By Shahid Ali Khan
RIYADH - Saudi Arabia can be a strategy partner of Malaysia to promote international Islamic finance industry, said a high-ranking official of Malaysia bank currently visiting the Kingdom.
Mohamed Razif Abd Kadir, deputy governor, Bank Negara Malaysia said at a press conference Saturday that the dynamic nature of economic ties and historical relations between the two countries, Saudi Arabia could be a strategic partner for Malaysia in shaping the global Islamic finance industry.
A 50-member delegation led by Raja Dr. Nazrin Shah, financial ambassador of Malaysia International Islamic Financial Center (MIFC) is currently visiting Saudi Arabia.
MIFC is an initiative to promote Malaysia as an Islamic financial hub by global integration of economic linkages among organizations related with Islamic finance.
The MIFC delegation is comprised of representatives from Malaysia’s regulatory authorities, national investment agencies, Islamic banks, Islamic fund managers, Takaful operators and professions services firms and Shariah research institute.
The delegation is organizing road shows in Riyadh, Jeddah and Makkah seeking to establish contacts with Saudi businessmen and investors.
Kadir said about 60 percent of Sukuk in the world’s financial market originate from Malaysia. “In fact, Malaysia has a 60 percent of the Sukuk world’s market share,” he said.
Sukuk, a “legal instrument, deed, check” is the Arabic name for a financial certificate, but commonly refers to the Islamic equivalent of bond.
Kadir said during the visit MIFC members will hold talks with officials of Capital Market Authority (CMA) and Saudi Arabian Monetary Agency (SAMA). “We will explore possibilities of establishing close links that can shape the global Islamic finance industry,” he said.
He said the countries in Asean Free Trade Area (AFTA) alone comprised of a population of 500 million people that offers huge potential for Islamic finance. The awareness among the people in Asean-member countries namely Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, Vietnam, Laos and Myanmar is increasing remarkably, he said.
“Saudis can join hands with Malaysia and other players in the region to tap this huge potential for Islamic finance,” he said.
Nik Mohamed Din Nik Musa of MIFC Promotions Unit said the level of interest for Islamic finance is rising among Saudis. He said more number of Saudi businessmen and investors started looking for Shariah compliant projects.
“During our current visit we want to establish contacts with more number of Saudi businessmen before entering into transaction dealings,” he said.
Dr. Nazrin Shah, MIFC Finance Ambassador said there has been a 30 percent growth in the corporate Sukuk that rose to SR32 billion in 2009 from SR24 billion in 2008.
“The annual compound rate of growth in Sukuk issues is 21 percent since 2001,” she said. - SG
Saturday, May 8, 2010
Times Square Bomber Linked With CIA-Controlled Terror Group
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Thursday, May 6, 2010
A man arrested in Pakistan in connection with the Times Square car bombing attempt who had traveled with accused bomber Faisal Shahzad is a member of a terrorist organization that is controlled by British MI6 and the CIA.
Sheik Mohammed Rehan, who was arrested on Tuesday in Karachi, “Allegedly drove with Shahzad from Karachi to Peshawar on July 7, 2009, in a pickup truck, authorities said. They returned to Karachi July 22. It is not known why they went to Peshawar and whether they met with anyone there,” reports the L.A. Times.
Rehan is a member of the militant group Jaish-e-Muhammad, a terrorist organization that came to prominence in the mid-1990’s and has been involved in attacks in the disputed Kashmir border region between India and Pakistan. The group also helped carry out the December 2001 attack on the Indian Parliament which brought India and Pakistan to the brink of nuclear war, tensions that proved very lucrative for British and American arms manufacturers who sold weapons to both sides.
“The December 2001 terrorist attacks on the Indian parliament — which contributed to pushing India and Pakistan to the brink of war — were conducted by two Pakistan-based rebel groups, Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Muhammad, both of which are covertly supported by Pakistan’s ISI,” writes Michel Chossudovsky. “Needless to say, these ISI-supported terrorist attacks serve the geopolitical interests of the US. They not only contribute to weakening and fracturing the Indian Union, they also create conditions which favor the outbreak of a regional war between Pakistan and India.”
Jaish-e-Muhammad, the group now emerging in connection with the Times Square incident, was founded by Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh, the 9/11 bagman who delivered $100,000 from the United Arab Emirates to Mohammed Atta at the behest of General Mahmud Ahmed, then head of the ISI. Mahmud Ahmed, the man who ordered Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh to bankroll the attacks on the Pentagon and the World Trade Center, was meeting with Republican Congressman Porter Goss and Democratic Senator Bob Graham in Washington DC on the morning of 9/11. In the days before and after the attack, Ahmed also met with CIA Head George Tenet as well as current Vice-President Joe Biden, then Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
In a report on Jaish-e-Muhammad’s involvement in the murder of Daniel Pearl, who was investigating the ISI, the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review reported that the Pakistani government, “Believe that Saeed Sheikh’s power comes not from the ISI, but from his connections with our own CIA.”
Former Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf also alleged that Sheikh was recruited by MI6 while studying in London for the effort to destabilize Bosnia. During the 1992-1995 Bosnia conflict, the CIA helped Osama Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda to train and arm Bosnian Muslims.
In 2002, the London Times reported that Sheikh “is no ordinary terrorist but a man who has connections that reach high into Pakistan’s military and intelligence elite and into the innermost circles of Osama Bin Laden and the al-Qaeda organization.”
Despite Sheikh’s intimate involvement in numerous acts of terror as well as political kidnappings, including the 2008 Mumbai massacre, he was protected by both the CIA and British intelligence at every turn.
To recap, this is the man who founded the group now emerging in connection with the botched Times Square bombing – a CIA and MI6 asset.
“Experts believe Jaish-e-Muhammad still benefits from links with Pakistan’s powerful government intelligence community. Some experts believe Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence agency facilitated the group’s formation,” states yesterday’s L.A. Times article.
As the vast majority of geopolitical analysts concur, the Pakistani ISI is virtually nothing more than a CIA outpost. The ISI does nothing without the Agency giving its approval. The CIA has paid millions of dollars to the ISI since 9/11, accounting for no less than a third of the ISI’s entire budget, despite the foreign spy agency’s notorious history of funding and arming terrorist groups like Jaish-e-Muhammad and despite the fact that it bankrolled the 9/11 hijackers.
Since the CIA has its fingerprints all over almost every Middle Eastern terror group, it’s unsurprising that an Agency connection to the Times Square bomber has come to light. We’ve never come across a terrorist who wasn’t trained, equipped, radicalized, entrapped, or provocateured by a western intelligence agency or a terror group controlled by a western intelligence agency.
Article printed from Infowars: http://www.infowars.com
URL to article: http://www.infowars.com/times-square-bomber-linked-with-cia-controlled-terror-group/
Prison Planet.com
Thursday, May 6, 2010
A man arrested in Pakistan in connection with the Times Square car bombing attempt who had traveled with accused bomber Faisal Shahzad is a member of a terrorist organization that is controlled by British MI6 and the CIA.
Sheik Mohammed Rehan, who was arrested on Tuesday in Karachi, “Allegedly drove with Shahzad from Karachi to Peshawar on July 7, 2009, in a pickup truck, authorities said. They returned to Karachi July 22. It is not known why they went to Peshawar and whether they met with anyone there,” reports the L.A. Times.
Rehan is a member of the militant group Jaish-e-Muhammad, a terrorist organization that came to prominence in the mid-1990’s and has been involved in attacks in the disputed Kashmir border region between India and Pakistan. The group also helped carry out the December 2001 attack on the Indian Parliament which brought India and Pakistan to the brink of nuclear war, tensions that proved very lucrative for British and American arms manufacturers who sold weapons to both sides.
“The December 2001 terrorist attacks on the Indian parliament — which contributed to pushing India and Pakistan to the brink of war — were conducted by two Pakistan-based rebel groups, Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Muhammad, both of which are covertly supported by Pakistan’s ISI,” writes Michel Chossudovsky. “Needless to say, these ISI-supported terrorist attacks serve the geopolitical interests of the US. They not only contribute to weakening and fracturing the Indian Union, they also create conditions which favor the outbreak of a regional war between Pakistan and India.”
Jaish-e-Muhammad, the group now emerging in connection with the Times Square incident, was founded by Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh, the 9/11 bagman who delivered $100,000 from the United Arab Emirates to Mohammed Atta at the behest of General Mahmud Ahmed, then head of the ISI. Mahmud Ahmed, the man who ordered Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh to bankroll the attacks on the Pentagon and the World Trade Center, was meeting with Republican Congressman Porter Goss and Democratic Senator Bob Graham in Washington DC on the morning of 9/11. In the days before and after the attack, Ahmed also met with CIA Head George Tenet as well as current Vice-President Joe Biden, then Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
In a report on Jaish-e-Muhammad’s involvement in the murder of Daniel Pearl, who was investigating the ISI, the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review reported that the Pakistani government, “Believe that Saeed Sheikh’s power comes not from the ISI, but from his connections with our own CIA.”
Former Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf also alleged that Sheikh was recruited by MI6 while studying in London for the effort to destabilize Bosnia. During the 1992-1995 Bosnia conflict, the CIA helped Osama Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda to train and arm Bosnian Muslims.
In 2002, the London Times reported that Sheikh “is no ordinary terrorist but a man who has connections that reach high into Pakistan’s military and intelligence elite and into the innermost circles of Osama Bin Laden and the al-Qaeda organization.”
Despite Sheikh’s intimate involvement in numerous acts of terror as well as political kidnappings, including the 2008 Mumbai massacre, he was protected by both the CIA and British intelligence at every turn.
To recap, this is the man who founded the group now emerging in connection with the botched Times Square bombing – a CIA and MI6 asset.
“Experts believe Jaish-e-Muhammad still benefits from links with Pakistan’s powerful government intelligence community. Some experts believe Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence agency facilitated the group’s formation,” states yesterday’s L.A. Times article.
As the vast majority of geopolitical analysts concur, the Pakistani ISI is virtually nothing more than a CIA outpost. The ISI does nothing without the Agency giving its approval. The CIA has paid millions of dollars to the ISI since 9/11, accounting for no less than a third of the ISI’s entire budget, despite the foreign spy agency’s notorious history of funding and arming terrorist groups like Jaish-e-Muhammad and despite the fact that it bankrolled the 9/11 hijackers.
Since the CIA has its fingerprints all over almost every Middle Eastern terror group, it’s unsurprising that an Agency connection to the Times Square bomber has come to light. We’ve never come across a terrorist who wasn’t trained, equipped, radicalized, entrapped, or provocateured by a western intelligence agency or a terror group controlled by a western intelligence agency.
Article printed from Infowars: http://www.infowars.com
URL to article: http://www.infowars.com/times-square-bomber-linked-with-cia-controlled-terror-group/
Greg Palast: “Remove the Bloodsuckers”
The Excavator
May 8, 2010
The solution to the Greek crisis, and the global debt crisis, is simple according to investigative reporter Greg Palast. In his 2001 article called “The Globalizer Who Came In From the Cold,” Palast suggests that we should “remove the bloodsuckers,” who are the global financial wizards that work at the IMF, WTO and the World Bank and practice the art of dark finance. Palast details the step-by-step plan of how these transnational economic parasites bring entire nations to ruin, which he learned after he gained a hold of some precious World Bank documents that laid out the banksters’ game-plan of how to harness the financial will of sovereign nations and use it against them. Palast also talked with Joseph Stiglitz, the former Chief Economist of the World Bank and a Nobel prize winner, for the piece.
Step one, Palast recounts, is ‘Briberization,” and it involves the criminal global financiers paying national leaders of poverty-stricken nations hefty amounts of dough for the direct sale of public assets to oligarchical corporations and private foreign banks. All the illegal dough of the traitorous leaders is then safely stashed in secret Swiss bank accounts, miles and miles away from the nation’s angry citizens whose livelihoods and incomes are stripped in the process.
Step two is what is referred to as the “Hot Money” cycle by Stiglitz. This is how the cycle works, as described by Palast, “Cash comes in for speculation in real estate and currency, then flees at the first whiff of trouble. A nation’s reserves can drain in days, hours. And when that happens, to seduce speculators into returning a nation’s own capital funds, the IMF demands these nations raise interest rates to 30%, 50% and 80%.” Step two is mainly about hijacking of pension funds, gutting employment benefits, and other social safety nets that people work all their lives for.
To put it another way, the criminal oligarchic parasites hypnotize a nation to sleep, bend it over, strip it of its clothes, and then rape it. That is the way the secret relationship works behind doors. The transnational banksters are all about economic rape. Rape of public assets, rape of pension funds, rape of electrical and water systems, rape of currencies, rape of everything that secures nations and keeps them alive.
And when the nation finally wakes up late in the afternoon, it realizes that it was robbed deaf, dumb, and blind the night before. It also discovers that it acquired an economic STD, so the pain has only begun and recovery is far from sight. An even bigger revelation awaits the nation, which will cause panic in the streets, and thrust the nation further into the economic abyss.
The people then begin to find out that the vampires from the IMF and World Bank never left the night before, they were hiding in the nation’s economic closet, where they’ve patiently waited to put the third step into effect, which is a sharp rise in food and gas prices, and other commodities that keep a nation running from day to day on an even keel. This step eventually leads to what Palast calls “Step-Three-and-a-Half,” and what Stiglitz brands as “The IMF riot.” It is attributed to the IMF because they basically engineer the collapse through their crippling policies and proposals for social spending cuts, which create the conditions for riots, public rage and civil unrest.
We are all familiar with the images from these riots around the world, they’ve taken place in Indonesia, Argentina, and now were seeing them in Greece. They include burning buildings. Streets in mayhem. Thuggish Stormtroopers protecting the Capitol and beating kids. Old and young fighting back with pots and pans. Entire roads up in flames. Palast writes:
The IMF riots (and by riots I mean peaceful demonstrations dispersed by bullets, tanks and teargas) cause new panicked flights of capital and government bankruptcies. This economic arson has it’s bright side – for foreign corporations, who can then pick off remaining assets, such as the odd mining concession or port, at fire sale prices.
The fourth and last step is called “poverty reduction strategy” by the World Bank/IMF, or if you don’t like the Big Brother coinage, the more apt term is “monopoly market politics.” People often mistake this last step with free trade policies, but one important thing to keep in mind, as Palast says, is that this is “free trade by the rules of the World Trade Organization and World Bank,” in other words, it is corporatist-monopolist trade in the guise of free market capitalism.
II.
Speaking to Alex Jones in March 2002 about the article, Palast said that the IMF/World Bank/WTO policies amount to “systematically tearing nations apart.” The global economic illusionists have done it to African and Latin American nations, and now they have their bloody, slug-infested eyes set on European and North American nations.
And the economic parasites never have new tricks up their sleeves, but everywhere their tricks work exactly the same, because they’re usually backed up by military muscle, so you’re condemned to believe in them, or face death. But not everybody believes in them. Certainly not Venezuela. They showed them the door. With guns, of course. But guns need not be involved.
Recently, Germany, America, England, and France supported the IMF’s call for a global bank tax, which would be dedicated to a fund that would secure the payment of future bank bailouts. Canada is the only nation in the Western hemisphere to oppose the tax. But it is not the only nation in the world. Brazil, Japan, Switzerland, and Australia are also voicing their dissent.
Simon Nixon writes in The Wall Street Journal that the proposed IMF bank tax doesn’t address structural problems within the global financial system, and should not be implemented. In his article “IMF Bank-Tax Plan Is No Substitute for Proper Regulation of the Sector,” Nixon writes:
But while taxing the banks may be a legitimate way to raise revenue, the IMF is on weaker ground with its claim that its proposed taxes directly address weaknesses in the global financial system exposed by the crisis. It argues that its proposed Financial Stability Contribution (FSC) would charge banks for the cost of implicit government guarantees by levying a fee on their liabilities less their equity and insured deposits, similar to the Obama administrations proposed bank-liability tax. The IMF recommends the money raised goes into a fund to cover the cost of future bailouts. Aware such a fund could encourage banks to run bigger risks, the IMF says governments must also introduce special resolution regimes allowing regulators to seize and restructure failing banks.
The IMF is also proposing a Financial Activity Tax (FAT), which would tax bank profits and banker pay as a way of keeping a lid on bonus payments, or what the IMF calls “excessive rents.” This would be similar to one-off taxes introduced this year by the U.K. and France in response to public outrage over this year’s giant bank bonuses.
But these proposals address only the symptoms and not the cause of the financial crisis. The real challenge for policy makers is to eliminate altogether—or at least minimize as far as possible— the implicit government guarantees that fueled excessive risk-taking in the boom and reduce the systemic risks posed by the failure of large banks that have left taxpayers in this crisis saddled with such huge bills.
That can only be done by much higher capital requirements and radical structural reform. The IMF is right to point out that higher capital requirements are themselves a form of tax. Indeed, from a macroprudential point of view the two approaches may achieve similar outcomes. But taxes don’t provide the same incentive for institutions to avoid excessive risk taking.
Allister Heath, author of “IMF plan: the wrong kind of reform,” has similar complaints about the IMF proposals. He writes:
There is a vital distinction between asking banks to pay a fee to finance this wind-down fund – and telling them the cash will be used for future bailouts, which would fuel more moral hazard. A related, crucial reform would be to set-up automatic procedures for the private sector to recapitalise troubled banks; this would allow bail-ins, as opposed to bail-outs. Banks could issue contingent convertible securities (CoCos); these debt instruments would convert to equity if capital ratios fell below an agreed level. Ordinary debt could also be turned into equity if a bank were to run out of capital. These ideas would transform banking, make it more market-based, introduce incentives to control risk and protect taxpayers. It is a tragedy the IMF and politicians are so obsessed with taxing everything that moves that they are incapable of a grown-up debate.
III.
A democratically mature reform would include smart regulation of credit and financial institutions, the reintroduction of public banking, the reduction of public subsidies to undeserving corporations and banks, the reinstatement of the principles of free economic competition, and lastly, the termination of the IMF, World Bank, and WTO, i.e. the “bloodsuckers,” whose agenda is to establish an oligarchical grip on nations and peoples, and deprive them of all prosperity, as well as economic and political independence.
May 8, 2010
The solution to the Greek crisis, and the global debt crisis, is simple according to investigative reporter Greg Palast. In his 2001 article called “The Globalizer Who Came In From the Cold,” Palast suggests that we should “remove the bloodsuckers,” who are the global financial wizards that work at the IMF, WTO and the World Bank and practice the art of dark finance. Palast details the step-by-step plan of how these transnational economic parasites bring entire nations to ruin, which he learned after he gained a hold of some precious World Bank documents that laid out the banksters’ game-plan of how to harness the financial will of sovereign nations and use it against them. Palast also talked with Joseph Stiglitz, the former Chief Economist of the World Bank and a Nobel prize winner, for the piece.
Step one, Palast recounts, is ‘Briberization,” and it involves the criminal global financiers paying national leaders of poverty-stricken nations hefty amounts of dough for the direct sale of public assets to oligarchical corporations and private foreign banks. All the illegal dough of the traitorous leaders is then safely stashed in secret Swiss bank accounts, miles and miles away from the nation’s angry citizens whose livelihoods and incomes are stripped in the process.
Step two is what is referred to as the “Hot Money” cycle by Stiglitz. This is how the cycle works, as described by Palast, “Cash comes in for speculation in real estate and currency, then flees at the first whiff of trouble. A nation’s reserves can drain in days, hours. And when that happens, to seduce speculators into returning a nation’s own capital funds, the IMF demands these nations raise interest rates to 30%, 50% and 80%.” Step two is mainly about hijacking of pension funds, gutting employment benefits, and other social safety nets that people work all their lives for.
To put it another way, the criminal oligarchic parasites hypnotize a nation to sleep, bend it over, strip it of its clothes, and then rape it. That is the way the secret relationship works behind doors. The transnational banksters are all about economic rape. Rape of public assets, rape of pension funds, rape of electrical and water systems, rape of currencies, rape of everything that secures nations and keeps them alive.
And when the nation finally wakes up late in the afternoon, it realizes that it was robbed deaf, dumb, and blind the night before. It also discovers that it acquired an economic STD, so the pain has only begun and recovery is far from sight. An even bigger revelation awaits the nation, which will cause panic in the streets, and thrust the nation further into the economic abyss.
The people then begin to find out that the vampires from the IMF and World Bank never left the night before, they were hiding in the nation’s economic closet, where they’ve patiently waited to put the third step into effect, which is a sharp rise in food and gas prices, and other commodities that keep a nation running from day to day on an even keel. This step eventually leads to what Palast calls “Step-Three-and-a-Half,” and what Stiglitz brands as “The IMF riot.” It is attributed to the IMF because they basically engineer the collapse through their crippling policies and proposals for social spending cuts, which create the conditions for riots, public rage and civil unrest.
We are all familiar with the images from these riots around the world, they’ve taken place in Indonesia, Argentina, and now were seeing them in Greece. They include burning buildings. Streets in mayhem. Thuggish Stormtroopers protecting the Capitol and beating kids. Old and young fighting back with pots and pans. Entire roads up in flames. Palast writes:
The IMF riots (and by riots I mean peaceful demonstrations dispersed by bullets, tanks and teargas) cause new panicked flights of capital and government bankruptcies. This economic arson has it’s bright side – for foreign corporations, who can then pick off remaining assets, such as the odd mining concession or port, at fire sale prices.
The fourth and last step is called “poverty reduction strategy” by the World Bank/IMF, or if you don’t like the Big Brother coinage, the more apt term is “monopoly market politics.” People often mistake this last step with free trade policies, but one important thing to keep in mind, as Palast says, is that this is “free trade by the rules of the World Trade Organization and World Bank,” in other words, it is corporatist-monopolist trade in the guise of free market capitalism.
II.
Speaking to Alex Jones in March 2002 about the article, Palast said that the IMF/World Bank/WTO policies amount to “systematically tearing nations apart.” The global economic illusionists have done it to African and Latin American nations, and now they have their bloody, slug-infested eyes set on European and North American nations.
And the economic parasites never have new tricks up their sleeves, but everywhere their tricks work exactly the same, because they’re usually backed up by military muscle, so you’re condemned to believe in them, or face death. But not everybody believes in them. Certainly not Venezuela. They showed them the door. With guns, of course. But guns need not be involved.
Recently, Germany, America, England, and France supported the IMF’s call for a global bank tax, which would be dedicated to a fund that would secure the payment of future bank bailouts. Canada is the only nation in the Western hemisphere to oppose the tax. But it is not the only nation in the world. Brazil, Japan, Switzerland, and Australia are also voicing their dissent.
Simon Nixon writes in The Wall Street Journal that the proposed IMF bank tax doesn’t address structural problems within the global financial system, and should not be implemented. In his article “IMF Bank-Tax Plan Is No Substitute for Proper Regulation of the Sector,” Nixon writes:
But while taxing the banks may be a legitimate way to raise revenue, the IMF is on weaker ground with its claim that its proposed taxes directly address weaknesses in the global financial system exposed by the crisis. It argues that its proposed Financial Stability Contribution (FSC) would charge banks for the cost of implicit government guarantees by levying a fee on their liabilities less their equity and insured deposits, similar to the Obama administrations proposed bank-liability tax. The IMF recommends the money raised goes into a fund to cover the cost of future bailouts. Aware such a fund could encourage banks to run bigger risks, the IMF says governments must also introduce special resolution regimes allowing regulators to seize and restructure failing banks.
The IMF is also proposing a Financial Activity Tax (FAT), which would tax bank profits and banker pay as a way of keeping a lid on bonus payments, or what the IMF calls “excessive rents.” This would be similar to one-off taxes introduced this year by the U.K. and France in response to public outrage over this year’s giant bank bonuses.
But these proposals address only the symptoms and not the cause of the financial crisis. The real challenge for policy makers is to eliminate altogether—or at least minimize as far as possible— the implicit government guarantees that fueled excessive risk-taking in the boom and reduce the systemic risks posed by the failure of large banks that have left taxpayers in this crisis saddled with such huge bills.
That can only be done by much higher capital requirements and radical structural reform. The IMF is right to point out that higher capital requirements are themselves a form of tax. Indeed, from a macroprudential point of view the two approaches may achieve similar outcomes. But taxes don’t provide the same incentive for institutions to avoid excessive risk taking.
Allister Heath, author of “IMF plan: the wrong kind of reform,” has similar complaints about the IMF proposals. He writes:
There is a vital distinction between asking banks to pay a fee to finance this wind-down fund – and telling them the cash will be used for future bailouts, which would fuel more moral hazard. A related, crucial reform would be to set-up automatic procedures for the private sector to recapitalise troubled banks; this would allow bail-ins, as opposed to bail-outs. Banks could issue contingent convertible securities (CoCos); these debt instruments would convert to equity if capital ratios fell below an agreed level. Ordinary debt could also be turned into equity if a bank were to run out of capital. These ideas would transform banking, make it more market-based, introduce incentives to control risk and protect taxpayers. It is a tragedy the IMF and politicians are so obsessed with taxing everything that moves that they are incapable of a grown-up debate.
III.
A democratically mature reform would include smart regulation of credit and financial institutions, the reintroduction of public banking, the reduction of public subsidies to undeserving corporations and banks, the reinstatement of the principles of free economic competition, and lastly, the termination of the IMF, World Bank, and WTO, i.e. the “bloodsuckers,” whose agenda is to establish an oligarchical grip on nations and peoples, and deprive them of all prosperity, as well as economic and political independence.
Thursday, May 6, 2010
WeAreChangeOklahoma – Arrested for Taking Video of Security Gaurds
Posted on04 May 2010.
CHARGES DROPPED AGAINST WE ARE CHANGE OKLAHOMA ACTIVIST WHO FILMED MALL COPS
By Andrew W. Griffin
Red Dirt Report, editor
Posted: April 29, 2010
reddirtreporter@gmail.com
OKLAHOMA CITY – Five months after being charged with assault and battery following an unprovoked altercation with Penn Square Mall security guards, We Are Change Oklahoma activist James Lane said all charges against him have been dropped.
Lane, who was interviewed by this reporter about the case last November contacted Red Dirt Report this week to explain that he had been facing as much as six months in jail over an incident last Thanksgiving weekend where he and other WAC-OK activists held an action at the popular Oklahoma City mall during the so-called “Black Friday” shopping day.
After “deception dollars” were dropped off a balcony and a bullhorn was used, Lane, activist Brent Southard and others were chased by mall security guards, including Richard Wisner, Daak Love and David Ray Hodges.
Armed with a camera during the direct action, Lane was approached by the guards who ultimately detained him, injuring him in the process and confiscating his camera. Lane insists he did not resist arrest and that he was treated terribly by the guards and largely ignored by the Oklahoma City cop who arrested him.
As Lane told RDR in the original interview, “Even though I was the victim of the brutal, unprovoked assault, and never touched a single officer, I was charged with assault and battery.”
Lane said that he declined to make a plea deal, which included assault charges and ultimately a disorderly conduct charge.
Lane said the prosecuting attorney obstructed Lane’s attorney’s attempts to gain access to the camera and video that showed what he had done.
Eventually, Lane said, he obtained the video, which had not been deleted, and that would be used at the trial.
“There was some confusion as to why I wanted to go to trial,” Lane said. “The city attorney backed out from the case and put another attorney in.”
Attorney Laura Yates, noted Lane, “seemed shocked” that they were having to go through court. The attorney, added Lane, “had to get the book out and read what they were charging me on.”
The first trial ended with “continuance for discovery.” The second trial, the three security guards were there and were questioned, asked if lane had engaged in disorderly conduct or a physical altercation.
“They said, ‘No, no, no,’” Lane said.
Lane said Yates then asked, ‘When Mr. Lane put his hand up, did he intend to do you harm,’ and they said I did not. That’s when the prosecutor slumped at the podium.”
Lane said he believes Yates was “disappointed the witness told the truth” and that they would not go forward with these trumped-up charges.”
Red Dirt Report called Oklahoma City Municipal Court to speak with Yates. She was not available and has not yet returned the call.
Wisner, Love and Hodges were also served papers for a civil case Lane has filed.
“They were visibly shaken,” Lane said of the security guards after receiving the papers.
Lane said he knows that they are in a pickle.
“They filed a false police report or they perjured themselves in front of the court,” Lane said.
Asked if Yates decided to file charges against the men who Lane claims did not tell the truth about what happened, he said she did not.
Lane said his attorney, Elliot Everett, pointed out a few things where one of the testifying security guards contradicted himself, but he said it apparently wasn’t relevant to the judge.
Everett could not be reached for comment.
As for the civil case, the men have not yet responded to it.
“I am 36 years old,” Lane said. “Never been arrested and never sued anyone in my life.”
Curious about his thoughts regarding what happened, Lane said, “It seems to be a good old boy network. The police officers were complicit in a false arrest. Whenever I told them that the man (security guard) assaulted me, they said I was out of touch with reality.”
“I’m disappointed, more than anything. I thought judicial system sought to find the truth. I’ve discovered it’s just a good ol’ boy network,” Lane said. “A person can get caught up in the system.”
As noted earlier, Lane said he is seeking justice through the civil action he filed.
“If I find (justice) there, I won’t pursue it further,” he said. “But the reason I am pursuing this is I don’t want this to happen to anyone else. I don’t want anyone else to get hurt.”
As for his We Are Change Oklahoma activist colleague Brent Southard, he was found guilty of disorderly conduct and received six months probation. Southard told Red Dirt Report he was disappointed with how things turned out.
Lane said the judge said Southard had failed to follow the security guard’s instructions. Lane said they were not cops and joked, “So, I guess anytime someone in a costume tells you to stop, you better stop.”
Added Lane bitterly: “What a mockery of our judicial system.”
Copyright 2010 West Marie Media
Link:http://www.wearechange.org/?p=1437
CHARGES DROPPED AGAINST WE ARE CHANGE OKLAHOMA ACTIVIST WHO FILMED MALL COPS
By Andrew W. Griffin
Red Dirt Report, editor
Posted: April 29, 2010
reddirtreporter@gmail.com
OKLAHOMA CITY – Five months after being charged with assault and battery following an unprovoked altercation with Penn Square Mall security guards, We Are Change Oklahoma activist James Lane said all charges against him have been dropped.
Lane, who was interviewed by this reporter about the case last November contacted Red Dirt Report this week to explain that he had been facing as much as six months in jail over an incident last Thanksgiving weekend where he and other WAC-OK activists held an action at the popular Oklahoma City mall during the so-called “Black Friday” shopping day.
After “deception dollars” were dropped off a balcony and a bullhorn was used, Lane, activist Brent Southard and others were chased by mall security guards, including Richard Wisner, Daak Love and David Ray Hodges.
Armed with a camera during the direct action, Lane was approached by the guards who ultimately detained him, injuring him in the process and confiscating his camera. Lane insists he did not resist arrest and that he was treated terribly by the guards and largely ignored by the Oklahoma City cop who arrested him.
As Lane told RDR in the original interview, “Even though I was the victim of the brutal, unprovoked assault, and never touched a single officer, I was charged with assault and battery.”
Lane said that he declined to make a plea deal, which included assault charges and ultimately a disorderly conduct charge.
Lane said the prosecuting attorney obstructed Lane’s attorney’s attempts to gain access to the camera and video that showed what he had done.
Eventually, Lane said, he obtained the video, which had not been deleted, and that would be used at the trial.
“There was some confusion as to why I wanted to go to trial,” Lane said. “The city attorney backed out from the case and put another attorney in.”
Attorney Laura Yates, noted Lane, “seemed shocked” that they were having to go through court. The attorney, added Lane, “had to get the book out and read what they were charging me on.”
The first trial ended with “continuance for discovery.” The second trial, the three security guards were there and were questioned, asked if lane had engaged in disorderly conduct or a physical altercation.
“They said, ‘No, no, no,’” Lane said.
Lane said Yates then asked, ‘When Mr. Lane put his hand up, did he intend to do you harm,’ and they said I did not. That’s when the prosecutor slumped at the podium.”
Lane said he believes Yates was “disappointed the witness told the truth” and that they would not go forward with these trumped-up charges.”
Red Dirt Report called Oklahoma City Municipal Court to speak with Yates. She was not available and has not yet returned the call.
Wisner, Love and Hodges were also served papers for a civil case Lane has filed.
“They were visibly shaken,” Lane said of the security guards after receiving the papers.
Lane said he knows that they are in a pickle.
“They filed a false police report or they perjured themselves in front of the court,” Lane said.
Asked if Yates decided to file charges against the men who Lane claims did not tell the truth about what happened, he said she did not.
Lane said his attorney, Elliot Everett, pointed out a few things where one of the testifying security guards contradicted himself, but he said it apparently wasn’t relevant to the judge.
Everett could not be reached for comment.
As for the civil case, the men have not yet responded to it.
“I am 36 years old,” Lane said. “Never been arrested and never sued anyone in my life.”
Curious about his thoughts regarding what happened, Lane said, “It seems to be a good old boy network. The police officers were complicit in a false arrest. Whenever I told them that the man (security guard) assaulted me, they said I was out of touch with reality.”
“I’m disappointed, more than anything. I thought judicial system sought to find the truth. I’ve discovered it’s just a good ol’ boy network,” Lane said. “A person can get caught up in the system.”
As noted earlier, Lane said he is seeking justice through the civil action he filed.
“If I find (justice) there, I won’t pursue it further,” he said. “But the reason I am pursuing this is I don’t want this to happen to anyone else. I don’t want anyone else to get hurt.”
As for his We Are Change Oklahoma activist colleague Brent Southard, he was found guilty of disorderly conduct and received six months probation. Southard told Red Dirt Report he was disappointed with how things turned out.
Lane said the judge said Southard had failed to follow the security guard’s instructions. Lane said they were not cops and joked, “So, I guess anytime someone in a costume tells you to stop, you better stop.”
Added Lane bitterly: “What a mockery of our judicial system.”
Copyright 2010 West Marie Media
Link:http://www.wearechange.org/?p=1437
Sunday, May 2, 2010
A Communiqué from Hizb ut-Tahrir to the Jordanian Government (1953)
Monday, 22 March 2010 08:09
On the anniversary of the first ban of Hizb ut-Tahrir in 1953 we present a translation of the communiqué sent to the Jordanian government on 19th Ramadhan 1372 AH (1st June 1953) in response to their ban of the party.
On 22nd March 1953, the Jordanian government declared Hizb ut-Tahrir to be an illegal party and ordered individuals administering the affairs of the party to stop all their activities.
On 1st May 1953, the sign of Hizb ut-Tahrir outside its office in Jerusalem was removed by the government.
On 8th May 1953, the Jordanian government declared that it does not agree with the method by which Hizb ut-Tahrir became a legal entity.
The above mentioned actions carried out against Hizb ut-Tahrir is in violation of the natural rights which every citizen is entitled to. We, therefore demand the abrogation of the order banning Hizb ut-Tahrir and removal of its sign.
It is obvious that the present situation, which the Imperialists have created in the Muslim land, along with other factors has created a veil in the minds of the people about Islam. This has contributed towards Muslims misunderstanding the issue of the Islamic State and consequently the stand against Hizb ut-Tahrir. We present this communiqué to explain the reality of the Islamic State, which Hizb ut-Tahrir works to re-establish. This communiqué will also discuss the da‘wah which Hizb ut-Tahrir carries and the views propagated towards Hizb ut-Tahrir by the government in its official statements.
بِسْمِ اللّهِ الرَّحْمَنِ الرَّحِيمِ
A Communiqué from Hizb ut-Tahrir to the Jordanian Government on 19th Ramadhan 1372 AH / 1st June 1953
1. Many theocratic governments existed in Europe during the Middle Ages. These governments were an obstacle to society's quest for progress. Through the use of brutal force, they were able to control the thoughts of the people. In fact, it was very common to witness killing and crucifixion of the thinkers and intellectuals by inquisition courts specifically established for such a purpose. Such forms of severe hardship led to a series of revolutions, beginning with an intellectual revolution and then a bloody struggle and ending with victory for the sovereignty of the mind in conducting life's affairs and thus a defeat for the theological way of life. This intellectual struggle brought into existence a new ideology, Capitalism. The Capitalistic ideology was based upon the separation of matter and spirit which meant the separation of Church and State. The clergy accepted and justified the birth of this ideology by using a verse from the Bible which states, "Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's and render unto God the things which are God's."
2. It was natural that the theocratic governments in Europe would become an obstacle in the path of progress due to the ideas they were built upon. Their viewpoint on life was based upon erroneous ideas concerning theocracy and spiritualism. They viewed spiritualism as antagonistic to materialism. At the time, European nations believed that Man was composed of two elements: Spirit and Matter.
Spirit was connected with the heavens whereas the matter was connected with the Earth and the Devil. Spirit and matter were on opposite sides of the scale. If the scale weighed more on the side of matter than the side of the spirit then man would be considered evil. On the other hand, if the scale weighed more on the side of the spirit then man would be considered good. Based upon this understanding of life, the Europeans believed enjoying life (i.e. initiate material advancement) will cause the scale of the matter to outweigh the scale of the spirit. To ensure that this would not occur and that the spiritual part in man is maintained and elevated, the authority over life's affairs was vested in the hands of the clergy. If the authority was given to anybody other than the clergy, the side of the matter would have outweighed the side of the spirit. Based upon this philosophy of matter and spirit, the clergy grabbed the power and governed with an iron fist until the authority was snatched from them by force, and consequently forced to issue a religious explanation justifying the equity of power being taken away from them.
3. The separation of matter from spirit and theological religion from the State generated a great momentum towards material advancement, high level of creativity, Industrial Revolution, inventions and explorations in the Western world. The basis of advancement was the authority being taken away from the clergy in life's affairs. This established in the minds of the Western people the ideological leadership of Capitalism, separation of Church and State. Based upon this new understanding of life, Western nations began globally propagating Capitalism as a way of life.
4. The Ottoman State as the Islamic State ruled the Islamic Ummah with its large numbers, with the exception of some parts of the Muslim land. The parts of the Muslim land (under the Islamic State) respected and gave their allegiance to the Ottoman State as it was the Islamic State. After the Industrial Revolution in Europe, the Ottoman State began declining rapidly in both intellectual and material aspects. Due to misunderstanding Islam, there were cases of misapplication of Islam within the State. All of these factors led to the overall decline in science, technology, politics and economics. Consequently, the Islamic State became void of the prerequisite for progress. Such a condition made Muslim lands fertile for the Western cultural invasion and eventually for the Western ideological leadership.
After the abolishment of the Ottoman State at the hands of the Western Imperialist nations, Muslim lands came under their direct occupation and supervision. Western nations began imposing upon Muslims their culture which embodied their concepts of life and legislation; it was implemented and executed by the governments in charge of the Muslim world including the Arab world. The entire Muslim world began submitting to the political, cultural, ideological and economic way of life of the West. Above all, Muslims began considering the Western way of life as a standard to be imitated and not by thinking about the basis of the thought.
The Western way of life was propagated by educational curricula/programs and missionary efforts under the guise of secularism. Such efforts were undertaken during the era of the Mandate, the era of physical occupation, and the era of ‘independence' in which Muslim countries were tied and connected with the political and Imperialistic treaties of the West. This effort gave birth in the Ummah to a new class of Muslims, the intelligentsia. The intelligentsia were cultured in foreign countries and missionary schools, all of which was based upon the Imperialist culture. In addition to the intelligentsia, there were individuals who were raised under the direct supervision of Imperialism from the end of the Ottoman State till the present. These individuals have witnessed two eras, the era of the Islamic State and the present era. Sadly, most individuals who look after the affairs of Muslims whether in education, economics, politics, the political system or legal system are from this educated elite class. These people were given important positions because they were educated with a culture which contradicts Islam, the Western culture.
The basis of the educational policy in the Muslim lands, including the Arab lands, was based upon a specific culture put forth by the Imperialists. The aim of these programs was to have the Western personality as the foundation from which we take our civilisation, concepts, and viewpoint on life. Muslims were even taught to look to the land, history, environment and circumstances of the West as a reference. This concentrated educational effort was taken as a source of thinking by the Muslims, including the Arabs.
The Imperialist nations began placing such types of curricula in missionary schools prior to World War I. However, after World War I these curricula were directly placed in Muslim lands under the era of physical occupation by the Imperialists. Their intention was to mislead the Muslims by putting their hand over the entire Muslim land. The curricula were intentionally designed to lead the Muslims astray by having the curricula founded upon the Western culture. The acceptance of the Western culture was achieved by portraying the Western culture as a science which must be taken since it is not based upon a viewpoint on life. Later, the Imperialist nations interfered in details of these curricula to make sure that everything proceeded according to their plan.
Since this alien educational curriculum was derived from the Western nations' ideology, environment, concepts and history, the educated class began thinking the way a Westerner would, not how a Muslim would. This educated class of Muslims began appearing as foreigners amongst their own people. They were alien to the Ummah, not being able to understand themselves nor the Ummah and not being aware of the Ummah's situation and need.
The culture, from the educational curriculum, that was established in the minds of the Muslims compelled us to start comparing our situation, society, people and deen to the European situation, society, people and Christianity. This false generalisation and analogy was intentionally applied. The effect of this false generalisation was that Muslims began calling for the separation of religion and state, religion from life, and perceived the Islamic State as backward. They based this argument on the premise that it was a theocratic, ritualistic and a theological state which prevents progress.
5. However, there are major differences between a religious-theological state and the Islamic State. In fact there are no similarities between the two. A religious state is a divine or holy state which derives its authority from God and nobody has the right to question it. The Islamic State is not a divine or holy state. Its authority is derived from the Islamic Ummah. However, the sovereignty belongs to Islam[1]. The ruling authority belongs to the Ummah and it delegates this authority to a person. This person is not considered as a holy or infallible person who is above questioning or criticism. Any Muslim has the right to question the actions of the Islamic State. The laws of the Islamic State are divine rules which it adopts from the Islamic Fiqh. Even the Islamic Fiqh is not considered holy in that it permits room for debate or discussion. Its ideas, rules and thoughts are considered Islamic but are subject to discussion, modification and cancellation through correct ijtihad based on daleel.
There is also a major difference between the concept of spirituality in Islam and in the theocratic/religious states. In Islam, spiritualism means comprehending, understanding and recognising man's relationship with Allah. The comprehension of man being created by Allah is derived through rationale and not by emotion or imitation and this comprehension leads man to perform his actions based upon the orders of Allah. The relationship after this life is the Day of Reckoning. Man lives in this life governed and controlled by this relationship, which connects this life with what is before and after it.
As for man being composed of matter and spirit, it is false because man and his actions are only material. Spirituality is the deep comprehension he is created by the Creator and this awareness is not part of man's physical makeup. Spirituality occurs by understanding man's relationship with the Creator and by performing actions based on the Divine Law. Such comprehension is not part of man's physical makeup. Based upon this understanding of spirituality in Islam, there is no such concept that man is composed of two opposing elements in which spirit is related to the heaven and material to the Earth. The physical nature of man leads to the conclusion that man's actions are material.
As for the meaning of spirit, the secret of life, it is part of man's structure. However, there is a little information about it. Allah says:
وَيَسْأَلُونَكَ عَنِ الرُّوحِ قُلِ الرُّوحُ مِنْ أَمْرِ رَبِّي وَمَا أُوتِيتُم مِّن الْعِلْمِ إِلاَّ قَلِيلاً
"And they ask you concerning the Ruh. Say, ‘The Ruh: its knowledge is with my Lord. And of its knowledge you (mankind) have been given only a little.'" [Al-Israa', 17:85]
The term Ruh[2] which is mentioned in this ayah is not debated and should not be mixed or confused with the meaning of spirit under discussion. Ruh is a prerequisite for life but it is not an antagonistic element of the body.
Therefore in Islam, there is no distinction or separation between religion and life. Neither is there a clergy nor spiritual authority. The affairs of life necessitate fighting the concept of priesthood or clergy. The comprehension of spirituality as the realisation of man's relationship with Allah سبحانه وتعالى is open to anyone and is not limited to a certain privileged class. In Islam, there is neither priesthood nor clergy and Islam came to eradicate such concepts. Thus there are no such terms as theology, theocratic authority, spiritual authority or a theocratic state.
6. The Islamic State is neither a religious/theocratic state nor a spiritual authority where the side of the spirit weighs more than the side of the matter. Neither is the Islamic State a secular authority where the side of the matter is heavier. It is a State established to rule and govern the affairs of the people based upon one intellectually derived and ideological creed from which the systems of life emanate. Systems are implemented and executed by the State. Laws are derived from a correct ijtihad that are based upon the text's general principles of understanding the text.
The Islamic State adopts one specific culture as its way of life. The foundation of the Islamic State is to implement Islam and to convey it. In essence, the Islamic State is built upon one foundation, that man, life and universe is created out of nothing by the Creator. This life is part of a complete relationship between what is before and after this life. The relationship between this life and after this life is Allah's judgment of our actions. The relationship after this life is the Day of Reckoning. In this life, man is governed and controlled by this relationship, which connects this life with what is before and after it.
The foundation of the Islamic State is the Islamic ‘aqeedah. The ‘aqeedah puts forth the ideological leadership which the State carries to the entire world as the Islamic da‘wah. The foundation of the Islamic State is to define man's position in this life in which his actions are governed by the relationship of what is before and after this life. Upon understanding this viewpoint on life, it is easy for the Islamic State to initiate material progress and removes obstacles and barriers in its path for progress. The ideological leadership is a vital ingredient which elevates the State in life and towards material progress. The material progress makes matter subservient to man to fulfil his needs. The system for life is derived from the Islamic ‘aqeedah because the ‘aqeedah functions to control man within the relationship of what is before and after the life. It obliges man to govern his life by Allah's Shari‘ah revealed to Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم. Man solves his problems through Allah's law alone because sovereignty solely belongs to this legislation. Any new problem requires a solution derived from the Qur'an and Sunnah. The Islamic State is the entity which adopts and implements the law. The State encompasses a comprehensive legislation addressing all of man's problem and issues. This legislation is rich enough to produce rules for new problems in a manner that there will be more solutions to problems independent of time or circumstance. Addressing all of life's problems exists in this legislation which the Islamic State functions with. The State implements and adopts rules to guarantee solution to man's problem thus ensuring peace and tranquillity.
The culture of the Islamic State is unique in three aspects:
A. Foundation
B. Point of view about life
C. Concept of happiness
A. The Islamic State's culture is derived from the Qur'an and Sunnah thus making its foundation the Islamic ‘aqeedah. The culture is derived from the revelation, through an intellectual process.
B. The State's culture represents a high level of spiritual elevation and material progress because it views life as a mix between spirit and matter. This mix causes man to govern his actions based on the orders of Allah سبحانه وتعالى. Man voluntarily seeks to implement Allah's legislation by his choice in response to the orders of Allah سبحانه وتعالى and not upon his interest. This view about life is progressive because it guarantees stability, tranquillity, luxury and happiness. The Islamic point of view renders sovereignty to the Shari‘ah which is applied upon the people. The Shari‘ah seeks to transform the society into a perfect structure that man can possibly have. This point of view prompts man to continuously follow Allah's legislation either voluntarily or by the State if required. The best standard of life is achieved through a legislation which is based upon the Islamic ‘aqeedah. Due to all of these reasons the Islamic way of life is incomparably the most advanced.
C. The concept of happiness in the Islamic culture is to acquire the pleasure of Allah سبحانه وتعالى, keeping in mind that it is the ultimate objective man works diligently to achieve. The ultimate objective or goal has to be one and not many in order to unite and concentrate people's effort to achieve it. The ultimate goal has to be permanent and not changeable in order to achieve stability and cohesiveness in the society. The ultimate goal has to be above materialistic goals because such goals would undoubtedly corrupt it. Neither should it be based on short term goals whereby once they are achieved, others are sought. The ultimate goal which man places for happiness has to be the objective of all objectives.
Hence, the ultimate goal in the Islamic culture is to acquire the pleasure of Allah سبحانه وتعالى and not to attain the realisation of one's self-conscious. This is due to the fact that self-conscious is changeable due to motives, thinking or people themselves (self-conscious is an instinctual comprehension which emanates from man's instinct and produced by those instincts). Thus, the ultimate goal should not be the attainment of ‘abstract high morals', the satisfaction of physical needs or any goal that could be nothing but an outlet for other goals upon completion. In addition, the ultimate goal cannot be multiple, changeable or restrictive. The Implementation of the Islamic ‘aqeedah, governing man's behaviour by the Shari‘ah and attaining the pleasure of Allah, as the ultimate goal, will be the cornerstone of the Islamic State.
The function of the Islamic State is to apply the Islamic ideology as a creed and a system within its jurisdiction and to carry the Islamic da‘wah to other nations. The da‘wah must be conveyed as an ideology with its intellectual leadership. The da‘wah must be supported by material strength to protect it and to eliminate any obstacle in front of it. Such a purpose is a basic element and component of the Islamic State's foundation. This particular outlook of life by the Islamic State is beyond comparison to the theocratic or the theological state's outlook on life. Thus any form of religion or theological aspect based upon the Western culture which prevented progress in the society should not be confused with the Islamic State.
7. The nature of the Islamic culture in the State aims for high material advancement in the State. Islamic culture views material things upon the following Islamic legal principle: "Every material or object is allowed unless prohibited." This point of view enables the State to be progressive and is in complete contrast to the theological state's point of view pertaining to material. Therefore, it is great injustice to consider the Islamic State as a religious state reminiscent of the Christian states in the Middle Ages and such a false analogy is completely baseless. The failure by the Muslims to re-establish the Islamic State, not to mention standing in-front of its re-establishment, is a great sin.
8. The makeup of societies in the Muslim world including the Arab world contradicts the Islamic way of life which necessitates the re-establishment of the Islamic State. This state will resume the Islamic way of life and carry the da‘wah to the world.
Based upon this goal, Hizb ut-Tahrir was formed to carry the Islamic da‘wah and to call the Muslim world including the Arab world to resume the Islamic way of life by re-establishing the Islamic State which implements Islam and carries the da‘wah.
9. Since the individuals responsible for Hizb ut-Tahrir reside in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, which is part of the Muslim world, it became natural for them to begin this da‘wah and their activities in the place where they reside. The activities of Hizb ut-Tahrir are not centred around just making the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan as the expected Islamic State. Rather, the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan could be a starting point[3] for this da‘wah and also has the possibility to be the launching point[4] or the establishment point[5]. The State is not re-established through confederation or by artificial annexation. Rather it grows naturally from the nucleus. The nucleus will possess life and its body will undergo natural growth according to Allah's law:
فَلَن تَجِدَ لِسُنَّتِ اللَّهِ تَبْدِيلًا وَلَن تَجِدَ لِسُنَّتِ اللَّهِ تَحْوِيلًا
"So no change will you find in Allah's way of dealing and no turning off will you find in Allah's way of dealing." [Faatir, 35:43]
Based on this way of dealing of Allah, the Islamic State was established in Madinah and later expanded to cover the Hijaz and the Arabian Peninsula and eventually most of the known world, at the time.
10. Hizb ut-Tahrir presented a communiqué to the Jordanian government notifying that it is established as a political party mentioning its name, position of its leadership, its address, its objective, its way and means, its administration and those who can sign on its behalf. This communiqué was attached with the bylaws of Hizb ut-Tahrir. These procedures were followed based upon the Ottoman Association Law which was a law legislated by the Islamic State and up to this moment the only law applicable in the West Bank of Jordan.
11. Upon completing the legal procedures as required by the Ottoman Association law, Hizb ut-Tahrir submitted the legal documents to the senior Jordanian official in Jerusalem. After the senior official had taken the notification, it was published in a newspaper. All of this was followed per the clause which mandates it in Article II, III, IV, V and VI. Upon completing all these legal procedures, Hizb ut-Tahrir began its activity. It became a legal party based upon Article VIII deserving all the rights and privileges that any legal party deserves.
12. Hizb ut-Tahrir presented its communiqué along with its bylaws for publishing in Al-Seraah newspaper (Vol. 176 14th March 1953). Hence, Hizb ut-Tahrir became a legal entity on Saturday 28th Jumada al-Thani 1372 A.H. (14th March 1953) and began its activities according to its bylaws.
13. Despite this, the government interrogated five founders of Hizb ut-Tahrir and arrested four of them. On 7th Rajab 1372 A.H. (22nd March 1953), the government considered Hizb ut-Tahrir to be an illegal party and prohibited any individuals to look after its affairs. On 1st May 1953, the signs of Hizb ut-Tahrir were removed from its office in Jerusalem. On 8th May 1953, the government issued another statement stating that it does not recognise the method by which Hizb ut-Tahrir became a legal entity.
14. The crusade against Hizb ut-Tahrir by the government is related to two points:
A. The actuality of establishing Hizb ut-Tahrir and of its becoming a legal entity and prohibiting individuals who are associated with Hizb ut-Tahrir.
B. The ideology which Hizb ut-Tahrir is based upon was presented to the government and it considered it a violation of the law of the land.
15. Hizb ut-Tahrir's legitimacy does not require any further proof since its legal establishment requires only a statement outlining a few terms and conditions according to Article VI in the Ottoman Association code. According to Article II, Hizb ut-Tahrir does not have to do anything further, since it has complied with necessary requirements. Therefore, banning individuals responsible for Hizb ut-Tahrir's activities, removing it's sign and considering it illegal cannot be considered as a legal act. Furthermore, legally speaking this cannot occur. The actions of the government does not effect our legitimacy because Hizb ut-Tahrir is an entity which has been legally established.
16. As for the foundation of Hizb ut-Tahrir, the statement which was presented to the government by Hizb ut-Tahrir is very clear and concise. The statement mentions the objectives of Hizb ut-Tahrir as:
A. To resume the Islamic way of life.
B. To carry the Islamic daw‘ah.
The method adopted by Hizb ut-Tahrir to achieve these objectives is to acquire the authority to implement Islam. This objective was even approved by a government statement dated 8th April 1953. It considered the Islamic daw‘ah not an unlawful activity and approved Hizb ut-Tahrir's methodology. The government considered in that statement that taking the authority to achieve this objective as a right and a legal issue.
17. The government states that Hizb ut-Tahrir does not recognise other forms of nationalities and restricts the bond between the citizens of the kingdom to the religious bond meaning Islam. The government further claims that this type of bond will create disunity between the citizens of the same state, is against the Ottoman Association Law and is dangerous to the homeland. This illustrates a misunderstanding of the government towards Islam and obliges us to elaborate on this issue:
A. Hizb ut-Tahrir does not recognise the term nationality with its regionalistic meaning because of Islam. The homeland in Islam is the land of the ideology. Wherever the ideology exists is our homeland. Defending the ideology requires defending the land in which the ideology is established. A Muslim defends the land and protects it because it is Islamic land. Therefore any country in which Islam existed is considered a land for all Muslims and all Muslims have to protect and secure it from any attack.
The call for patriotism[6] in the Muslim land has led to the division of one Muslim homeland into many homelands. We have began hearing of a Jordanian land, Syrian land, Lebanese homeland, Egyptian land, Iraqi land, Pakistani land, Iranian land and so on. If such calls did not exist, Muslims would not consider their objective as getting independence for a small piece of land they live in. Ironically, no one is standing and objecting to the call of independence by Jordan, Palestine, Syria, Iraq and so on. How can they consider patriotism as their case and consider it as their constitution they are working for? Hizb ut-Tahrir categorically denounces the call for nationalism due to its regionalistic denotations. Hizb ut-Tahrir calls to defend the homeland as an Islamic homeland and considers every piece of Muslim land including the Arab land as part of the Islamic homeland. If the enemy invades any part of this land then Jihad is mandatory upon every male or female. Therefore, liberating Palestine is the responsibility of all the Muslims. This is the concept which Hizb ut-Tahrir calls for and it is an Islamic concept and part of the Islamic daw‘ah.
B. As for denouncing nationalism, it is a matter which Islam mandates! It is a call of jahilliyah, the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said: "Beware of the call of jahilliyah" and warned people from the call of tribalism or racism. He صلى الله عليه وسلم used to say "Leave it, it's rotten" and "Arabs have no superiority over non-Arabs but by Taqwa."
Allah says:
يَا أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ إِنَّا خَلَقْنَاكُم مِّن ذَكَرٍ وَأُنثَى وَجَعَلْنَاكُمْ شُعُوبًا وَقَبَائِلَ لِتَعَارَفُوا إِنَّ أَكْرَمَكُمْ عِندَ اللَّهِ أَتْقَاكُمْ إِنَّ اللَّهَ عَلِيمٌ خَبِيرٌ
"O mankind! We have created you from a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that you may know one another. Verily, the most honourable of you in the sight of Allah is those who have Taqwa. Surely Allah is Knowing, Aware." [Al-Hujurat, 49:13]
There are many other ayat similar to this in meaning. As for some ahadith praising the Arabs and glorifying them, not one single hadith is authentic. All of them were fabricated when the call for Shuubiyah[7] began. Moreover, the Islamic message is a universal message surpassing racism and is for all mankind. When the Qur'an addresses people in its rule, it addresses them as human beings alone.
Regarding the Arabic language, it is a vital ingredient in Islam and is a prerequisite for understanding Islam. The Arabic language has the same momentum as Islam does. Its lies in its ability to influence people, a very rich language that is able to encompass new words, furthermore the language has the quality of derivation[8]. All such qualities such as being influential, rich and expansive exists in Islam as well. Consequently, the Arabic language has to be mixed with Islam. The qualities of the Arabic language such as derivation, metaphor and Arabisation enable the language to be rich and relevant at all times in the affairs of life. The nature of Islam is that both the Qur'an and Sunnah outline, general and basic rules for life. This enables Islam to produce solutions for problems in life. Islam has to be connected with the Arabic language. In other words, Islamic momentum has to be mixed with the Arabic momentum. This is especially the case when deriving laws through a correct ijtihad, which is the secret behind the progress of the Ummah. Ijtihad cannot be performed except through the Arabic language. The Arabic language is a vital element in the da‘wah. Its sciences such as grammar, morphology and eloquence are considered part of the Islamic culture as Fiqh, Tafsir and Hadith are. Mixing the Arabic language with Islam has nothing to do with nationalism. It has to do with Islam and Islam only. Islam does not recognise nationalism as a bond amongst people.
The call for nationalism is undoubtedly an Imperialistic call. This alien idea was implanted in the Muslim world by Western nations in order to dismantle and destroy the Islamic State. The Ottoman State as the Islamic State ruled over many people with their vast ethnicities. Therefore, the tool of nationalism was used to provoke people to separate them from one body under the banner of independence. The West further established political parties based upon nationalism. To counter this effort the Ottoman State as the Islamic State banned any call for nationalism. Article III of Ottoman Association law banned the establishment of any society or association based upon nationalism. This article was explained in Article IV that it is unlawful to form political associations based upon ethnicity or race. The call for nationalism does not comply with Islam or the law which Hizb ut-Tahrir was established upon. Nationalism is an Imperialistic call which is very harmful to the structure of the Ummah. Hizb ut-Tahrir adamantly considers any call other than the Islamic call an alien call and dangerous to the Ummah.
C. Binding people based upon the Islamic bond is the only correct ideological bond . Other types of bonds include patriotism, nationalism, interest and religious bond, in the Western definition of religion, which do not provide a system to organise life are invalid.
The patriotic bond is primitive and arises as a reaction to the defense of the land in which people live. It is part of the instinct of survival. This reactionary bond would never arise if the land was not attacked, on the other hand, if the land is free then this bond disappears. Thus it is a very primitive bond and is not able to bind people on a permanent basis. It is not a comprehensive bond because people would not call others to it or to work for it. The patriotic bond does not provide any solutions to the individuals, societies or the state at large.
The nationalistic[9] bond is a racial bond. It arises amongst people who have by-past the primitive or tribal stage. In this type of bond, people's outlook is elevated to the level of family or tribe at large. Nevertheless, it is still racist and restrictive. It is similar to a tribal bond in that it seeks control and dominance. It originates from the domination of an individual in life which is part of the instinct of survival. The tendency to dominate expands from the domination of an individual to a family, tribe and finally nation. The series of dominations will result in internal disruptions unless external disputes arise. It is an inhumane bond that causes disruption within the nation. It has nothing of value to offer in the affairs of life.
The bond of interest is a temporary bond which unites people upon a common interest. They work together as long as the interest exists. Upon the disappearance of the interest people will be divided and may even become enemies. Therefore, the bond of interest is very lethal and must not be considered a valid bond.
The religious bond which does not provide a system to organise life exists amongst people with a common belief that mandates to worship their God. The impact of their worship will be apparent by their acts of worship, religiousness and glorification. However, this impact would not exist in life's affair. The religious bond is not a comprehensive bond but a partial and an impractical bond not being able to unite people in all of life's affair. An example of this type of bond are the European people. The bond amongst the European nation is not strong in fact they are divided though they are Christians. As an entity, the whole of Europe is Christian, yet they are divided into many people and nations and is very difficult to unite them into one nation, though they have the same religious bond.
The Islamic bond is an ideological bond. It is the bond which is based on a rational doctrine from which emanates the systems for life. It is the bond which is able to unite people and is definitely worth propagating. It is a bond which renders all Muslims one nation. It is this concept of one Ummah that Hizb ut-Tahrir advocates. Hizb ut-Tahrir denounces and rejects any bond based on anything other than the Islamic ‘aqeedah. In fact, Hizb ut-Tahrir does not recognise any other bond. As per the definition of Ummah by Hizb ut-Tahrir it is a comprehensive one. Hizb ut-Tahrir has defined the Ummah as a group of people sharing in one ‘aqeedah with a system emanating from it. Therefore all Muslims are one Ummah. Allah says:
إِنَّ هَذِهِ أُمَّتُكُمْ أُمَّةً وَاحِدَةً وَأَنَا رَبُّكُمْ فَاعْبُدُونِ
"Truly! This, your deen is one deen, and I am your Lord, therefore worship me." [Al-Anbiyaa, 21:92]
We would take the opportunity to highlight a very dangerous point mentioned by the government, it demonstrates deep animosity against the people due to its animosity and hatred towards Islam. The statement by the government as an official communiqué demonstrates its effort to undermine the people, its ‘aqeedah, emotions, people's sentiments and it undermines all Muslims. The government says regarding Hizb ut-Tahrir: "Hizb ut-Tahrir limits the bonds of the citizenship of this kingdom with the bond of the deen, which will lead to disunity amongst the people of the same homeland. This is against the rules of the Association law and will lead to great danger."
This statement undermines the Islamic deen and is a manifest Kufr. Allah سبحانه وتعالى says:
وَإِن نَّكَثُواْ أَيْمَانَهُم مِّن بَعْدِ عَهْدِهِمْ وَطَعَنُواْ فِي دِينِكُمْ فَقَاتِلُواْ أَئِمَّةَ الْكُفْرِ إِنَّهُمْ لاَ أَيْمَانَ لَهُمْ لَعَلَّهُمْ يَنتَهُونَ
"But if they violate their oaths after their covenant and attack your religion with disapproval and criticism then fight the leaders of disbelief for surely their oaths are nothing to them so that they may stop." [At-Tauba, 9:12]
The government should not place itself in such a state. In addition to misleading and deceiving the people, the government is flagrantly lying against the Muslims. It wants to divide the citizens of this country and keep the people away from Islam, the Islamic da‘wah and those who carry it.
No one can deny the fact that the Islamic Ummah was ruled and governed by the Islamic State. Many non-Muslims used to live with Muslims under the banner of Islam for almost thirteen centuries. Throughout those periods non-Muslims used to have the same high standard of living as the Muslims did. They enjoyed equal rights, prosperity, happiness, tranquillity and security. Muslims along with non-Muslims only began facing severe hardships after the abolishment of the Islamic State and living under the rulership of the Colonialists.
By investigating the Islamic history in its entirety it is evident that non-Muslims lived amongst the Muslims under the Islamic rule. A Christian mother would breast feed her Muslim child, Muslim men used to marry Christian or Jewish women, in-laws from them. Muslims used to deal with the Christians and the Jews in the life's affairs. The Jew and Christians used to be called Ahl al-Dhimma, People of the Covenant. The Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said, "He who abuses a dhimmi[10], then I will be his rival and dispute him on the Day of Judgment."
Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم appointed ‘Abdullah ibn al-Arqam to collect Jizyah from the People of the Dhimma. Upon ‘Abdullah ibn al-Arqam's departure to collect the Jizyah, the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم reminded him that he who oppresses a mu'ahid[11] or pressures him beyond his capacity or undermines his right, then he صلى الله عليه وسلم will have a case against that person for the mu'ahid on the Day of Judgement.
It was reported that ‘Umar bin al-Khattab said: "I advise the Khaleefah coming after me to look after the People of the Dhimma. We have to fulfil the covenant and defend them even if it requires material power. The People of Dhimma should not be overburdened beyond their capacity." ‘Umar used to allocate a budget from the Bait al-Mal for the handicapped, blind and elderly from the People of the Ahl al-Dhimma. When Iraq was conquered, the People of Majus (Zoroastrians) used to own lands but were unable to cultivate them. Under the authority of the Muslims, the lands still belonged to the Majus in addition sufficient funds from Bait al-Mal was given for them to cultivate the land and more funds were allocated for their life's affair till the harvest season.
The Hukm Shari‘i states: Non-Muslims from the People of the Book deserve whatever the Muslims deserve from the Bait al-Mal.
Ibn Hazm says, "That one of the rights of the People of Covenant is that if Dar al-Islam is attacked and the People of the Covenant reside in that part of the land then Muslims have to die to defend them. Any leniency in this regard would be leniency in the rights of the People of Dhimma."
Imam Qarafi says, "It is the responsibility of the Muslims to the People of the Dhimma to take care of their weak, fulfilling the needs of the poor, feeding the hungry, providing clothes, addressing them politely and even tolerating their harm even if it was from a neighbour, even though the Muslim would have an upper hand. The Muslims must also advise them sincerely on their affairs and protect them against anyone who tries to hurt them or their family, steal their wealth or violates their rights."
It was reported that when Muslims defeated the Tartars in part of al-Sham, Ibn Taymiah requested the Tartar leaders to release the prisoners of war which included non-Muslims. However, the Tartar leader agreed only to release Muslim prisoners of war. However, Ibn Taymiah insisted that all prisoners of war be released, including the Christians and Jews. He said that we will never allow you to hold one prisoner Muslim or otherwise. Consequently, all of them were released.
Imam Abu Hanifah's madhab says: "If a Muslim kills anyone from the People of the Dhimma, then the killer deserves the same punishment, regardless of being male or female. It is agreed upon in Islam that the People of Dhimma, could drink liquor, eat pork and do what their religion allows for them within the scope of the Shari‘ah."
The application of the Islamic System upon the People of the Dhimma should not be viewed as a religious or theocratic application of Islam on the contrary it is a legal system. It regulates the affairs of Ahl al-Dhimma as well as general public affairs that effect them. The People of the Dhimma cannot be forced to convert to Islam. They are given their rights to function according to their belief, way of worship, laws related to food and family life. They should not be forced to do things against their deen. These aspects are related to their personal life. However, the public order which includes the penal system and others, Islam alone is implemented upon them. That's because all citizens of the Islamic State regardless of their sect, religion, race, nationality are to follow the Islamic System as a legal system and not as a religious obligation as long as they carry the Islamic State's citizenship.
Thus, the penal code is implemented upon the non-Muslims as it is upon the Muslims. The validity of transactions will be based on the same standard for Muslims and non-Muslims. The Islamic legal system looks at man as a man and not upon his beliefs. In the Islamic legislation, care should be taken in the way laws are derived by observing their evidences from the Qur'an and Sunnah. These laws should be viewed as a solution to the problem and not viewed as a spiritual inapplicable theoretical text. The text should be taken to solve the problem.
Allah سبحانه وتعالى says:
وَاسْتَشْهِدُواْ شَهِيدَيْنِ من رِّجَالِكُمْ فَإِن لَّمْ يَكُونَا رَجُلَيْنِ فَرَجُلٌ وَامْرَأَتَانِ مِمَّن تَرْضَوْنَ مِنَ الشُّهَدَاء أَن تَضِلَّ إْحْدَاهُمَا فَتُذَكِّرَ إِحْدَاهُمَا الأُخْرَى وَلاَ يَأْبَ الشُّهَدَاء إِذَا مَا دُعُواْ
"And get two witnesses out of your own men. And if there are not two men available, then a man and two women, such as you agree for witnesses, so that if one of them (two women) errs, the other can remind her. And the witnesses should not refuse when they are called on for evidence." [Al-Baqarah, 2:282]
If the text is not taken as part of the legal system having a legal cause but as a theological text, the evidence would be restricted to those cases alone. Accordingly, the testimony of non-Muslims and a woman would not be permitted. In this case the Islamic legislation would be rigid and unable to accommodate new problems. However, the Islamic legislation takes into account legal causes and is not a theocratic system. Consequently, the testimony of only one woman in actions in which she would have access to such as breast feeding or birth is accepted. In addition, Islam accepted the testimony of non-Muslims in financial matters. Also, Islam accepted the testimony of a woman only in cases which involves a place where a woman alone has access to. The testimony of the plaintiff and witness is also accepted.
All of these rules were derived due to the presence of the legal cause. Thus the evidence is not restricted by its literal meaning. There are many examples similar to the issue of testimony. The Islamic legislation can accommodate all of life's affairs no matter how many they are without having the legislation to undergo transformation. This legislation is applicable upon Muslims and non-Muslims from a legal perspective and from an Islamic point of view. All of this is achievable due to Islam being revealed as a universal deen to mankind. Allah سبحانه وتعالى addressed mankind as a human not from any other perspective. The scholars of ‘Usul ul-Fiqh have fully explained that the one addressed by the Shari‘ah is the one who is sane and comprehends the message whether Muslim or otherwise. All of mankind is addressed by Islam's da‘wah (Takleef). As for the da‘wah, it is an invitation for all people to accept Islam. As for the Takleef (legal capacity) it is to comply with the Islamic legislation which is undertaken through the Islamic State.
The Islamic da‘wah is an invitation to the people to accept Islam and become Muslims, whereas the address to obey is to have people abide by its legislation by obeying the laws. This command is carried by the Islamic State. The Islamic System views people as human beings and addresses them under two premises, the person being sane and able to comprehend the address.
Islam binds all people under its jurisdiction in Dar al-Islam. Thus, anyone in Dar al-Islam accepts its rules and has the same rights and rules from the State's point of view whether Muslim or otherwise. Any person residing outside Dar al-Islam does not have any rights or privileges from the State even if he is a Muslim. Islam expresses this understanding by using the word citizenship. Anyone carrying the citizenship of the Islamic State carries his loyalty to the State and its system. The fuqaha, under the chapter of nafaqah, have mentioned that one of the requirements is that both the payer and receiver have to hold the same citizenship. Meaning if non-Muslim parents visited their Muslim son in the Islamic State as visitors, not residents, then the Muslim judge would not command the parents to provide financial assistance to their son since the parents are not under the State's jurisdiction. The financial support is like any other right, which the citizens of the State are obliged to, whether they are Muslims or non-Muslims.
Consequently, if a British Muslim not carrying the Islamic State's citizenship has a Muslim son by a Christian wife, carrying the Islamic States citizenship, then the father would not be forced to receive financial support from his son, though both father and son are Muslims. However, the mother would receive financial support from her son, though she is a non-Muslim. Similarly, other rights are applied under this principle. Citizenship is the common bond binding people together. The citizenship plays an active role in the affairs of life. This is the Islamic viewpoint towards non-Muslims and the Islamic rule in this regard. It unites people together and guarantees the highest level of life for all the citizens.
Hizb ut-Tahrir does not place Islam in a defensive position. Hizb ut-Tahrir clears the fact to make it known to the ones who do not. However, it seems that the government is not standing against Hizb ut-Tahrir for the reason that it has mentioned. Its resistance could be due to external factors such as the West and specifically United States, Britain and France which have caused the present situation in the Muslim land, particularly the Arab land. The Europeans conspired against the Islamic State to eliminate it and have undertaken serious efforts to see that it may never arise again despite the existence of many Islamic movements. The Imperialist nations have isolated and prevented Islam from the political life, though it existed for many centuries. They were very successful in their quest to destroy the State and to see that it never rises to the point that the world now does not consider Islam in the world order and the subject of the Islamic State.
Hizb ut-Tahrir carries the Islamic da‘wah and works to re-establish the Islamic State to carry the da‘wah. This effort will cause the Imperialist nations to stand against Hizb ut-Tahrir's efforts. The Western nations have created the political and economic environment to force the governments headed by the Muslims to stand against Hizb ut-Tahrir. The government has issued many excuses related to Islam and the Islamic da‘wah to formulate their stands. It has pushed itself to a position of ridiculing Islam.
The other factor is the situation of the Arab world, specifically Palestine, after World War II. Western nations are trying to prevent the people's involvement in politics to maintain the status quo in the Middle East and the Muslim world for Western exploitation and hegemony. This effort is being crystallised in two forms: Securing the Middle East and establishing a Jewish State as a spearhead in the Muslim world. These two projects are very lethal to the body of the Ummah. It is not expected from the Ummah to accept even one of them. Due to this, a momentum was created to eliminate political parties. Following this, other measures were placed to prevent the emergence of new parties.
Hizb ut-Tahrir is quite worried that the Imperialists will succeed in executing their plan in securing the Middle East and establishing the Jewish State. Hizb ut-Tahrir takes this opportunity to warn the Ummah of these two serious dangers. Hizb ut-Tahrir explicitly denounces the military pacts to defend the Middle East and peace with Israel. The proposal to defend the Middle East is a serious crime because Muslims will be fighting under the banner of their enemies and for a cause other than that of Allah سبحانه وتعالى. It is haram for any Muslim to do so. The obligation of every Muslim is to perform Jihad to make the word of Allah سبحانه وتعالى supreme.
The mission of the Islamic Ummah, including the Arabs, is to struggle against all forms of Imperialism especially Western Imperialism. Such a struggle will not only lead to the prevention of a proxy war in the Muslim world or exploitation of Muslim land but should lead to completely kicking the Imperialists out altogether from the land and to uproot their roots and build the Islamic entity. This entity will be very effective in taking the initiative from both the Western and the Eastern camp. It is the obligation of Hizb ut-Tahrir to declare that the treaty with Israel is a crime. The existence of a Jewish entity as a State or even as a Wilayah in Palestine or any Muslim land is lethal against the Islamic Ummah. Therefore, the state of war has to remain with the Jewish political entity until it ceases to exist.
These two opinions of Hizb ut-Tahrir are in direct conflict with the Western plan. Therefore, the Middle East is in a situation which causes the Imperialists to work against any grassroots movements and ban any sincere party. All governments in the Muslim world are zeroed in on this prerogative. Accordingly, sincere parties have been banned since they express the opinions of the people. It seems the government was influenced, as the other governments were, to oppose Hizb ut-Tahrir. It is the only party carrying a global da‘wah possessing the nature of eliminating Imperialism in all its forms. This da‘wah ultimately aims to re-establish the Islamic State which takes the initiative from the two camps.
The case of Hizb ut-Tahrir is the case of the Islamic Ummah including the Arabs. It is not the case of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan because Hizb ut-Tahrir considers the entire Muslim land as one land and looks at Jordan as part of the Muslim land. The case of Hizb ut-Tahrir is the case of the Islamic Ummah. Hizb ut-Tahrir has explained this in Concepts of Hizb ut-Tahrir (Arabic edition) in page 53: "Carrying the Islamic da‘wah and political struggle for the Islamic da‘wah should occur in the society which Hizb ut-Tahrir defines as a society for it. Hizb ut-Tahrir considers the entire Muslim world as its society including the Arab world. Since all of them carry the case of Islam. However, Hizb ut-Tahrir makes the starting point the Arab land as part of the Muslim land and views the Islamic State in the Arab land as a nucleus." This point needs to be understood when discussing about Hizb ut-Tahrir.
The case of the Islamic Ummah is to liberate it from slavery imposed by the Imperialist Kuffar, who through their political, economic, military and cultural influence look to exploit the Ummah and establish their viewpoint on life and prevent the re-emergence of the Islamic State.
In Political Concepts (1st Edition in Arabic page 31), "Hizb ut-Tahrir works to liberate the Islamic Ummah, including the Arabs from slavery to the Western nations which govern and control all aspects of life. It seeks to elevate it based upon the ‘aqeedah of Islam. It views any action other than the Islamic action as wasteful and a barrier delaying the momentum for the right cause." Attention has to be paid to the danger of any opinion against Hizb ut-Tahrir because it would lead to other dangers against the Ummah. The function which Hizb ut-Tahrir shoulders has to be appreciated.
Anyone can clearly see that societies in the Muslim world, including the Arab world, are deplorable in every aspect of life. They are under the direct influence of the Western nations. Even the Eastern camp has its eyes on the Muslim world. Muslim lands have become a platform for all alien ideological leaderships. Nothing can save the Ummah except a sincere party, tending to change it through the Ummah, whether it is a ruler or citizen, rich or poor, educated or illiterate.
This comprehensive outlook for the society is very important. It is shallow to think that change in one aspect from the mess will work. The change has to be comprehensive and has to take care of all aspects. The change has to be to the concepts, ideas, attitude and behaviour of the people. And a change of direction from the corruption to the goodness and hence the virus will be eliminated from the Muslim body. This will never occur unless we change the ideological foundation which people carry and replace it with the correct intellectual foundation. As a result current ideas will be replaced and therefore the concepts will be changed to elevate man's behaviour in this life. This would only occur through the Islamic da‘wah and the Islamic state. Hizb ut-Tahrir works to resume the Islamic way of life and to carry the da‘wah to provide the Islamic Ummah with the opportunity to once again carry this message to the world.
A party with such a noble objective, goal, ideas, beliefs, deserves from those who have full awareness and feel the situation of the Ummah to realise the importance of Hizb ut-Tahrir's existence to change the structure and situation of the Ummah in the way of dignity, elevation, tranquillity and prosperity. They should understand and comprehend the importance of clearing the way between this Hizb and the people. So that it will be given the chance to achieve its objective. It may be that the light of Islam would rise from this blessed land in order to guide the people to the path of guidance.
[1] Sovereignty belongs to the Shari‘ah or Islam. However, Islam gave the Ummah the authority to choose one Khaleefah to rule by Islam.
[2] Ruh has many meanings: secret of life, Islam, Gibrael and comprehending the relationship with Allah. The Ruh under discussion is comprehending the relationship with Allah. This comprehension is not part of man's physical makeup. Man's acceptance or rejection of the cognisance of his relationship with Allah classifies whether he is a believer or a disbeliever.
[3] The location where the daw‘ah is first begun.
[4] After establishing the daw‘ah, the party moves towards interacting with the society to address the public opinion.
[5] Transferring the daw‘ah from being carried by the people to an idea being implemented by the State.
[6] Patriotism - Love or attachment to a specific land or country (when under a percieved threat) and considering it as a valid bond for people to unite or disunite.
[7] Shuubiyah - Call for Anti-Arab during the Abbasid Khilafah. This call is Haram.
[8] Derivation - being able to derive many words from a word.
[9] Nationalism - Love for one's tribe, lineage or race.
[10] Dhimmi - A non-Muslim citizen of the Islamic State.
[11] Mu'ahid - A person with whom the Islamic State has a treaty with
On the anniversary of the first ban of Hizb ut-Tahrir in 1953 we present a translation of the communiqué sent to the Jordanian government on 19th Ramadhan 1372 AH (1st June 1953) in response to their ban of the party.
On 22nd March 1953, the Jordanian government declared Hizb ut-Tahrir to be an illegal party and ordered individuals administering the affairs of the party to stop all their activities.
On 1st May 1953, the sign of Hizb ut-Tahrir outside its office in Jerusalem was removed by the government.
On 8th May 1953, the Jordanian government declared that it does not agree with the method by which Hizb ut-Tahrir became a legal entity.
The above mentioned actions carried out against Hizb ut-Tahrir is in violation of the natural rights which every citizen is entitled to. We, therefore demand the abrogation of the order banning Hizb ut-Tahrir and removal of its sign.
It is obvious that the present situation, which the Imperialists have created in the Muslim land, along with other factors has created a veil in the minds of the people about Islam. This has contributed towards Muslims misunderstanding the issue of the Islamic State and consequently the stand against Hizb ut-Tahrir. We present this communiqué to explain the reality of the Islamic State, which Hizb ut-Tahrir works to re-establish. This communiqué will also discuss the da‘wah which Hizb ut-Tahrir carries and the views propagated towards Hizb ut-Tahrir by the government in its official statements.
بِسْمِ اللّهِ الرَّحْمَنِ الرَّحِيمِ
A Communiqué from Hizb ut-Tahrir to the Jordanian Government on 19th Ramadhan 1372 AH / 1st June 1953
1. Many theocratic governments existed in Europe during the Middle Ages. These governments were an obstacle to society's quest for progress. Through the use of brutal force, they were able to control the thoughts of the people. In fact, it was very common to witness killing and crucifixion of the thinkers and intellectuals by inquisition courts specifically established for such a purpose. Such forms of severe hardship led to a series of revolutions, beginning with an intellectual revolution and then a bloody struggle and ending with victory for the sovereignty of the mind in conducting life's affairs and thus a defeat for the theological way of life. This intellectual struggle brought into existence a new ideology, Capitalism. The Capitalistic ideology was based upon the separation of matter and spirit which meant the separation of Church and State. The clergy accepted and justified the birth of this ideology by using a verse from the Bible which states, "Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's and render unto God the things which are God's."
2. It was natural that the theocratic governments in Europe would become an obstacle in the path of progress due to the ideas they were built upon. Their viewpoint on life was based upon erroneous ideas concerning theocracy and spiritualism. They viewed spiritualism as antagonistic to materialism. At the time, European nations believed that Man was composed of two elements: Spirit and Matter.
Spirit was connected with the heavens whereas the matter was connected with the Earth and the Devil. Spirit and matter were on opposite sides of the scale. If the scale weighed more on the side of matter than the side of the spirit then man would be considered evil. On the other hand, if the scale weighed more on the side of the spirit then man would be considered good. Based upon this understanding of life, the Europeans believed enjoying life (i.e. initiate material advancement) will cause the scale of the matter to outweigh the scale of the spirit. To ensure that this would not occur and that the spiritual part in man is maintained and elevated, the authority over life's affairs was vested in the hands of the clergy. If the authority was given to anybody other than the clergy, the side of the matter would have outweighed the side of the spirit. Based upon this philosophy of matter and spirit, the clergy grabbed the power and governed with an iron fist until the authority was snatched from them by force, and consequently forced to issue a religious explanation justifying the equity of power being taken away from them.
3. The separation of matter from spirit and theological religion from the State generated a great momentum towards material advancement, high level of creativity, Industrial Revolution, inventions and explorations in the Western world. The basis of advancement was the authority being taken away from the clergy in life's affairs. This established in the minds of the Western people the ideological leadership of Capitalism, separation of Church and State. Based upon this new understanding of life, Western nations began globally propagating Capitalism as a way of life.
4. The Ottoman State as the Islamic State ruled the Islamic Ummah with its large numbers, with the exception of some parts of the Muslim land. The parts of the Muslim land (under the Islamic State) respected and gave their allegiance to the Ottoman State as it was the Islamic State. After the Industrial Revolution in Europe, the Ottoman State began declining rapidly in both intellectual and material aspects. Due to misunderstanding Islam, there were cases of misapplication of Islam within the State. All of these factors led to the overall decline in science, technology, politics and economics. Consequently, the Islamic State became void of the prerequisite for progress. Such a condition made Muslim lands fertile for the Western cultural invasion and eventually for the Western ideological leadership.
After the abolishment of the Ottoman State at the hands of the Western Imperialist nations, Muslim lands came under their direct occupation and supervision. Western nations began imposing upon Muslims their culture which embodied their concepts of life and legislation; it was implemented and executed by the governments in charge of the Muslim world including the Arab world. The entire Muslim world began submitting to the political, cultural, ideological and economic way of life of the West. Above all, Muslims began considering the Western way of life as a standard to be imitated and not by thinking about the basis of the thought.
The Western way of life was propagated by educational curricula/programs and missionary efforts under the guise of secularism. Such efforts were undertaken during the era of the Mandate, the era of physical occupation, and the era of ‘independence' in which Muslim countries were tied and connected with the political and Imperialistic treaties of the West. This effort gave birth in the Ummah to a new class of Muslims, the intelligentsia. The intelligentsia were cultured in foreign countries and missionary schools, all of which was based upon the Imperialist culture. In addition to the intelligentsia, there were individuals who were raised under the direct supervision of Imperialism from the end of the Ottoman State till the present. These individuals have witnessed two eras, the era of the Islamic State and the present era. Sadly, most individuals who look after the affairs of Muslims whether in education, economics, politics, the political system or legal system are from this educated elite class. These people were given important positions because they were educated with a culture which contradicts Islam, the Western culture.
The basis of the educational policy in the Muslim lands, including the Arab lands, was based upon a specific culture put forth by the Imperialists. The aim of these programs was to have the Western personality as the foundation from which we take our civilisation, concepts, and viewpoint on life. Muslims were even taught to look to the land, history, environment and circumstances of the West as a reference. This concentrated educational effort was taken as a source of thinking by the Muslims, including the Arabs.
The Imperialist nations began placing such types of curricula in missionary schools prior to World War I. However, after World War I these curricula were directly placed in Muslim lands under the era of physical occupation by the Imperialists. Their intention was to mislead the Muslims by putting their hand over the entire Muslim land. The curricula were intentionally designed to lead the Muslims astray by having the curricula founded upon the Western culture. The acceptance of the Western culture was achieved by portraying the Western culture as a science which must be taken since it is not based upon a viewpoint on life. Later, the Imperialist nations interfered in details of these curricula to make sure that everything proceeded according to their plan.
Since this alien educational curriculum was derived from the Western nations' ideology, environment, concepts and history, the educated class began thinking the way a Westerner would, not how a Muslim would. This educated class of Muslims began appearing as foreigners amongst their own people. They were alien to the Ummah, not being able to understand themselves nor the Ummah and not being aware of the Ummah's situation and need.
The culture, from the educational curriculum, that was established in the minds of the Muslims compelled us to start comparing our situation, society, people and deen to the European situation, society, people and Christianity. This false generalisation and analogy was intentionally applied. The effect of this false generalisation was that Muslims began calling for the separation of religion and state, religion from life, and perceived the Islamic State as backward. They based this argument on the premise that it was a theocratic, ritualistic and a theological state which prevents progress.
5. However, there are major differences between a religious-theological state and the Islamic State. In fact there are no similarities between the two. A religious state is a divine or holy state which derives its authority from God and nobody has the right to question it. The Islamic State is not a divine or holy state. Its authority is derived from the Islamic Ummah. However, the sovereignty belongs to Islam[1]. The ruling authority belongs to the Ummah and it delegates this authority to a person. This person is not considered as a holy or infallible person who is above questioning or criticism. Any Muslim has the right to question the actions of the Islamic State. The laws of the Islamic State are divine rules which it adopts from the Islamic Fiqh. Even the Islamic Fiqh is not considered holy in that it permits room for debate or discussion. Its ideas, rules and thoughts are considered Islamic but are subject to discussion, modification and cancellation through correct ijtihad based on daleel.
There is also a major difference between the concept of spirituality in Islam and in the theocratic/religious states. In Islam, spiritualism means comprehending, understanding and recognising man's relationship with Allah. The comprehension of man being created by Allah is derived through rationale and not by emotion or imitation and this comprehension leads man to perform his actions based upon the orders of Allah. The relationship after this life is the Day of Reckoning. Man lives in this life governed and controlled by this relationship, which connects this life with what is before and after it.
As for man being composed of matter and spirit, it is false because man and his actions are only material. Spirituality is the deep comprehension he is created by the Creator and this awareness is not part of man's physical makeup. Spirituality occurs by understanding man's relationship with the Creator and by performing actions based on the Divine Law. Such comprehension is not part of man's physical makeup. Based upon this understanding of spirituality in Islam, there is no such concept that man is composed of two opposing elements in which spirit is related to the heaven and material to the Earth. The physical nature of man leads to the conclusion that man's actions are material.
As for the meaning of spirit, the secret of life, it is part of man's structure. However, there is a little information about it. Allah says:
وَيَسْأَلُونَكَ عَنِ الرُّوحِ قُلِ الرُّوحُ مِنْ أَمْرِ رَبِّي وَمَا أُوتِيتُم مِّن الْعِلْمِ إِلاَّ قَلِيلاً
"And they ask you concerning the Ruh. Say, ‘The Ruh: its knowledge is with my Lord. And of its knowledge you (mankind) have been given only a little.'" [Al-Israa', 17:85]
The term Ruh[2] which is mentioned in this ayah is not debated and should not be mixed or confused with the meaning of spirit under discussion. Ruh is a prerequisite for life but it is not an antagonistic element of the body.
Therefore in Islam, there is no distinction or separation between religion and life. Neither is there a clergy nor spiritual authority. The affairs of life necessitate fighting the concept of priesthood or clergy. The comprehension of spirituality as the realisation of man's relationship with Allah سبحانه وتعالى is open to anyone and is not limited to a certain privileged class. In Islam, there is neither priesthood nor clergy and Islam came to eradicate such concepts. Thus there are no such terms as theology, theocratic authority, spiritual authority or a theocratic state.
6. The Islamic State is neither a religious/theocratic state nor a spiritual authority where the side of the spirit weighs more than the side of the matter. Neither is the Islamic State a secular authority where the side of the matter is heavier. It is a State established to rule and govern the affairs of the people based upon one intellectually derived and ideological creed from which the systems of life emanate. Systems are implemented and executed by the State. Laws are derived from a correct ijtihad that are based upon the text's general principles of understanding the text.
The Islamic State adopts one specific culture as its way of life. The foundation of the Islamic State is to implement Islam and to convey it. In essence, the Islamic State is built upon one foundation, that man, life and universe is created out of nothing by the Creator. This life is part of a complete relationship between what is before and after this life. The relationship between this life and after this life is Allah's judgment of our actions. The relationship after this life is the Day of Reckoning. In this life, man is governed and controlled by this relationship, which connects this life with what is before and after it.
The foundation of the Islamic State is the Islamic ‘aqeedah. The ‘aqeedah puts forth the ideological leadership which the State carries to the entire world as the Islamic da‘wah. The foundation of the Islamic State is to define man's position in this life in which his actions are governed by the relationship of what is before and after this life. Upon understanding this viewpoint on life, it is easy for the Islamic State to initiate material progress and removes obstacles and barriers in its path for progress. The ideological leadership is a vital ingredient which elevates the State in life and towards material progress. The material progress makes matter subservient to man to fulfil his needs. The system for life is derived from the Islamic ‘aqeedah because the ‘aqeedah functions to control man within the relationship of what is before and after the life. It obliges man to govern his life by Allah's Shari‘ah revealed to Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم. Man solves his problems through Allah's law alone because sovereignty solely belongs to this legislation. Any new problem requires a solution derived from the Qur'an and Sunnah. The Islamic State is the entity which adopts and implements the law. The State encompasses a comprehensive legislation addressing all of man's problem and issues. This legislation is rich enough to produce rules for new problems in a manner that there will be more solutions to problems independent of time or circumstance. Addressing all of life's problems exists in this legislation which the Islamic State functions with. The State implements and adopts rules to guarantee solution to man's problem thus ensuring peace and tranquillity.
The culture of the Islamic State is unique in three aspects:
A. Foundation
B. Point of view about life
C. Concept of happiness
A. The Islamic State's culture is derived from the Qur'an and Sunnah thus making its foundation the Islamic ‘aqeedah. The culture is derived from the revelation, through an intellectual process.
B. The State's culture represents a high level of spiritual elevation and material progress because it views life as a mix between spirit and matter. This mix causes man to govern his actions based on the orders of Allah سبحانه وتعالى. Man voluntarily seeks to implement Allah's legislation by his choice in response to the orders of Allah سبحانه وتعالى and not upon his interest. This view about life is progressive because it guarantees stability, tranquillity, luxury and happiness. The Islamic point of view renders sovereignty to the Shari‘ah which is applied upon the people. The Shari‘ah seeks to transform the society into a perfect structure that man can possibly have. This point of view prompts man to continuously follow Allah's legislation either voluntarily or by the State if required. The best standard of life is achieved through a legislation which is based upon the Islamic ‘aqeedah. Due to all of these reasons the Islamic way of life is incomparably the most advanced.
C. The concept of happiness in the Islamic culture is to acquire the pleasure of Allah سبحانه وتعالى, keeping in mind that it is the ultimate objective man works diligently to achieve. The ultimate objective or goal has to be one and not many in order to unite and concentrate people's effort to achieve it. The ultimate goal has to be permanent and not changeable in order to achieve stability and cohesiveness in the society. The ultimate goal has to be above materialistic goals because such goals would undoubtedly corrupt it. Neither should it be based on short term goals whereby once they are achieved, others are sought. The ultimate goal which man places for happiness has to be the objective of all objectives.
Hence, the ultimate goal in the Islamic culture is to acquire the pleasure of Allah سبحانه وتعالى and not to attain the realisation of one's self-conscious. This is due to the fact that self-conscious is changeable due to motives, thinking or people themselves (self-conscious is an instinctual comprehension which emanates from man's instinct and produced by those instincts). Thus, the ultimate goal should not be the attainment of ‘abstract high morals', the satisfaction of physical needs or any goal that could be nothing but an outlet for other goals upon completion. In addition, the ultimate goal cannot be multiple, changeable or restrictive. The Implementation of the Islamic ‘aqeedah, governing man's behaviour by the Shari‘ah and attaining the pleasure of Allah, as the ultimate goal, will be the cornerstone of the Islamic State.
The function of the Islamic State is to apply the Islamic ideology as a creed and a system within its jurisdiction and to carry the Islamic da‘wah to other nations. The da‘wah must be conveyed as an ideology with its intellectual leadership. The da‘wah must be supported by material strength to protect it and to eliminate any obstacle in front of it. Such a purpose is a basic element and component of the Islamic State's foundation. This particular outlook of life by the Islamic State is beyond comparison to the theocratic or the theological state's outlook on life. Thus any form of religion or theological aspect based upon the Western culture which prevented progress in the society should not be confused with the Islamic State.
7. The nature of the Islamic culture in the State aims for high material advancement in the State. Islamic culture views material things upon the following Islamic legal principle: "Every material or object is allowed unless prohibited." This point of view enables the State to be progressive and is in complete contrast to the theological state's point of view pertaining to material. Therefore, it is great injustice to consider the Islamic State as a religious state reminiscent of the Christian states in the Middle Ages and such a false analogy is completely baseless. The failure by the Muslims to re-establish the Islamic State, not to mention standing in-front of its re-establishment, is a great sin.
8. The makeup of societies in the Muslim world including the Arab world contradicts the Islamic way of life which necessitates the re-establishment of the Islamic State. This state will resume the Islamic way of life and carry the da‘wah to the world.
Based upon this goal, Hizb ut-Tahrir was formed to carry the Islamic da‘wah and to call the Muslim world including the Arab world to resume the Islamic way of life by re-establishing the Islamic State which implements Islam and carries the da‘wah.
9. Since the individuals responsible for Hizb ut-Tahrir reside in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, which is part of the Muslim world, it became natural for them to begin this da‘wah and their activities in the place where they reside. The activities of Hizb ut-Tahrir are not centred around just making the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan as the expected Islamic State. Rather, the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan could be a starting point[3] for this da‘wah and also has the possibility to be the launching point[4] or the establishment point[5]. The State is not re-established through confederation or by artificial annexation. Rather it grows naturally from the nucleus. The nucleus will possess life and its body will undergo natural growth according to Allah's law:
فَلَن تَجِدَ لِسُنَّتِ اللَّهِ تَبْدِيلًا وَلَن تَجِدَ لِسُنَّتِ اللَّهِ تَحْوِيلًا
"So no change will you find in Allah's way of dealing and no turning off will you find in Allah's way of dealing." [Faatir, 35:43]
Based on this way of dealing of Allah, the Islamic State was established in Madinah and later expanded to cover the Hijaz and the Arabian Peninsula and eventually most of the known world, at the time.
10. Hizb ut-Tahrir presented a communiqué to the Jordanian government notifying that it is established as a political party mentioning its name, position of its leadership, its address, its objective, its way and means, its administration and those who can sign on its behalf. This communiqué was attached with the bylaws of Hizb ut-Tahrir. These procedures were followed based upon the Ottoman Association Law which was a law legislated by the Islamic State and up to this moment the only law applicable in the West Bank of Jordan.
11. Upon completing the legal procedures as required by the Ottoman Association law, Hizb ut-Tahrir submitted the legal documents to the senior Jordanian official in Jerusalem. After the senior official had taken the notification, it was published in a newspaper. All of this was followed per the clause which mandates it in Article II, III, IV, V and VI. Upon completing all these legal procedures, Hizb ut-Tahrir began its activity. It became a legal party based upon Article VIII deserving all the rights and privileges that any legal party deserves.
12. Hizb ut-Tahrir presented its communiqué along with its bylaws for publishing in Al-Seraah newspaper (Vol. 176 14th March 1953). Hence, Hizb ut-Tahrir became a legal entity on Saturday 28th Jumada al-Thani 1372 A.H. (14th March 1953) and began its activities according to its bylaws.
13. Despite this, the government interrogated five founders of Hizb ut-Tahrir and arrested four of them. On 7th Rajab 1372 A.H. (22nd March 1953), the government considered Hizb ut-Tahrir to be an illegal party and prohibited any individuals to look after its affairs. On 1st May 1953, the signs of Hizb ut-Tahrir were removed from its office in Jerusalem. On 8th May 1953, the government issued another statement stating that it does not recognise the method by which Hizb ut-Tahrir became a legal entity.
14. The crusade against Hizb ut-Tahrir by the government is related to two points:
A. The actuality of establishing Hizb ut-Tahrir and of its becoming a legal entity and prohibiting individuals who are associated with Hizb ut-Tahrir.
B. The ideology which Hizb ut-Tahrir is based upon was presented to the government and it considered it a violation of the law of the land.
15. Hizb ut-Tahrir's legitimacy does not require any further proof since its legal establishment requires only a statement outlining a few terms and conditions according to Article VI in the Ottoman Association code. According to Article II, Hizb ut-Tahrir does not have to do anything further, since it has complied with necessary requirements. Therefore, banning individuals responsible for Hizb ut-Tahrir's activities, removing it's sign and considering it illegal cannot be considered as a legal act. Furthermore, legally speaking this cannot occur. The actions of the government does not effect our legitimacy because Hizb ut-Tahrir is an entity which has been legally established.
16. As for the foundation of Hizb ut-Tahrir, the statement which was presented to the government by Hizb ut-Tahrir is very clear and concise. The statement mentions the objectives of Hizb ut-Tahrir as:
A. To resume the Islamic way of life.
B. To carry the Islamic daw‘ah.
The method adopted by Hizb ut-Tahrir to achieve these objectives is to acquire the authority to implement Islam. This objective was even approved by a government statement dated 8th April 1953. It considered the Islamic daw‘ah not an unlawful activity and approved Hizb ut-Tahrir's methodology. The government considered in that statement that taking the authority to achieve this objective as a right and a legal issue.
17. The government states that Hizb ut-Tahrir does not recognise other forms of nationalities and restricts the bond between the citizens of the kingdom to the religious bond meaning Islam. The government further claims that this type of bond will create disunity between the citizens of the same state, is against the Ottoman Association Law and is dangerous to the homeland. This illustrates a misunderstanding of the government towards Islam and obliges us to elaborate on this issue:
A. Hizb ut-Tahrir does not recognise the term nationality with its regionalistic meaning because of Islam. The homeland in Islam is the land of the ideology. Wherever the ideology exists is our homeland. Defending the ideology requires defending the land in which the ideology is established. A Muslim defends the land and protects it because it is Islamic land. Therefore any country in which Islam existed is considered a land for all Muslims and all Muslims have to protect and secure it from any attack.
The call for patriotism[6] in the Muslim land has led to the division of one Muslim homeland into many homelands. We have began hearing of a Jordanian land, Syrian land, Lebanese homeland, Egyptian land, Iraqi land, Pakistani land, Iranian land and so on. If such calls did not exist, Muslims would not consider their objective as getting independence for a small piece of land they live in. Ironically, no one is standing and objecting to the call of independence by Jordan, Palestine, Syria, Iraq and so on. How can they consider patriotism as their case and consider it as their constitution they are working for? Hizb ut-Tahrir categorically denounces the call for nationalism due to its regionalistic denotations. Hizb ut-Tahrir calls to defend the homeland as an Islamic homeland and considers every piece of Muslim land including the Arab land as part of the Islamic homeland. If the enemy invades any part of this land then Jihad is mandatory upon every male or female. Therefore, liberating Palestine is the responsibility of all the Muslims. This is the concept which Hizb ut-Tahrir calls for and it is an Islamic concept and part of the Islamic daw‘ah.
B. As for denouncing nationalism, it is a matter which Islam mandates! It is a call of jahilliyah, the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said: "Beware of the call of jahilliyah" and warned people from the call of tribalism or racism. He صلى الله عليه وسلم used to say "Leave it, it's rotten" and "Arabs have no superiority over non-Arabs but by Taqwa."
Allah says:
يَا أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ إِنَّا خَلَقْنَاكُم مِّن ذَكَرٍ وَأُنثَى وَجَعَلْنَاكُمْ شُعُوبًا وَقَبَائِلَ لِتَعَارَفُوا إِنَّ أَكْرَمَكُمْ عِندَ اللَّهِ أَتْقَاكُمْ إِنَّ اللَّهَ عَلِيمٌ خَبِيرٌ
"O mankind! We have created you from a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that you may know one another. Verily, the most honourable of you in the sight of Allah is those who have Taqwa. Surely Allah is Knowing, Aware." [Al-Hujurat, 49:13]
There are many other ayat similar to this in meaning. As for some ahadith praising the Arabs and glorifying them, not one single hadith is authentic. All of them were fabricated when the call for Shuubiyah[7] began. Moreover, the Islamic message is a universal message surpassing racism and is for all mankind. When the Qur'an addresses people in its rule, it addresses them as human beings alone.
Regarding the Arabic language, it is a vital ingredient in Islam and is a prerequisite for understanding Islam. The Arabic language has the same momentum as Islam does. Its lies in its ability to influence people, a very rich language that is able to encompass new words, furthermore the language has the quality of derivation[8]. All such qualities such as being influential, rich and expansive exists in Islam as well. Consequently, the Arabic language has to be mixed with Islam. The qualities of the Arabic language such as derivation, metaphor and Arabisation enable the language to be rich and relevant at all times in the affairs of life. The nature of Islam is that both the Qur'an and Sunnah outline, general and basic rules for life. This enables Islam to produce solutions for problems in life. Islam has to be connected with the Arabic language. In other words, Islamic momentum has to be mixed with the Arabic momentum. This is especially the case when deriving laws through a correct ijtihad, which is the secret behind the progress of the Ummah. Ijtihad cannot be performed except through the Arabic language. The Arabic language is a vital element in the da‘wah. Its sciences such as grammar, morphology and eloquence are considered part of the Islamic culture as Fiqh, Tafsir and Hadith are. Mixing the Arabic language with Islam has nothing to do with nationalism. It has to do with Islam and Islam only. Islam does not recognise nationalism as a bond amongst people.
The call for nationalism is undoubtedly an Imperialistic call. This alien idea was implanted in the Muslim world by Western nations in order to dismantle and destroy the Islamic State. The Ottoman State as the Islamic State ruled over many people with their vast ethnicities. Therefore, the tool of nationalism was used to provoke people to separate them from one body under the banner of independence. The West further established political parties based upon nationalism. To counter this effort the Ottoman State as the Islamic State banned any call for nationalism. Article III of Ottoman Association law banned the establishment of any society or association based upon nationalism. This article was explained in Article IV that it is unlawful to form political associations based upon ethnicity or race. The call for nationalism does not comply with Islam or the law which Hizb ut-Tahrir was established upon. Nationalism is an Imperialistic call which is very harmful to the structure of the Ummah. Hizb ut-Tahrir adamantly considers any call other than the Islamic call an alien call and dangerous to the Ummah.
C. Binding people based upon the Islamic bond is the only correct ideological bond . Other types of bonds include patriotism, nationalism, interest and religious bond, in the Western definition of religion, which do not provide a system to organise life are invalid.
The patriotic bond is primitive and arises as a reaction to the defense of the land in which people live. It is part of the instinct of survival. This reactionary bond would never arise if the land was not attacked, on the other hand, if the land is free then this bond disappears. Thus it is a very primitive bond and is not able to bind people on a permanent basis. It is not a comprehensive bond because people would not call others to it or to work for it. The patriotic bond does not provide any solutions to the individuals, societies or the state at large.
The nationalistic[9] bond is a racial bond. It arises amongst people who have by-past the primitive or tribal stage. In this type of bond, people's outlook is elevated to the level of family or tribe at large. Nevertheless, it is still racist and restrictive. It is similar to a tribal bond in that it seeks control and dominance. It originates from the domination of an individual in life which is part of the instinct of survival. The tendency to dominate expands from the domination of an individual to a family, tribe and finally nation. The series of dominations will result in internal disruptions unless external disputes arise. It is an inhumane bond that causes disruption within the nation. It has nothing of value to offer in the affairs of life.
The bond of interest is a temporary bond which unites people upon a common interest. They work together as long as the interest exists. Upon the disappearance of the interest people will be divided and may even become enemies. Therefore, the bond of interest is very lethal and must not be considered a valid bond.
The religious bond which does not provide a system to organise life exists amongst people with a common belief that mandates to worship their God. The impact of their worship will be apparent by their acts of worship, religiousness and glorification. However, this impact would not exist in life's affair. The religious bond is not a comprehensive bond but a partial and an impractical bond not being able to unite people in all of life's affair. An example of this type of bond are the European people. The bond amongst the European nation is not strong in fact they are divided though they are Christians. As an entity, the whole of Europe is Christian, yet they are divided into many people and nations and is very difficult to unite them into one nation, though they have the same religious bond.
The Islamic bond is an ideological bond. It is the bond which is based on a rational doctrine from which emanates the systems for life. It is the bond which is able to unite people and is definitely worth propagating. It is a bond which renders all Muslims one nation. It is this concept of one Ummah that Hizb ut-Tahrir advocates. Hizb ut-Tahrir denounces and rejects any bond based on anything other than the Islamic ‘aqeedah. In fact, Hizb ut-Tahrir does not recognise any other bond. As per the definition of Ummah by Hizb ut-Tahrir it is a comprehensive one. Hizb ut-Tahrir has defined the Ummah as a group of people sharing in one ‘aqeedah with a system emanating from it. Therefore all Muslims are one Ummah. Allah says:
إِنَّ هَذِهِ أُمَّتُكُمْ أُمَّةً وَاحِدَةً وَأَنَا رَبُّكُمْ فَاعْبُدُونِ
"Truly! This, your deen is one deen, and I am your Lord, therefore worship me." [Al-Anbiyaa, 21:92]
We would take the opportunity to highlight a very dangerous point mentioned by the government, it demonstrates deep animosity against the people due to its animosity and hatred towards Islam. The statement by the government as an official communiqué demonstrates its effort to undermine the people, its ‘aqeedah, emotions, people's sentiments and it undermines all Muslims. The government says regarding Hizb ut-Tahrir: "Hizb ut-Tahrir limits the bonds of the citizenship of this kingdom with the bond of the deen, which will lead to disunity amongst the people of the same homeland. This is against the rules of the Association law and will lead to great danger."
This statement undermines the Islamic deen and is a manifest Kufr. Allah سبحانه وتعالى says:
وَإِن نَّكَثُواْ أَيْمَانَهُم مِّن بَعْدِ عَهْدِهِمْ وَطَعَنُواْ فِي دِينِكُمْ فَقَاتِلُواْ أَئِمَّةَ الْكُفْرِ إِنَّهُمْ لاَ أَيْمَانَ لَهُمْ لَعَلَّهُمْ يَنتَهُونَ
"But if they violate their oaths after their covenant and attack your religion with disapproval and criticism then fight the leaders of disbelief for surely their oaths are nothing to them so that they may stop." [At-Tauba, 9:12]
The government should not place itself in such a state. In addition to misleading and deceiving the people, the government is flagrantly lying against the Muslims. It wants to divide the citizens of this country and keep the people away from Islam, the Islamic da‘wah and those who carry it.
No one can deny the fact that the Islamic Ummah was ruled and governed by the Islamic State. Many non-Muslims used to live with Muslims under the banner of Islam for almost thirteen centuries. Throughout those periods non-Muslims used to have the same high standard of living as the Muslims did. They enjoyed equal rights, prosperity, happiness, tranquillity and security. Muslims along with non-Muslims only began facing severe hardships after the abolishment of the Islamic State and living under the rulership of the Colonialists.
By investigating the Islamic history in its entirety it is evident that non-Muslims lived amongst the Muslims under the Islamic rule. A Christian mother would breast feed her Muslim child, Muslim men used to marry Christian or Jewish women, in-laws from them. Muslims used to deal with the Christians and the Jews in the life's affairs. The Jew and Christians used to be called Ahl al-Dhimma, People of the Covenant. The Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said, "He who abuses a dhimmi[10], then I will be his rival and dispute him on the Day of Judgment."
Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم appointed ‘Abdullah ibn al-Arqam to collect Jizyah from the People of the Dhimma. Upon ‘Abdullah ibn al-Arqam's departure to collect the Jizyah, the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم reminded him that he who oppresses a mu'ahid[11] or pressures him beyond his capacity or undermines his right, then he صلى الله عليه وسلم will have a case against that person for the mu'ahid on the Day of Judgement.
It was reported that ‘Umar bin al-Khattab said: "I advise the Khaleefah coming after me to look after the People of the Dhimma. We have to fulfil the covenant and defend them even if it requires material power. The People of Dhimma should not be overburdened beyond their capacity." ‘Umar used to allocate a budget from the Bait al-Mal for the handicapped, blind and elderly from the People of the Ahl al-Dhimma. When Iraq was conquered, the People of Majus (Zoroastrians) used to own lands but were unable to cultivate them. Under the authority of the Muslims, the lands still belonged to the Majus in addition sufficient funds from Bait al-Mal was given for them to cultivate the land and more funds were allocated for their life's affair till the harvest season.
The Hukm Shari‘i states: Non-Muslims from the People of the Book deserve whatever the Muslims deserve from the Bait al-Mal.
Ibn Hazm says, "That one of the rights of the People of Covenant is that if Dar al-Islam is attacked and the People of the Covenant reside in that part of the land then Muslims have to die to defend them. Any leniency in this regard would be leniency in the rights of the People of Dhimma."
Imam Qarafi says, "It is the responsibility of the Muslims to the People of the Dhimma to take care of their weak, fulfilling the needs of the poor, feeding the hungry, providing clothes, addressing them politely and even tolerating their harm even if it was from a neighbour, even though the Muslim would have an upper hand. The Muslims must also advise them sincerely on their affairs and protect them against anyone who tries to hurt them or their family, steal their wealth or violates their rights."
It was reported that when Muslims defeated the Tartars in part of al-Sham, Ibn Taymiah requested the Tartar leaders to release the prisoners of war which included non-Muslims. However, the Tartar leader agreed only to release Muslim prisoners of war. However, Ibn Taymiah insisted that all prisoners of war be released, including the Christians and Jews. He said that we will never allow you to hold one prisoner Muslim or otherwise. Consequently, all of them were released.
Imam Abu Hanifah's madhab says: "If a Muslim kills anyone from the People of the Dhimma, then the killer deserves the same punishment, regardless of being male or female. It is agreed upon in Islam that the People of Dhimma, could drink liquor, eat pork and do what their religion allows for them within the scope of the Shari‘ah."
The application of the Islamic System upon the People of the Dhimma should not be viewed as a religious or theocratic application of Islam on the contrary it is a legal system. It regulates the affairs of Ahl al-Dhimma as well as general public affairs that effect them. The People of the Dhimma cannot be forced to convert to Islam. They are given their rights to function according to their belief, way of worship, laws related to food and family life. They should not be forced to do things against their deen. These aspects are related to their personal life. However, the public order which includes the penal system and others, Islam alone is implemented upon them. That's because all citizens of the Islamic State regardless of their sect, religion, race, nationality are to follow the Islamic System as a legal system and not as a religious obligation as long as they carry the Islamic State's citizenship.
Thus, the penal code is implemented upon the non-Muslims as it is upon the Muslims. The validity of transactions will be based on the same standard for Muslims and non-Muslims. The Islamic legal system looks at man as a man and not upon his beliefs. In the Islamic legislation, care should be taken in the way laws are derived by observing their evidences from the Qur'an and Sunnah. These laws should be viewed as a solution to the problem and not viewed as a spiritual inapplicable theoretical text. The text should be taken to solve the problem.
Allah سبحانه وتعالى says:
وَاسْتَشْهِدُواْ شَهِيدَيْنِ من رِّجَالِكُمْ فَإِن لَّمْ يَكُونَا رَجُلَيْنِ فَرَجُلٌ وَامْرَأَتَانِ مِمَّن تَرْضَوْنَ مِنَ الشُّهَدَاء أَن تَضِلَّ إْحْدَاهُمَا فَتُذَكِّرَ إِحْدَاهُمَا الأُخْرَى وَلاَ يَأْبَ الشُّهَدَاء إِذَا مَا دُعُواْ
"And get two witnesses out of your own men. And if there are not two men available, then a man and two women, such as you agree for witnesses, so that if one of them (two women) errs, the other can remind her. And the witnesses should not refuse when they are called on for evidence." [Al-Baqarah, 2:282]
If the text is not taken as part of the legal system having a legal cause but as a theological text, the evidence would be restricted to those cases alone. Accordingly, the testimony of non-Muslims and a woman would not be permitted. In this case the Islamic legislation would be rigid and unable to accommodate new problems. However, the Islamic legislation takes into account legal causes and is not a theocratic system. Consequently, the testimony of only one woman in actions in which she would have access to such as breast feeding or birth is accepted. In addition, Islam accepted the testimony of non-Muslims in financial matters. Also, Islam accepted the testimony of a woman only in cases which involves a place where a woman alone has access to. The testimony of the plaintiff and witness is also accepted.
All of these rules were derived due to the presence of the legal cause. Thus the evidence is not restricted by its literal meaning. There are many examples similar to the issue of testimony. The Islamic legislation can accommodate all of life's affairs no matter how many they are without having the legislation to undergo transformation. This legislation is applicable upon Muslims and non-Muslims from a legal perspective and from an Islamic point of view. All of this is achievable due to Islam being revealed as a universal deen to mankind. Allah سبحانه وتعالى addressed mankind as a human not from any other perspective. The scholars of ‘Usul ul-Fiqh have fully explained that the one addressed by the Shari‘ah is the one who is sane and comprehends the message whether Muslim or otherwise. All of mankind is addressed by Islam's da‘wah (Takleef). As for the da‘wah, it is an invitation for all people to accept Islam. As for the Takleef (legal capacity) it is to comply with the Islamic legislation which is undertaken through the Islamic State.
The Islamic da‘wah is an invitation to the people to accept Islam and become Muslims, whereas the address to obey is to have people abide by its legislation by obeying the laws. This command is carried by the Islamic State. The Islamic System views people as human beings and addresses them under two premises, the person being sane and able to comprehend the address.
Islam binds all people under its jurisdiction in Dar al-Islam. Thus, anyone in Dar al-Islam accepts its rules and has the same rights and rules from the State's point of view whether Muslim or otherwise. Any person residing outside Dar al-Islam does not have any rights or privileges from the State even if he is a Muslim. Islam expresses this understanding by using the word citizenship. Anyone carrying the citizenship of the Islamic State carries his loyalty to the State and its system. The fuqaha, under the chapter of nafaqah, have mentioned that one of the requirements is that both the payer and receiver have to hold the same citizenship. Meaning if non-Muslim parents visited their Muslim son in the Islamic State as visitors, not residents, then the Muslim judge would not command the parents to provide financial assistance to their son since the parents are not under the State's jurisdiction. The financial support is like any other right, which the citizens of the State are obliged to, whether they are Muslims or non-Muslims.
Consequently, if a British Muslim not carrying the Islamic State's citizenship has a Muslim son by a Christian wife, carrying the Islamic States citizenship, then the father would not be forced to receive financial support from his son, though both father and son are Muslims. However, the mother would receive financial support from her son, though she is a non-Muslim. Similarly, other rights are applied under this principle. Citizenship is the common bond binding people together. The citizenship plays an active role in the affairs of life. This is the Islamic viewpoint towards non-Muslims and the Islamic rule in this regard. It unites people together and guarantees the highest level of life for all the citizens.
Hizb ut-Tahrir does not place Islam in a defensive position. Hizb ut-Tahrir clears the fact to make it known to the ones who do not. However, it seems that the government is not standing against Hizb ut-Tahrir for the reason that it has mentioned. Its resistance could be due to external factors such as the West and specifically United States, Britain and France which have caused the present situation in the Muslim land, particularly the Arab land. The Europeans conspired against the Islamic State to eliminate it and have undertaken serious efforts to see that it may never arise again despite the existence of many Islamic movements. The Imperialist nations have isolated and prevented Islam from the political life, though it existed for many centuries. They were very successful in their quest to destroy the State and to see that it never rises to the point that the world now does not consider Islam in the world order and the subject of the Islamic State.
Hizb ut-Tahrir carries the Islamic da‘wah and works to re-establish the Islamic State to carry the da‘wah. This effort will cause the Imperialist nations to stand against Hizb ut-Tahrir's efforts. The Western nations have created the political and economic environment to force the governments headed by the Muslims to stand against Hizb ut-Tahrir. The government has issued many excuses related to Islam and the Islamic da‘wah to formulate their stands. It has pushed itself to a position of ridiculing Islam.
The other factor is the situation of the Arab world, specifically Palestine, after World War II. Western nations are trying to prevent the people's involvement in politics to maintain the status quo in the Middle East and the Muslim world for Western exploitation and hegemony. This effort is being crystallised in two forms: Securing the Middle East and establishing a Jewish State as a spearhead in the Muslim world. These two projects are very lethal to the body of the Ummah. It is not expected from the Ummah to accept even one of them. Due to this, a momentum was created to eliminate political parties. Following this, other measures were placed to prevent the emergence of new parties.
Hizb ut-Tahrir is quite worried that the Imperialists will succeed in executing their plan in securing the Middle East and establishing the Jewish State. Hizb ut-Tahrir takes this opportunity to warn the Ummah of these two serious dangers. Hizb ut-Tahrir explicitly denounces the military pacts to defend the Middle East and peace with Israel. The proposal to defend the Middle East is a serious crime because Muslims will be fighting under the banner of their enemies and for a cause other than that of Allah سبحانه وتعالى. It is haram for any Muslim to do so. The obligation of every Muslim is to perform Jihad to make the word of Allah سبحانه وتعالى supreme.
The mission of the Islamic Ummah, including the Arabs, is to struggle against all forms of Imperialism especially Western Imperialism. Such a struggle will not only lead to the prevention of a proxy war in the Muslim world or exploitation of Muslim land but should lead to completely kicking the Imperialists out altogether from the land and to uproot their roots and build the Islamic entity. This entity will be very effective in taking the initiative from both the Western and the Eastern camp. It is the obligation of Hizb ut-Tahrir to declare that the treaty with Israel is a crime. The existence of a Jewish entity as a State or even as a Wilayah in Palestine or any Muslim land is lethal against the Islamic Ummah. Therefore, the state of war has to remain with the Jewish political entity until it ceases to exist.
These two opinions of Hizb ut-Tahrir are in direct conflict with the Western plan. Therefore, the Middle East is in a situation which causes the Imperialists to work against any grassroots movements and ban any sincere party. All governments in the Muslim world are zeroed in on this prerogative. Accordingly, sincere parties have been banned since they express the opinions of the people. It seems the government was influenced, as the other governments were, to oppose Hizb ut-Tahrir. It is the only party carrying a global da‘wah possessing the nature of eliminating Imperialism in all its forms. This da‘wah ultimately aims to re-establish the Islamic State which takes the initiative from the two camps.
The case of Hizb ut-Tahrir is the case of the Islamic Ummah including the Arabs. It is not the case of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan because Hizb ut-Tahrir considers the entire Muslim land as one land and looks at Jordan as part of the Muslim land. The case of Hizb ut-Tahrir is the case of the Islamic Ummah. Hizb ut-Tahrir has explained this in Concepts of Hizb ut-Tahrir (Arabic edition) in page 53: "Carrying the Islamic da‘wah and political struggle for the Islamic da‘wah should occur in the society which Hizb ut-Tahrir defines as a society for it. Hizb ut-Tahrir considers the entire Muslim world as its society including the Arab world. Since all of them carry the case of Islam. However, Hizb ut-Tahrir makes the starting point the Arab land as part of the Muslim land and views the Islamic State in the Arab land as a nucleus." This point needs to be understood when discussing about Hizb ut-Tahrir.
The case of the Islamic Ummah is to liberate it from slavery imposed by the Imperialist Kuffar, who through their political, economic, military and cultural influence look to exploit the Ummah and establish their viewpoint on life and prevent the re-emergence of the Islamic State.
In Political Concepts (1st Edition in Arabic page 31), "Hizb ut-Tahrir works to liberate the Islamic Ummah, including the Arabs from slavery to the Western nations which govern and control all aspects of life. It seeks to elevate it based upon the ‘aqeedah of Islam. It views any action other than the Islamic action as wasteful and a barrier delaying the momentum for the right cause." Attention has to be paid to the danger of any opinion against Hizb ut-Tahrir because it would lead to other dangers against the Ummah. The function which Hizb ut-Tahrir shoulders has to be appreciated.
Anyone can clearly see that societies in the Muslim world, including the Arab world, are deplorable in every aspect of life. They are under the direct influence of the Western nations. Even the Eastern camp has its eyes on the Muslim world. Muslim lands have become a platform for all alien ideological leaderships. Nothing can save the Ummah except a sincere party, tending to change it through the Ummah, whether it is a ruler or citizen, rich or poor, educated or illiterate.
This comprehensive outlook for the society is very important. It is shallow to think that change in one aspect from the mess will work. The change has to be comprehensive and has to take care of all aspects. The change has to be to the concepts, ideas, attitude and behaviour of the people. And a change of direction from the corruption to the goodness and hence the virus will be eliminated from the Muslim body. This will never occur unless we change the ideological foundation which people carry and replace it with the correct intellectual foundation. As a result current ideas will be replaced and therefore the concepts will be changed to elevate man's behaviour in this life. This would only occur through the Islamic da‘wah and the Islamic state. Hizb ut-Tahrir works to resume the Islamic way of life and to carry the da‘wah to provide the Islamic Ummah with the opportunity to once again carry this message to the world.
A party with such a noble objective, goal, ideas, beliefs, deserves from those who have full awareness and feel the situation of the Ummah to realise the importance of Hizb ut-Tahrir's existence to change the structure and situation of the Ummah in the way of dignity, elevation, tranquillity and prosperity. They should understand and comprehend the importance of clearing the way between this Hizb and the people. So that it will be given the chance to achieve its objective. It may be that the light of Islam would rise from this blessed land in order to guide the people to the path of guidance.
[1] Sovereignty belongs to the Shari‘ah or Islam. However, Islam gave the Ummah the authority to choose one Khaleefah to rule by Islam.
[2] Ruh has many meanings: secret of life, Islam, Gibrael and comprehending the relationship with Allah. The Ruh under discussion is comprehending the relationship with Allah. This comprehension is not part of man's physical makeup. Man's acceptance or rejection of the cognisance of his relationship with Allah classifies whether he is a believer or a disbeliever.
[3] The location where the daw‘ah is first begun.
[4] After establishing the daw‘ah, the party moves towards interacting with the society to address the public opinion.
[5] Transferring the daw‘ah from being carried by the people to an idea being implemented by the State.
[6] Patriotism - Love or attachment to a specific land or country (when under a percieved threat) and considering it as a valid bond for people to unite or disunite.
[7] Shuubiyah - Call for Anti-Arab during the Abbasid Khilafah. This call is Haram.
[8] Derivation - being able to derive many words from a word.
[9] Nationalism - Love for one's tribe, lineage or race.
[10] Dhimmi - A non-Muslim citizen of the Islamic State.
[11] Mu'ahid - A person with whom the Islamic State has a treaty with
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)