Hizbut Tahrir story
I've been following and monitoring the activities of Hizbut Tahrir (HT) for the best part of 18 years of my life now. It is well known that HT is a non violent intellectual political entity. In fact many so called jihadi movements are highly critical of their non-violent methodology for change around the globe. They are very clear about their stance on taking up arms for political change - it is not their way of doing things, they rely only on their ideas, they do not have a military wing, that is also very well known. Their work is Islamic politics. In fact ever since their inception in 1953, they've lost many of their members in the hands of brutal rulers around the Muslim world from Libya to Iraq, Uzbekistan to Syria, but they remained very consistent - they did not take up arms against them. This is well documented by various well established sources around the world.
I found your editorial last Sunday somewhat disingenuous and utterly biased. A lot of your assertions in the previous articles about the party were downright fictitious and contradictory. For example, you alleged that they are banned in Western countries, they are not. You alleged that they are funded by Middle Eastern countries and in the same sentence you said they are banned there too. This is shoddy journalism, to say the least. It is well known that the Arab rulers are all dictators without exception. They would even ban the Green Party in those countries. I mean what point are you trying to make here? Moreover, it is well known that the Arab rulers are witless, spineless and ultra-nationalist in outlook, so it is only natural for them to ban HT because HT is a transnational party.
What is more perplexing to me is your stance on political Islam, you seem to be caught up in the Eurocentric view of the world and politics, vociferously anti-Islamic.
Comments