Any thoughts? Has this article changed your mind on Hizb-ut-Tahrir?

the Union of Jewish Students (UK) has already "prepared the way" whilst holding positions on the NUS National Executive Committee to bring motions to no-platform Hizb-Ut Tahrir (during NUS Conference 2004) and as well as labelling various other Islamic groups such as the Muslim Association of Britain (MAB) and the Muslim Public Affairs Committee (MPAC) in the UK, as "extremists" to the Home Affairs Committee of the House of Commons. these motions were led
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200405/cmselect/cmhaff/165ii/165we38.htm

but tell me this, why no-platform Hizb-Ut-Tahrir again in 2004, when they were already no-platformed back in 1996? (or was it '95 - not sure)

The owners of a Bradford Hotel, the Pennington Midland Hotel, decided not to hire their ballroom out for a conference when they saw the advertising material put out by the organisers on the day of the event and realised that the organisers belonged to Hizb ut-Tahrir. The poster to which Josie and John Pennington, co-owners of the hotel, took offence read: "In 1948, America supported the establishment of an illegitimate entity named Israel on the pillage of Muslim blood and the destruction of Muslim property. Now with the help of our treacherous leaders, America has launched a new crusade against Islam and the Muslim workers under the guise of the so called ‘Peace Process’"

what was so offensive about that statement? the perspective? surely it's a valid emotion to be angry and upset after being driven from your villages? after all most of the world has sympathy and compassion for the terrible suffering of Jewish people during WWII, why not hold sympathy and compassion for the terrible suffering of Palestinian Arabs during the Nabka caused by Israel's War of Independence?

Kenan Malik wrote an article in the New Statesman (06.09.96) called "No platform, or no democracy?" where he condemns the NUS’ banning of Hizb ut-Tahrir from university campuses (amongst other bans and "no-platform" policies)

"We can only hope for a more rational answer than that which is now found on university campuses; that equality and free speech are not seen as antagonistic claims, but as two necessary elements of a freer society."

At the 2004 NUS conference, there seemed to be a certain amount of zionist bias in those leaflets that the UJS circulated that stated that these groups were extremists and anti-semites, esp. highlighting their criticism of Israel

my concern is that we're moving towards a UK adaptation of US Anti-Arabism which has gripped the the political and academic US for the best part of the last 20 years, with UJS requesting that pro-Palestinian lecturers to be secretly blacklisted, and we're being pushed to take a dangerous non-neutral position re. Islamic groups, whilst ignoring the extremism and nationalism in some Jewish groups (lets' be honest - they too have similar 'extremists' in their ranks)

i don't know what to think about Hizb at the moment. i'd need to do some more research and know more about them, and separate the propaganda from the truth (and that's not easy!)

perhaps this thread could evolve some way towards assisting with that education

 

[X-77]

This group and all others similar to it have to banned. Its not that they directly are responsibile for terrorist acts here in UK but by their rhetoric they feed into the pool that potential terrorists are born in.

I am a Moslem and have come across Hizb ( and other groups ) literature - Its all designed to create a feeling of 'us and them' - Some people can become influenced by this and over time become radicalized, from this radicalized group a few can go further - Like what we saw in London.

This pool has to be drained, those already influenced have to watched if this problem is going to sorted out.

And I think its high time the UK moslems were 'insulated' from the radical Islam found in so many moslem countries. Mullahs must not be imported from abroad ( which has been done with Home Office giving Visa's ) who have come to UK and infected the young. A unemployed youth in Leeds is easy prey to these Mullah's, esp. when the parents send their kids to the local Mosque, not knowing that their kids are being brainwashed.

All Mosques should be registered with all Mullah's being reguired to be certified by some UK body. All Mullah's should be required to pass some. Any Mullah found to be preaching anything inconsistent with being a Briton should have his certificate revoked.

Its time for a serious effort on the part of government for all Britons and that includes moslems like me. I could be a victim of these terrorists and on top of that have to face rest of the community looking at me as some extremist.

what are your views of UK foreign policy?

 

[rghthrerightnow]

perhaps this thread could evolve some way towards assisting with that education

yes - i was hoping that.

i have just read an article by a man whose blog is here (hope it doesnt break any rules linking to it)Harry's Place. i have skimmed through it and he has a quite irrational fixation with George Galloway (shared with some posters on here) but some interesting 'facts' that are worthy of investigation if nothing else.

I am suprised the man was commissioned to write an article by a site I regularly trawl but here it is. i penned a rather long and rambling reply to him which may or may not be of interest:

"Hizb-ut-Tahrir has spent a great deal of time and effort sanitising the public face of its politics. In that sense, it has followed the same path as the British National Party. But people are not fooled by extremists simply because they wear smart clothes and speak in measured tones. They should not be taken in by Hizb-ut-Tahrir".

How ironic that David T states the danger with Hizb-ut-Tahrir lies in their attempt to smarten up their image.

This group, as with UKIP at the last European election, is being fed with constant oxygen by a press with either indifference or ignorance of the ‘self-fulfilling prophecy’ effect such attention always brings. That goes from clever op eds to swaggering blogs.

I am somewhat surprised David T is opposing an outright ban. Of course any rational person can determine a ban would have to be made on some sort of criteria.. opposing the state, religious or racial hatred, members’ violence or violent propaganda. Such a ban would erode quite a substantial portion of the freedom to organise in this country. It could apply to many groups on the far left or right. But having seen his blog and bizarre fixation with George Galloway I was expecting something a little less perspicacious. Perhaps, he also, is ‘toning it down’ to suit the audience.

For me, the danger with Hizb-ut-Tahrir is in the deafening silence of the moderates, Muslim or otherwise. For me, the moderates are those willing to address the root causes of terrorism, and political disenfranchisement, of not just Muslims, but also the majority of people in Britain.
http://www.new-politics.net/news-releases/new-poll-shows-democratic-reform-vital-for-britain/

We see front page after front page of bearded Asians and Arabs... with headlines screaming 'hate' ‘terror’ 'get out'. And Blair sits sunning himself somewhere while people forget to ask the real questions.

The Independent will run today with a story on the front page spelling out that the bombers spent more time in the gym than the mosque, yet most of the papers scream still for mosques to be closed down. This claim is not a new one.

"Thirty-year-old Mohammed Sidique Khan worked as a counselor in a youth center. He seemed to spend more time in the gym than the mosque."
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2005/7/13/153809.shtml

Racist attacks are up. People are scared to be Muslim. And this kind of climate is supposed to reduce terrorism?

What has to be asked is why the focus has moved once again, away from our lying prime minister, away from the disastrous foreign policy practised by our government, to a handy diversion.

I believe we have to ask what can be done, to re-direct attention where it should be. To the democratic deficit in this country, the global injustices that mean it is quite miraculous, in my opinion, that there are not more attacks.

We have asked and answered the questions before, about what to do with extremists, how and on what criteria to enforce a ban. But a free society cannot accommodate such contradictions. Whilst an honest society realises that rises in extremism are a result of a failure of what is on offer. In the idyllic society there will always be a few extremists. Sometimes they create needed reforms; sometimes they develop dangerous and unproductive philosophies. But if what *** says is true, and the idea of a caliphate has such widespread support, this can only be because the alternative does not seem productive to the average Muslim. Just as the BNP has gained ground, on the back of a widespread feeling of the failure of our leaders to represent us.

“The British National Party is on the verge of becoming a major political force. Over the past few years it has seen its support and membership rocket. It now has 21 councillors, polled 808,000 votes in the European election and, were it not for the United Kingdom Independence Party, would have several MEPs and London Assembly members by now. In May’s general election the BNP saved its deposit in 34 constituencies, 25 in Yorkshire and the West Midlands alone.”
http://www.searchlightmagazine.com/index.php?link=template&story=136

And so we find ourselves staring day in, day out, at Bakri and Qatada, and what we don’t see is the situation on the ground in Iraq, in Afghanistan. We forget the destruction and the injustice while we prepare ourselves to invade another Arab land.

Q Including use of force?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, you know, as I say, all options are on the table.
http://www.earnedmedia.org/wh0812.htm

The bit about him ‘not being optimistic’ on this issue didn’t make the transcript. But I know what I heard.

We are expected to oppose the development of nuclear energy/ weapons in Iran when a man like Bush has his finger on the button. When the US administration have scuppered non-proliferation talks to suit its own programme of encouraged proliferation elsewhere.

Why are people, on left, right and centre, having debates about censorship instead of representation? Having debates about spending another trillion dollars on war instead of the people languishing in poverty. I for one am deeply disturbed that there are so few people, particularly in Britain, asking the big questions, at a time when we need them more than ever.

 

[Atan]

JHE,

What the hell makes you doubt that I am not a Moslem? What you so conditioned that any views that are at variance with what you think should be a Moslem and you struggle to accept my faith?

I am a Moslem, perhaps not a good Moslem but by heck I am one. I don't know how to prove ( although I don't know why I should ) but here goes.

I was born in Pakistan, in that splinter of territory known as Azad Kashmir in a district called Bhimber not far from the LOC. I was three when my parents moved to UK. That territory itself has seen three wars and more bloodshed asides, all legacy of colonialism's hasty retreat.

As for as UK foreign policy ( I take it you are referring to Moslem countries ) it sucks and partly if not significantly is the root cause of what happened in London. I am not judging here but stating what I think is fact - Contrary to what Blair and his gang claim.

I don't wanna 'skyscraper' of a post here so I will be short. Its Isreal ( the sale of one people's land to another people by a people who did not even own it - What Edward Said I believe called 'Transfer of a European problem to the Middle East' and the subsequent support of Isreal. Add to this the Western intervention in Middle East all the way to Iraq have all helped to fire the radicals.

In addition the 1980s Afghan Jihad organized by CIA with liberal funds ( matched dollar by dollar from Saudi ) was seminal to the landscape we face today. Islam was radicalized esp. CIA sponsored Maddrassas which generated the cannon fodder for the war against Soviets. These Maddrasas mushroomed in Pakistanin the 1980s. The concept of Jihad was actively sponsored. Since Saudi Arabia was part of this effort Wahabism was injected in liberal doses. By 1989 the Soviets might have pulled out but there was a whole infrasructure of Jihad in Pakistan which since has been hijacked by Bin Laden in the Jihad against the West. 9/11 was a blowback of this policy of creating 'Gods soldiers' as Reagan liked to call them.

Now we have this radicalized cancer spreading - Some of it has spread here to UK via the Mullahs and assorted people, mostly refugees given asylum here. Now I can cry here all day what the wrongs done by USA or UK but that is not going to stop these people and frankly I am feel pretty nervous because my life is gonna ger more complicated and possibly ( esp. if more bombs go off ) endangered when the majority start looking at me or my kind as suicide bombers. If thats selfish well it probably is!!!

To put is simply wrong has been done by UK/USA but I don't want to see bombs going off here, esp. since it highly unlikely that UK or the US are going to change their policies.

PS. Before somebody complains I know my typo skills are .. Well non existant and spelling was never my forte so do excuse me

 

[upsidedownwalrus]

This group and all others similar to it have to banned. Its not that they directly are responsibile for terrorist acts here in UK but by their rhetoric they feed into the pool that potential terrorists are born in.

....

Its time for a serious effort on the part of government for all Britons and that includes moslems like me. I could be a victim of these terrorists and on top of that have to face rest of the community looking at me as some extremist.

There's no way you are a muslim. For one thing, no muslim would ever refer to themself as a 'moslem', which is seen as a highly offensive spelling.

 

[Atan]

Ha Ha Ha ... Now this is funny. What do have to do to prove I am a mOslem? Take off my trousers and show I am circumcized? Then again you guy's will claim I am a Jew!

Check out Paktribune - Its a Pakistani political discussion forum full of India/Pak slugging matches - I am a Moderator there. I just hope that settles it

I wanted to contribute something positive here but instead I can't get beyond my bloody identity.

 

[rghthrerightnow]

fookin ell the polls on that site are even worse than the ones on here sometimes

Question: "Who will stand to gain the most out of the London Bombings ?"

# Muslims
# Christians
# Jews

quite bizarrely the top answer so far is Jews. great. great question great answer. solving bugger all

and funnily enough

Discussion Forum is Down for Maintenance

Sorry for inconvenience
http://www.paktribune.com/forums/

 

[Atan]

Suggest you visit the site in a few days time - It gets hacked regularly. If you want to see extremism in its raw form with almost everything turned on its head log on.

You might understand why I am so averse to groups like Al-Mahajouran.

 

[upsidedownwalrus]

Ha Ha Ha ... Now this is funny. What do have to do to prove I am a mOslem? Take off my trousers and show I am circumcized? Then again you guy's will claim I am a Jew!

Check out Paktribune - Its a Pakistani political discussion forum full of India/Pak slugging matches - I am a Moderator there. I just hope that settles it

I wanted to contribute something positive here but instead I can't get beyond my bloody identity.

But I thought the spelling 'moslem' was offensive to most Muslims?

 

[tangentlama]

Read Kenan Malik's 1996 essay for New Statesmen -
http://www.kenanmalik.com/essays/no_platform.html

 

[energy]

tangentlama,

Your response is utterly bizarre. Are you trying to say that Hizb-ut-Tahrir are wonderful people, and it's actually a Jewish-Zionist conspiracy to say that they are otherwise?

Surely that is as odious a comment as comments made by the group itself against Jews, Hindus, gays and women (to paraphrase Kenan Malik).

You should be ashamed of youself.

 

[tangentlama]

tada! i now have my very own stalker, energy, following my posts and implying that i've given words of support for HUT where there have been none

i posted a link to the 1996 Kenan Malik essay i referred to in earlier post on this thread

i suggest you read all my posts like a good little stalker and keep your shame to yourself

 

[energy]

I just find it inexplicable that on one thread you moan about the treatment of gays in Palestinian society, and in another you seem to defend a notoriously anti-gay group by saying its a Jewish-Zionist conspiracy. You should be utterly ashamed of yourself.

 

[rghthrerightnow]

tangentlama,

i found that essay interesting, once it got past the rather frightening area of eugenics.

it has struck me that some on this board seem to be more concerned about Hizb-ut-Tahrir than the BNP. one could perhaps understand it in the wake of the london bombings, but since most seem quite conversant with the underlying motivation in terms of british foreign policy, it remains odd. we all know official BNP policy is underlaid with a quite obscene and offensive ideology, as espoused on certain message boards. the same is no doubt true for groups such H-I-T. why the double standard?

it was informative to read a view on the development of the 'state', and 'radical' attitude which led to no platform

whenever i have braved a discussion on no platform with other anti-fascists the prevailing argument for no platform is that if they got the power, they would not allow us a platform, they would not allow us the freedom to organise.

i feel that this could be applied to any horror a malignant power could confer on another. are we to say, that under neo-con world rule, poor nations would be gunea pigs for depleted uranium, and dissenters would be routinely tortured, so we must get in there first and apply this injustice ourselves?

really my position remains that we cannot pre-empt what we disagree with by emulating it. restriction to speech and thought is fundamentally inconsistent with progress and the legitimacy of anything that is able to be achieved. i.e. if you reach your idyllic society (highly unlikely) by constraining and directing debate, that cannot, by definition, be the idyllic society.

 

[rghthrerightnow]

you seem to defend a notoriously anti-gay group by saying its a Jewish-Zionist conspiracy.

erm, sorry for my ignorance, but have i missed something? where in the essay is the Jewish-Zionist conspiracy bit?

 

[tangentlama]

I just find it inexplicable that on one thread you moan about the treatment of gays in Palestinian society, and in another you seem to defend a notoriously anti-gay group by saying its a Jewish-Zionist conspiracy. You should be utterly ashamed of yourself.

substantiate your accusations here and now, with actual quotes, or stfu

 

[energy]

substantiate your accusations here and now, with actual quotes, or stfu

I'll stfu because I don't want to get into a bitter feud, but I'll have my beady little eyes on you